Weekend Open Thread for March 17-20, 2017

Welcome to the weekend! Here are some questions to keep ponder after St Paddy’s Day:

  1. Who will finish in the top two in GA-6?
  2. Who will be the next major retirement announcement?
  3. What will be the biggest upset in 2017?

And because it it the weekend we give you the greatest thing you will ever see HERE

Previous Post Next Post

140 Comments

  • davybaby March 17, 2017 at 8:40 pm

    1. Handel and Ossoff.
    2. Nancy Pelosi.
    3. Bill de Blasio wins.

    • GOPTarHeel March 17, 2017 at 9:13 pm

      BdB winning isn’t really an upset is it?


      R/NC-4. Needed a May, got a Trump.

      • Izengabe March 17, 2017 at 9:16 pm

        It would upset me!


        Follow me on Twitter: @Izengabe_

        • Manhatlibertarian March 18, 2017 at 2:14 pm

          With the US Attorney and the Manhattan DA indicating they would not prosecute him for Pay to Play and violating campaign contribution limitations (although they did criticize the “spirit” of his behavior), the CW now is that deBlasio is the favorite for re-election. For starters he is doing well among minority voters, particularly African-American ones, and while most white voters don’t like him, there is a chunk of white left progressive voters who think he is just great (and anyway whites only make up about 30% of the NYC population these days). Looks like any A Grade Dem primary opponents will now choose to wait until 4 years from now. State Senator Tony Avella is probably his strongest opponent among those that have announced they will run, but his candidacy does not seem to have garnered much support. Avella is an IDC Dem faction member from a suburban like district with many Asian and White homeowners in NE Queens where he is popular; but he is largely unknown outside his district and I don’t see where he is getting enough $ to be really competitive. Park Avenue Real Estate developer Paul Massey seems to be the likely GOP candidate at this point, and he is good at fund raising (and can also self finance to an extent). However, the chances of a Republican beating deBlasio look pretty dismal at this point. The 2013 GOP candidate, Ray Lhota, carried Staten Island and other GOP strongholds in NYC, but still only managed to get only about one fourth of the vote against deBlasio. So unless some other scandal pops up involving deBlasio it looks like he will win again in 2017, however “upsetting” in may be to some of us (although at least he really annoys Cuomo).

  • Izengabe March 17, 2017 at 9:02 pm

    In honor of St Patrick’s Day here is a chart of Irish ancestry by congressional district (2015 1-year estimates, 115th Congress districts)
    https://t.co/D5fgyPuV8p
    https://t.co/hVnzSJehTX


    Follow me on Twitter: @Izengabe_

    • Republican Michigander March 18, 2017 at 1:47 pm

      Interesting List:

      I’m not surprised at Massachusetts dominating the top part of the list, nor New York and Eastern PA. I am surprised at NJ-1, since I thought that was almost minority-majority. NH-2 and Vermont I expected to have a lower percentage as well (thought of those areas as more French Canadien, although I’m sure a lot of the ex-New Yorkers have Irish ancestry). West Virginia 3 I didn’t expect to see at first until I remembered the “Orange.” I figured Lipinski’s district in Illinois would be the highest in that state.

      In Michigan, I expected MI-11 to be the highest (due to Livonia and much of what was once Detroit’s west side), but I am not all that surprised at MI-07. The old railroad goes through that district and the Irish and Chinese built the railroads. While I never lived in that district, my roots are from Marshall and Jackson. There’s a NY/Ohio and a Michigan branch of my family. The Michigan branch worked the railroads. MI-8 has it’s share of American Irish, largely through Detroit’s west side and Redford moving west, but I never thought of the Lansing area as heavily Irish. I thought MI-05 would be much higher (Flint’s suburbs) and MI-10 would be much lower (East side seemed more Italian and Polish outside of parts of Roseville and St Clair shores)


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

    • Greyhound March 18, 2017 at 9:51 pm

      I think the most interesting part of this is that the most Irish district in the entire country is still <30% Irish. That speaks wonders to how integrated they are in the US these days.


      R, 26, CA-18. Nothing smooths over divisions like victory.

      • davybaby March 19, 2017 at 3:19 am

        The peak decade for immigration from Ireland was the 1850s. That’s a long time to become assimilated.

        • Greyhound March 19, 2017 at 3:49 am

          I know, but the fact that there isn’t a single Irish-majority seat (or anything close to it) anywhere in the country is still pretty impressive. I’m curious what the pattern is for English, German, and Italians now.


          R, 26, CA-18. Nothing smooths over divisions like victory.

          • CTIronman March 19, 2017 at 8:37 am

            Query how high the Irish % would be if you combined MA08 & MA09 & culled out the less Celtic portions?

            • BostonPatriot March 19, 2017 at 11:28 am

              You still probably couldn’t get a majority. Even the most Irish South Shore towns hover right aground 50%. A Southie/Quincy-based seat 15 years ago would have been, but gentrification plus the Asian influx in Quincy have changed things.

          • VastBlightKingConspiracy March 19, 2017 at 9:45 am

            I know someone who did a study about this. If you go neighborhood by neighborhood, Hispanics I think are one of the least segregated ethnic groups in America. Hispanic-NHWhite segregation is low compared to all other minority groups, and Hispanic-Asian segregation is almost non-existent.

            In contrast, Black-White and Asian-White segregation is very high. Shouldn’t be a surprise to anyone who has gone to college in America and realized there isn’t much of a Hispanic-NHWhite gap while most Asian and Black students have overwhelmingly same-race social circles.

            Give them 150 years and you’ll probably get a similar outcome.


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

          • Jon March 19, 2017 at 4:15 pm

            There would be a massive number of English-majority seats by just about every reasonable measurement.

            German majority though would highly depend upon how you measure it:
            Those that have more than 50% German ancestry?
            Those with German surnames / spelling errors from German surnames / can trace to family changing their surname from a German surname to an Anglo one?
            Those with one drop of German ancestry?


            45, M, MO-02

  • Tekzilla March 17, 2017 at 9:11 pm

    1. Ossoff & Handel
    2. Conyers seems like a good pick every year until it happens.
    3. Periello beating Northam, otherwise a pretty much as expected year, Democrats make decent but not massive gains across the board as Trump continues to languish in low 40s approval but never dropping below that.


    36/M/NY-01 (D)

    • Wahoowa March 17, 2017 at 10:05 pm

      I think you might be right about Perriello, and it’s gonna infuriate some Virginia Dems. But Tom P. will be easier to beat.


      CO-7

    • davybaby March 18, 2017 at 2:26 pm

      The question for Conyers is whether he retires before he loses a primary.

      • Republican Michigander March 18, 2017 at 3:38 pm

        John Conyers will likely be there until he dies. He’s an institution.


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

        • davybaby March 18, 2017 at 4:07 pm

          Sometimes institutions lose primaries. Charlie Rangel almost did in 2014, for example.

          It’s always possible some younger Democrat (since Conyers will be 89 in 2018, being younger isn’t hard) will get tired of waiting his or her turn.

          • Red Oaks March 18, 2017 at 6:42 pm

            The trouble is that everybody wants a crack at it when he retires so even when a reasonable, competent recognizable challenger comes along (like Janice Winfrey) no one endorses or really helps her. It’s easier just to stick with Conyers and wait for the eventual open seat, which will be wide open.


            MI-03 Castle voter who now says Give Trump a chance

          • MosheM March 18, 2017 at 9:23 pm

            Don’t compare to Rangel. The demographics changed under his feet in that situation.


            28, M, R, NY-10

          • Republican Michigander March 19, 2017 at 8:54 pm

            I don’t know the average age in that district, but I would imagine that it would be on the higher side. A lot of the voters in Detroit, especially primaries, are seniors. A lot of the “progressives” (not a majority in the district, but they will vote) also like Conyers.

            As long as the machine accepts Conyers, he’s relatively safe. He’ll struggle in Dearborn Heights and the white parts of Redford, but that’s not going to defeat him. Most of “gentrifying” Detroit is in the other district as well.


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

  • segmentation_fault March 17, 2017 at 9:45 pm

    1. Ossoff and Handel
    2. Walter Jones
    3. Democrats win VA legislature. All they would have to do is come close to matching Hillary’s numbers since she won the median district

    • segmentation_fault March 17, 2017 at 9:47 pm

      Oh wait. Senate is not up. lol facepalm. Well, the House.

  • kewgardens March 17, 2017 at 9:52 pm

    The revolt of the judges. https://www.lawfareblog.com/revolt-judges-what-happens-when-judiciary-doesnt-trust-presidents-oath

    This article explains that judicial decisions on the travel ban suggest that (liberal) judges now see two presidencies for purposes of judicial review: one where judges believe the president’s oath—that is, a presidency in which all sorts of norms of deference apply—and a second presidency (Trump’s) in which judges don’t believe the oath. In other words, these judges are decoupling the presidency from the person of the president. According to these judges, under the Trump Administration, judges owe nothing to the office institutionally and can make individual decisions about how to interact with the presidency based on how much they trust, like, or hate the president.

    Whatever you think of Trump, this is a dangerous new road. And is unlikely to disappear in future conservative presidencies.

    We may be experiencing a light constitutional crisis.

    This is worth reading — even for the non-lawyers on this site.

    • VastBlightKingConspiracy March 17, 2017 at 10:33 pm

      I’m not a particular fan of LawFare, but I think the article is spot on.

      There are a remarkable amount of “weak spots” in the American Constitution and what we’ve found out in the recent years is that the parties have been willing to target those “weak spots” more dramatically. Most conventional norms of political culture have largely broken down, most dramatically in the United States Senate from 2008 on. One of the largest weak points of the US system is that we give an unelected, unaccountable group of elites (who generally hate most Americans) total power to seize control of the government and the reason that this hasn’t happened is far less the fact that our system is some perfect eschaton, but rather that most judges have historically been appointed by the permanent party of resistance, so they’ve been fairly restrained for that sole reason.

      Light constitutional crises always presage real constitutional crises because they send a signal that all of the norms are gone. The prime historical example of this was how the Weimar Republic slid into chaos after the reactionary elitist Imperial right, enraged over (perceived) perpetual Social Democratic ascendance, finally ended up abusing the defects of the Weimar Constitution to both simultaneously destroy Social Democratic local governments (the infamous Preussenschlag) and bypass parliamentary democracy by ruling through executive decrees and the administrative state. In other words, the exact same playbook the Democratic Party will use the next time they take power again.


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

      • kewgardens March 17, 2017 at 10:58 pm

        Re: the revolt of the judges. Some more conservative jurists fight back. http://www.politico.com/story/2017/03/9th-circuit-judges-feud-trump-travel-ban-236211

        The problem is that in our current political environment there are no practical “checks” on the judiciary. The judiciary has become a de facto superior caste with an almost absolute power over the legislative and executive branches. And since most of the jurists willing to exercise this absolute power tend to be left-of-center, their actions create an inherent bias in our political system.

        • VastBlightKingConspiracy March 17, 2017 at 11:20 pm

          Yes, as suggested, that lack of practical check is essentially the intense and total partisan polarization of our country. It’s actually a worse legal defect than Article 48 in Weimar Germany, because their problem was a much worse political situation (the Nazis and Stalinists took up too many seats for pro-parliamentarism to muster a legislative majority.)

          Our problem is that the Constitution mandates intense supermajoritarianism for all of the elected institutions, but for none of the unelected institutions, and the elected institutions are incapable of mustering any supermajority for anything in the partisan climate.

          Judge Kozinski also isn’t really hardly a conservative or “judicial restraint” fanatic, so it’s telling that he’s the one getting in such an unprecedented public spat. He’s just intellectually honest. At this point, I’m just wondering who will come out ahead when the constitutional structure collapses on its own weight.


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

        • Manhatlibertarian March 18, 2017 at 4:19 pm

          Legal analyst Jonathan Turley has writen an article sympathetic to the 5 ninth circuit judges who filed a blistering dissent of the motion for a rehearing. He notes that “To see this type of vociferous dissent in a withdrawn appeal is remarkable in itself.” He states the five judges were clearly angered by what they saw as judicial overreach in striking down the Trump EO. He notes that they felt the court should have been governed by the 1972 decision of Kleindienst vs Mandel in which the SC stated when the executive decides to “…exclude aliens on the basis of a facially legitimate… reason the courts will neither look behind the exercise of that discretion nor test it by balancing its justification against the First Amendment.” So it appears the most recent district lower court decision striking down the EO based on campaign rhetoric about a “Muslim ban” (and which Trump himself later backed away from) flies in the face of what the revised EO actually states and the judge instead justifies striking it down based on the “sinister” real motivation for the EO.

          https://jonathanturley.org/2017/03/17/five-ninth-circuit-judges-file-rare-dissent-rebuking-the-panel-in-immigration-ruling/

          • Left Coast Libertarian March 18, 2017 at 7:43 pm

            The judges said that they were taking statements made by the President to make a judgement on the order. These statements weren’t part of the executive order and the order should be judged on its contents. If judges can arbitrarily decide to admit whatever evidence they want then the executive and legislative branches are irrelevant.

    • indocon March 18, 2017 at 8:39 pm

      Only way to fix this is to ramrod through the senate appointments for all the vacancies, and aggressively push to split the really crazy courts like the 9’th. As I’ve said it before, we are living in a “soft: Civil War, about time we treated it with that level of urgency, you bet the left has been doing that for a while already.

      • Manhatlibertarian March 18, 2017 at 9:57 pm

        Yes one can moan and gnash one’s teeth over these decisions, but the fact is the federal judiciary is largely an Obama creation at this point. So until you start changing the face of the federal judiciary by rapidly filling vacancies expect more decisions like this. And filling the appeals court slots in particular has to be a big priority.

        • rdelbov March 18, 2017 at 10:05 pm

          Even Gorsuch will make a difference. When it is 4-4 district and circuit judges can run wild. IMO the court will not be open to stays or halts on judicial action when it is 4-4.

          • indocon March 18, 2017 at 11:45 pm

            I have got a sneaky suspicion that Gorsuch is another Souter in making. Hope I am wrong. This is where we are really week and don’t have you know what to do what is needed, if Dems had trifecta, you think they would have nominated Garland or Liu? Part of me would would have wanted to go with Pryor just to get a sure shot on the court. A little prior training to judge Pryor to fudge his past crazy statements on Roe v Wade would have helped.

            • The Emperor March 19, 2017 at 12:31 am

              Gorsuch is solid. He has a bulletproof conservative record from the appeals court, and his history before being a judge shows him to be a rather partisan conservative republican. Beforehand, everyone was saying Hardiman was the potential Souter with Pryor actually having liberal rulings on certain issues.
              Gorsuch would be more conservative than anyone besides Thomas


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

              • indocon March 19, 2017 at 12:08 pm

                My issue with him is on immigration, which is the defining issue for our base. Liberal judges are literally ready to force Trump to except more refugees and immigrants, what is our side going to do in response to that?

                • rdelbov March 19, 2017 at 2:32 pm

                  I think Gorsuch and Hardiman are solid.

                  Immigration rulings are about following the law. That idea that judges or justices find wiggle room in the law is not related IMO to the issue but rather judicial restraint. Felix Frankfurther was as liberal in politics as the day was long but he, at one time at least, felt that his job as a judge was not to make policy but rather to enforce the law.

  • Izengabe March 17, 2017 at 9:59 pm

    Biggest upset of the year will be Governor Joe Piscopo.


    Follow me on Twitter: @Izengabe_

  • Greyhound March 17, 2017 at 10:19 pm

    Also, this tool is making noise again, this time also including running against Chaffetz:
    http://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/324516-mcmullin-possible-ill-challenge-chaffetz-or-hatch-in-2018
    Has anyone ever beat an incumbent Senator in a primary on a platform of opposing your own party’s current President?


    R, 26, CA-18. Nothing smooths over divisions like victory.

    • LtNOWIS March 18, 2017 at 12:37 am

      This could end up being a general election challenge, not a primary challenge.


      28, VA-11

      • Greyhound March 18, 2017 at 1:07 am

        Well, duh. McMullin is trying to save the GOP from the scourge of political success.


        R, 26, CA-18. Nothing smooths over divisions like victory.

        • BostonPatriot March 18, 2017 at 3:47 am

          So glad I decided at the last minute not to vote for him. I realized quite literally while I was in line to vote what McMullin actually was. Not that I’m thrilled with my vote for Aleppo Gary, but still.

          • James March 18, 2017 at 12:17 pm

            He makes me regret my vote for him every single day. Wish I had voted for Aleppo Gary, who knows how to disappear after a disappointing 3rd party run, unlike McMullin and Finn.
            Part of me wishes I had voted to MAGA, but being in Louisiana it wouldn’t have mattered and I’m still not convinced this works out lol.


            Let's Make America Greater

            • Son_of_the_South March 18, 2017 at 12:21 pm

              I’m pretty proud of my vote for Aleppo Gary. I now want to MAGA, but only because Trump didn’t immediately start acting like a dictator upon his swearing-in and is currently buying me off with judges and policy.


              23, R, DC-AL
              Classical liberals are a minority. Fusionism is the answer.

          • Blindfish82 March 18, 2017 at 2:06 pm

            Everyday I’m thankful that McMullin was not on the ballot in Ohio because I probably would’ve voted for him if he was. Ultimately I voted for our 45th president with some reservations (that I still have now), however I’m very happy with my vote and hopeful for sound economic and spending policies.


            R, DC
            Rockefeller Republican

            • Manhatlibertarian March 18, 2017 at 3:42 pm

              Since he is getting more and more flaky and annoying I think I am going to start calling him “McMuffin” again. And yes I don’t regret my unenthusiastic vote for “Aleppo Gary” rather than him.

          • Ryan_in_SEPA March 18, 2017 at 4:55 pm

            I am far happier to have voted for the Nasty Woman over this tool. He has been far more critical of Trump than the Nasty Woman!


            31, PA-6, fiscally conservative communitarian

    • Red Oaks March 18, 2017 at 1:05 pm

      Probably not. The closest equivalent was in 1980 in Alabama. Jim Folsom unseated incumbent Democratic Senator Donald Stewart in the primary while Jimmy Carter was President. Folsom attacked Stewart for being too liberal and a “puppet of the great Washington power structure”. I don’t know that Folsom explicitly criticized him for being close to Carter though.


      MI-03 Castle voter who now says Give Trump a chance

      • shamlet March 18, 2017 at 2:03 pm

        It definitely happened in 1938 in Idaho, where David Worth Clark ousted James P. Pope because Pope was too supportive of the New Deal.


        R, MD-7. Process is more important than outcome.

      • Son_of_the_South March 18, 2017 at 2:07 pm

        Right, and Folsom went on to lose narrowly in the GE anyway.


        23, R, DC-AL
        Classical liberals are a minority. Fusionism is the answer.

        • rdelbov March 18, 2017 at 3:29 pm

          Now Folsom went down to defeat to Jeremiah Denton. Folsom was like 31 years old and Denton mercilessly questioned whether Folsom was the brightest bulb in the pack. Denton in several speeches made the comment “I have met many 31 years men who are very smart but Jim Folson was not one of them”

          Denton was a Vietnam POW who had been shot down and spent 7 years in a prison camp. Times were a little different back then. Denton’s military service was universally honored in the state of Alabama.

          Long story short two weeks before the election in Oct 1980 Folsom’s campaign manager (not Folsom) made the comment that if “Denton was so smart why did he get shot down?” That comment backfired and what was already a close race tipped to Denton’s favor.

          • jncca March 18, 2017 at 3:51 pm

            “I like people who weren’t captured”


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

            • rdelbov March 18, 2017 at 4:14 pm

              Ironically I think referenced Denton’s story in 2015 at this site. I was convinced that it would be Trump’s undoing. So yes I was wrong wrong about Trump winning the GOP nod. I still can’t believe that happened.

              • Mugwump March 18, 2017 at 4:29 pm

                It was a different political climate back then. Also, not sure if you are one of the McCain haters but it is really hard for people who don’t hate McCain to understand how much some people hate the man. That comment was music to a lot of people’s ears


                Trumpocrat who wants to MAGA WI-06

            • kewgardens March 18, 2017 at 10:15 pm

              Times were a little different back then.

          • davybaby March 18, 2017 at 3:59 pm

            My initial reaction to your post was to think it wasn’t that complicated; Denton was just swept in in the Reagan landslide. But you’re right. In Alabama, Reagan didn’t win by a landslide; he just squeaked by Carter there.

            • Greyhound March 18, 2017 at 4:28 pm

              Yeah, and Mattingly won in Georgia even while Carter was winning that state by 15. More interestingly, the county map suggests that Mattingly won a decent % of the black vote, as I think you have to in order to win Fulton by 13 points even in 1980.


              R, 26, CA-18. Nothing smooths over divisions like victory.

              • Son_of_the_South March 18, 2017 at 4:32 pm

                Oh yeah. I often contend that the Georgia Senate race in 1980 has the strangest map of any Senate race in modern times (except perhaps NY in 1970, but that one was insane and irreplicable).


                23, R, DC-AL
                Classical liberals are a minority. Fusionism is the answer.

                • Greyhound March 18, 2017 at 4:55 pm

                  I mean it makes sense in that Talmadage was pretty much an unrepentant Segregationist, and that 1980 was the first time he was facing a challenge from a serious Republican in a year where Republicans could actually win elections.


                  R, 26, CA-18. Nothing smooths over divisions like victory.

                  • shamlet March 18, 2017 at 6:01 pm

                    And, probably more importantly at that point, Talmadge was also incredibly corrupt. It’s probably more analogous to Cao/Jefferson situation than anything else.


                    R, MD-7. Process is more important than outcome.

                • davybaby March 18, 2017 at 4:58 pm

                  Mattingly was really the first successful statewide candidate from the Atlanta suburbs.

      • davybaby March 18, 2017 at 2:41 pm

        Stewart was a weak incumbent. In 1978 longtime Sen. Jim Allen (D) died. His widow, Maryon, was appointed to the seat and then Stewart defeated her in the primary before winning a two-year term in a special election that fall.

    • indocon March 18, 2017 at 8:41 pm

      We should always use the word Egg McMuffin to refer to this true Manchurian candidate.

  • GerGOP March 18, 2017 at 5:00 am

    Donna Brazile has finally admitted to forwarding questions to the Clinton campaign: “In an essay for Time published Friday, called “Russian DNC Narrative Played Out Exactly As They Hoped,” the Democratic strategist said she had in fact passed on topics, despite saying she had not when her communications with the campaign were leaked by WikiLeaks in October.

    “[I]n October, a subsequent release of emails revealed that among the many things I did in my role as a Democratic operative and D.N.C. Vice Chair prior to assuming the interim D.N.C. Chair position was to share potential town hall topics with the Clinton campaign,” she wrote.

    In October, emails from Clinton campaign Chair John Podesta’s account were released by WikiLeaks showing that Brazile – then a CNN contributor – had forwarded questions ahead of a March primary debate.”
    http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/03/17/brazile-admits-forwarded-debate-questions-to-clinton-camp.html

    • davybaby March 18, 2017 at 2:44 pm

      The whole incident was pretty stupid. She told someone in Flint to expect a question about the water? Big surprise! OK, she said to expect a question about the water from someone with a rash. I don’t see how that detail made much of a difference.

  • bluewahoo March 18, 2017 at 12:38 pm

    For the curious, there have now been two straw polls in the Democratic Primaries for VA Gov and Lt. Gov in Fairfax County. The first one coming from the Mt. Vernon Democratic Committee fundraiser and the second one was yesterday at Gerry Connolly’s St. Patrick’s Day fundraiser.

    First one was 76.4%-23.6% Northam-Perriello and 78.4%-12.6%-8.8% Fairfax-Platt-Rossi. Those had 234 and 237 participants respectively.

    With around 1,000 participants the results from yesterday’s are 78%- 22% Northam-Perriello; 78%-16%-6% Fairfax-Platt-Rossi.

    I don’t know what to take from these other than the Northern Virginia party insiders have clear favorites, but also, who didn’t know that before these polls?

  • krazen1211 March 18, 2017 at 1:09 pm

    Rick Scott has a new ad out.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YUps8wZwKZI

  • Son_of_the_South March 18, 2017 at 3:45 pm

    So it turns out that the key to flipping OH-13 is putting most of Akron in Renacci’s district (renumbered as the 9th due to reapportionment). You then have to crack Toledo. I’ve been tinkering with this for a while. I started doing it because a bunch of people here wanted to eliminate OH-13. It turns out that that’s a complete dummynander. Flipping OH-13 or at least making it competitive is actually doable, but still dangerous. I hope to god no one in the OH legislature gets cocky and does either one of these plans. Just crack Toledo and be done with it.


    23, R, DC-AL
    Classical liberals are a minority. Fusionism is the answer.

    • davybaby March 18, 2017 at 4:01 pm

      What’s the latest thinking? 15 seats for Ohio in 2022?

      • Son_of_the_South March 18, 2017 at 4:05 pm

        Yes. Some might say that you could put all of Mahoning AND most of Trumbull in OH-6, but I think that’s a bridge too far. If you can’t do that, you’re pretty much forced to crack Toledo. Cracking the 3rd is theoretically possible, but it’s a bitch and a half to do and would be shaky.


        23, R, DC-AL
        Classical liberals are a minority. Fusionism is the answer.

        • CTIronman March 18, 2017 at 4:32 pm

          If the OHGOP wasn’t gonna crack Franklin County after 2010 –when they could’ve tried to save another R seat—they won’t now with the area racing left.

    • krazen1211 March 18, 2017 at 4:11 pm

      I had been firmly on the 11-4 bandwagon, but I am somewhat coming around to 12-3. Putting Akron in the 13th and condensing the 11th to Cuyahoga is definitely the way to go. Too many OH-11 style districts have been attacked as racial gerrymanders and that type of nonsense, and that leg into Akron doesn’t even help us anyway.

      The 14th will have to expand and can roll into the ‘connector’ area of the 11th which has some R towns in it. It would be nice to do something with excess Rs in OH-08 since Boehner is gone.

      Worth noting that we should be able to override a veto here, although I doubt we lose the Governor’s mansion in 2018.

      • rdelbov March 18, 2017 at 4:17 pm

        I could go 11-4 or 12-3. I still we do not even need to split Toledo. Split Lucas county twice but not Toledo. I am convinced we could do a Michigan style map of Ohio at -12-3. Fairly clean lines. Would every seat be safe GOP-no but we are not there right now.

        I could also do a 11-4 map for political peace.

        • CTIronman March 18, 2017 at 4:30 pm

          I played with this trying non-crazy lines. Put all of Trumbull in 14. It’s then 2008 PVI 0; but trending red. All of Mahoning to 6 which was R +2 but racing right; and you’re left with a OH 13 in Akron that’s hard to push below D+3 without making the Renacci & Gibbs seats wobbly by 2008 measures

          • Son_of_the_South March 18, 2017 at 6:13 pm

            Right, but those two seats would still be R+. They’d be somewhat shaky, though, as you say. That gives me pause.


            23, R, DC-AL
            Classical liberals are a minority. Fusionism is the answer.

            • rdelbov March 18, 2017 at 8:27 pm

              Current OH14 is both a Romney and Trump seat-yup Trump did better! I would not weaken that seat

              • Son_of_the_South March 18, 2017 at 9:45 pm

                My plan doesn’t put all of Trumbull in it. The 14th does get weakened a bit by gaining all of Parma and Parma Heights, but it’s not a big hit.


                23, R, DC-AL
                Classical liberals are a minority. Fusionism is the answer.

  • The Anonymous User March 18, 2017 at 4:20 pm

    1. Ossoff & Handel, in that order
    2. Nita Lowey
    3. Dems get supermajorities in NJ and almost get a majority in the VA House.


    Loyal partisan Democrat, liberal, male, IL-10, in one of few bright spots for Democrats in 2016.

  • Alton March 18, 2017 at 4:22 pm

    1. Handel and Ossoff
    2. Don Young? Thoughts, anyone? He’s not chairing a subcommittee this session (last session, he chaired one in the Natural Resources committee).
    3. Christie gets a position somewhere and incumbent Gov. Guadagno beats Corzine Jr. But that would be a yuuuuuge upset.

    • shamlet March 19, 2017 at 3:42 pm

      Young will most likely die in office IMO, assuming he isn’t finally indicted. He really has no reason to retire seeing as he doesn’t have the kind of rapport with his colleagues or credibility to lobby effectively, and I doubt he’s longing to get back to Fort Yukon.


      R, MD-7. Process is more important than outcome.

  • Mugwump March 18, 2017 at 4:32 pm

    1. Don’t know enough but I think for sure one is the Dem
    2. Rob Quist but I am a little biased here
    3. I think Ron Kind loses of the GOP gets a good candidate. I am still shocked they left him unopposed last go around.


    Trumpocrat who wants to MAGA WI-06

    • Son_of_the_South March 18, 2017 at 4:37 pm

      I’m confused. If Rob Quist won, why would he immediately retire?


      23, R, DC-AL
      Classical liberals are a minority. Fusionism is the answer.

      • Mugwump March 18, 2017 at 4:41 pm

        Lol. I answered questions 3 twice. For retirement, I think Barbara Lee. She wanted to the ambassador to Cuba but since that isn’t happening, why stick around? I also want to see Kos get embarrassed in a primary.


        Trumpocrat who wants to MAGA WI-06

        • davybaby March 18, 2017 at 4:54 pm

          Kos could raise the money. His problem is that he is horrible on TV.

          • Mugwump March 18, 2017 at 5:13 pm

            Agreed.


            Trumpocrat who wants to MAGA WI-06

  • andyroo312 March 18, 2017 at 7:14 pm

    I’m thinking Ossoff and Gray in the first round, with Gray prevailing 52-48 in the run-off. I actually think Ossoff would top Handel in a one-on-one.


    MA-7

    • cer March 19, 2017 at 6:21 pm

      Any Republican as long as they aren’t David Duke will win GA-6.

  • shamlet March 18, 2017 at 7:18 pm

    Philly’s historically-black Tribune newspaper has a brief but nice profile of Lucinda Little (R), the only candidate on the ballot Tuesday for the overwhelmingly D LD-197. http://www.phillytrib.com/news/north-phila-gop-candidate-embraces-community-diversity/article_3a91d3a2-0c9f-5215-9fad-6b10a830314d.html

    I actually think we could win this one. The most serious write-in candidate by far is the Green, Cheri Honkala, who has raised $30K but won’t be able to count on any machine backing. The machine doesn’t seem to be going all-out for their choice write-in candidate and there are a couple other lesser-known Ds that are also campaigning for write-in votes.


    R, MD-7. Process is more important than outcome.

    • Greyhound March 18, 2017 at 7:46 pm

      Do we have an official PVI for this seat? Might wind up the Bluest in the country with a GOP rep if she can pull this off.


      R, 26, CA-18. Nothing smooths over divisions like victory.

      • shamlet March 19, 2017 at 9:54 am

        No might – I’m almost certain we don’t hold a seat worse than the D+20 range anywhere, and even that’s limited to a seat or two in Vermont and Hawaii. I can’t imagine we hold another D+40 or more… the only question is if this would be the bluest seat *ever* to have a GOP rep.


        R, MD-7. Process is more important than outcome.

      • w920us March 19, 2017 at 3:23 pm

        This result of this race could conceivably drag on for a few weeks. Counting write-in votes in PA is not a quick process. And open to challenges and appeals.

        While I hope Little wins decisively, i.e. her total surpasses the combined write-in total, otherwise I hope we see a clear winner.


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

        • shamlet March 19, 2017 at 3:36 pm

          I doubt any of the write-ins will get a decisive victory. Honkala is running the only serious campaign of the bunch and I doubt the machine will GOTV for her. I would honestly be at least a little shocked if anyone, Little, Honkala, or Vasquez, got more than ~40%.


          R, MD-7. Process is more important than outcome.

      • w920us March 19, 2017 at 3:45 pm

        The blog Philadelinquency has been following this clusterf*ck somewhat closely and their latest posting…

        http://www.philadelinquency.com/2017/03/19/2-days-left-and-yet-another-write-in-for-the-197th-district-race/

        I believe this is a left leaning blog but amusing nonetheless.


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

  • bluewahoo March 18, 2017 at 10:11 pm

    VA HD-72: Incumbent Jim Massie won’t seek re election this November. This is the second GOP retirement from a Clinton won district (HD-2 is the other so far). Clinton carried the suburban Richmond district 48.6%-44.6%.

    http://wric.com/2017/03/18/va-delegate-from-henrico-james-massie-will-not-seek-re-election/

  • Red Oaks March 18, 2017 at 10:42 pm

    It took awhile but the Michigan Secretary of State’s office finally released the 2016 election results at the precinct level. It’s a treasure trove of information for election junkies.

    http://miboecfr.nictusa.com/cgi-bin/cfr/precinct_srch.cgi


    MI-03 Castle voter who now says Give Trump a chance

    • rdelbov March 19, 2017 at 2:28 pm

      They need maps like NC or FL or some other states. I love states or counties where you search precinct numbers with a map of the county

  • MosheM March 19, 2017 at 10:36 am

    https://twitter.com/tommyxtopher/status/843463124560896001

    Nunes on intel


    28, M, R, NY-10

    • Manhatlibertarian March 19, 2017 at 1:52 pm

      Of course now there will be endless speculation over who is the one Trump Admin member under surveillance, that Nunes hinted at.

      • MikeFL March 19, 2017 at 2:30 pm

        Is anyone connected with Manafort still in the WH? If so, probably that person.


        26 | FL-3/-16 | Fiscal Conservative
        Hoping for the best.

    • NYC_DINO March 19, 2017 at 6:43 pm

      Am I the only one who isn’t hearing this? The way he says “uh” throughout the exchange, I think he could be saying, “any uh one”.

  • Manhatlibertarian March 19, 2017 at 2:11 pm

    Politico points out that liberal Dem pressure groups are unhappy about Gorsuch, whose hearing starts this week, and are threatening retaliation against Dem senators who vote for him, but they can’t concentrate on him because other issues like repealing the ACA, the Budget and Congressional committees investigating Russian interference in the election are taking up a lot of their time. Typical is Indivisible Executive Director Ezra Levin who says “We believe Gorsuch is an extreme pick”. Yet even Schumer, who opposes Gorsuch, is not ready to commit to start a filibuster against him at this point. There is hope that maybe he will perform badly at his hearings or give answers that will really galvanize lib Dem opposition, but so far Gorsuch seems to be very adept at answering questions about his views in a very “diplomatic way”. Also Schumer knows that if he starts a filibuster and the GOP can’t break it, McConnell will go the nuclear option and end the filibuster for the SCOTUS nominations. So basically it looks like unless Gorsuch stumbles with his hearing responses the lib Dems are too preoccupied with other issues right now and will save their “silver bullets” for another time.

    http://www.politico.com/story/2017/03/neil-gorsuch-confirmation-hearings-scotus-liberal-activists-democrats-236176

    • MikeFL March 19, 2017 at 2:29 pm

      If they were smart, they’d hold their fire for Kennedy’s replacement. Gorsuch just returns the bench to the status quo.


      26 | FL-3/-16 | Fiscal Conservative
      Hoping for the best.

      • rdelbov March 19, 2017 at 2:43 pm

        Op Ed on Gorsuch

        https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-judicial-nomination-war-started-with-bork-lets-end-it-with-gorsuch/2017/03/15/3effeb4e-0990-11e7-b77c-0047d15a24e0_story.html?utm_term=.8859d1069ff3

        I agree with much of what was said in this article. Scalia got a huge vote to confirm–great resume but a conservative. Then the Bork war that not based IMO on ability but rather his potential judicial rulings. Breyer and Ginsburg waltzed in Scalia like. Then Alito and Roberts got mini-Borked.

        It is time to go back and confirm able judges without fights over views.

      • The Emperor March 19, 2017 at 2:44 pm

        When Breyer and Ginsburg leave, then all hell will break loose


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

        • Son_of_the_South March 19, 2017 at 3:07 pm

          I just assumed that they’d try to hold on as long as possible. Of course, health might intervene, but it also might not intervene.


          23, R, DC-AL
          Classical liberals are a minority. Fusionism is the answer.

          • The Emperor March 19, 2017 at 3:12 pm

            I have Breyer pegged as the surprise retirement within the next year


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

            • fzw March 19, 2017 at 3:50 pm

              Unless he’s terminally ill, why in the world would he vacate his seat? It’s not like SCOTUS Justices work full time themselves–it’s mostly their clerks. I doubt him or Ginsburg would willingly cede their seats before 2020, particularly knowing there’s a decent chance a Democrat wins that year.


              NY-23 from MO-3. Soon to be RI-1.
              #MADGA (Make a Divided Government Again)

              • Manhatlibertarian March 19, 2017 at 8:35 pm

                I agree unless there is a health problem, I don’t see Breyer or Ginsburg leaving before 2020, hoping a Dem might be elected then. If anyone it would be Kennedy, who might decide to exit with a Repub Pres in place. But I would put the odds of that at about 50/50 unless of course he develops a health problem.

              • roguemapper March 19, 2017 at 8:52 pm

                It’s kind of like how I have the Donald pegged to choke on a Big Mac within the next year: wishful thinking.


                Dem NC-11

                • Red Oaks March 19, 2017 at 9:08 pm

                  That raises an interesting question – why do so many people on the left openly wish for Trump to die or even be assassinated? Won’t that just lead to a more consistently conservative President Pence?


                  MI-03 Castle voter who now says Give Trump a chance

                  • roguemapper March 19, 2017 at 9:19 pm

                    Speaking for myself I think that the Donald is a danger to the Republic. From a political standpoint I think that Democrats are better off with him in office. From an American standpoint I think President Pence would be far better notwithstanding the fact that I don’t agree with him about much of anything. He’s not a treasonous self-obsessed lunatic.


                    Dem NC-11

                  • Manhatlibertarian March 19, 2017 at 9:34 pm

                    And even if they managed to impeach both Trump and Pence on some grounds the next in line is Speaker Ryan. Many on the left have a visceral dislike for Trump because of his remarks about Mexicans, Muslims and women. Yet on the other hand he doesn’t want to touch Social Security and Medicare, castigates companies that move factories abroad, wants a big public works program, doesn’t seem particularly bothered by gay marriage and is lukewarm about defunding Planned Parenthood. So oddly enough of Trump, Pence and Ryan, Trump in many respects is less conservative. So it is interesting that commentators on MSNBC and other leftwingers seem almost fixated with the idea of finding something on Trump that can be used to impeach and remove him from office; yet in their hatred for Trump they seem to loss track of what happens if he is forced from office.

                    • w920us March 19, 2017 at 10:26 pm

                      Well, As reported here in mid February, many leftists believe it is as simple as Sally Kohn’s tweet.

                      Sally Kohn ✔@sallykohn
                      Straightforward from here:
                      1. Impeach Trump & Pence
                      2. Constitutional crisis
                      3. Call special election
                      4. Ryan v Clinton
                      5. President Clinton
                      9:21 AM – 15 Feb 2017

                      I was talking with this stupid woman back in December, who truly believed that all Obama needed to do was declare martial law and that it was in the constitution for him to do so and then continue serving past January 20th.


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

                  • jncca March 19, 2017 at 10:50 pm

                    It depends how serious one thinks the danger of Trump is. I don’t believe he’s much more dangerous than Mike Pence is, personally, and I much prefer Trump in office to either Pence or Paul Ryan. But most of my friends would probably take Pence.


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

                    • w920us March 19, 2017 at 11:28 pm

                      Maybe Pence is like a more conservative Gerald Ford?


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

      • andyroo312 March 19, 2017 at 4:31 pm

        Agreed. I mean, I loathe Trump but wouldn’t hesitate at all to vote for Gorsuch, who is supremely qualified.


        MA-7

  • cer March 19, 2017 at 6:23 pm

    If you are a Republican, there is absolutely NO excuse not to support Gorsuch.

  • Mike1965 March 19, 2017 at 8:55 pm

    MN-Gov: Tim Walz telling people he is in. Expect an announcement soon.

    http://www.startribune.com/lt-gov-tina-smith-is-out-all-eyes-on-rep-tim-walz/416518413/


    Democrat. Union Member. Atheist. Everything your Republican parents warned you about.

    • Son_of_the_South March 19, 2017 at 9:07 pm

      Well, well… Can he still run for reelection if he loses at convention?


      23, R, DC-AL
      Classical liberals are a minority. Fusionism is the answer.

      • Mike1965 March 19, 2017 at 9:15 pm

        Yes, Primary filing deadline is after the Convention but I would guess he wouldn’t screw over the Dems looking to replace him.


        Democrat. Union Member. Atheist. Everything your Republican parents warned you about.

      • davybaby March 20, 2017 at 12:28 am

        To cite one such example, in 1984 Rep. Jim Oberstar fired for reelection to the House after losing the Senate endorsement at the convention.

    • The Emperor March 19, 2017 at 9:07 pm

      Regardless of what happens in the Governor’s race, this leaves Walz’s house seat as an excellent pickup opportunity for the GOP. The rural areas swung hard right in the last two elections, and Rochester is significantly GOP downballot.


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

      • Mike1965 March 19, 2017 at 9:28 pm

        The City of Rochester is not Republican downballot. Rural Olmsted county is heavily Republican but the city of Rochester itself leans Democrat.


        Democrat. Union Member. Atheist. Everything your Republican parents warned you about.

        • The Emperor March 19, 2017 at 9:31 pm

          When I say Rochester, I mean Olmsted County as a whole. The GOP holds both State Senate seats in the county.


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

          • Mike1965 March 19, 2017 at 9:47 pm

            And Democrats hold both House seats in the city itself. One of the big state level redistricting fights in 2022 will be whether the City of Rochester remains split between 2 Senate districts with rural areas attached to each or weather one Senate district is wholly within the city.

            FWIW in 2014 Democrats and Republicans went 3-3 in Olmsted countywide races. Really is tossup territory.


            Democrat. Union Member. Atheist. Everything your Republican parents warned you about.

            • The Emperor March 19, 2017 at 10:03 pm

              If the GOP can get someone that runs well in Rochester and maintains Trump numbers in the rurals, then the seat is leans R at worst


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

              • Mike1965 March 19, 2017 at 10:13 pm

                You are assuming Trump (37% approval today in Gallop tracker) does not become a drag on the ticket.

                An open seat MN-01 in a neutral year probably does lean Republican but a Democrat can still win here. Al Franken carried the district in 2014 for goodness sake.


                Democrat. Union Member. Atheist. Everything your Republican parents warned you about.

                • Greyhound March 20, 2017 at 1:45 am

                  The thing to remember about seats like this is that the local D party is way more in line with the actual CD than the National one is. Its the same reason why SEPA Republicans are much more secure than the top-line #s indicate, as plenty of voters who prefer a national Dem to a national Republican still prefer a local Republican to a local Dem.

                  To put it another way, if the MN-1 Democrats nominate a bold-progressive BLM-supporting woke White Liberal and the GOP nominates a small-town agrarian Populist who promises to maintain Social Security, yeah, I could see the Democrats losing this seat by double digits. But the odds of the former happening are slim in a seat where the average Democrat is still a small-town middle-class married white person.

                  It’ll be a top GOP target for sure, but this is hardly in the bag for us.


                  R, 26, CA-18. Nothing smooths over divisions like victory.

      • Manhatlibertarian March 19, 2017 at 9:45 pm

        Yeah Walz barely won in 2016 and Trump carried the CD, so this has to be a prime pickup target for the GOP.

    • Mike1965 March 19, 2017 at 9:19 pm

      Collin Peterson is supporting Walz run. No surprise.

      https://twitter.com/lorisell/status/843526129382297600


      Democrat. Union Member. Atheist. Everything your Republican parents warned you about.

      • The Emperor March 19, 2017 at 9:30 pm

        I still think him an underdog to a Twin Cities Dem, especially if Nolan gets in and splits the outstate vote


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

        • Son_of_the_South March 19, 2017 at 11:00 pm

          Are you talking about the primary or the convention? I think that anything could happen at convention.


          23, R, DC-AL
          Classical liberals are a minority. Fusionism is the answer.

          • The Emperor March 20, 2017 at 12:36 am

            Primary


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

            • Son_of_the_South March 20, 2017 at 2:52 am

              So you’re predicting that one or more of the losers at the convention refuses to abide by the decision and forces a primary?


              23, R, DC-AL
              Classical liberals are a minority. Fusionism is the answer.

  • RogueBeaver March 19, 2017 at 9:06 pm

    Forget if this was mentioned, but Roll Call says no indication national Dems are spending in MT-AL. http://www.rollcall.com/news/politics/special-elections-are-only-limited-barometer-of-trump-and-2018


    MTL/Blue Tory/M

  • Leave a Reply