Political Roundup for June 19th, 2017

About last night: Over the weekend Emmanuelle Macron’s new En Marche! party got a majority of the seats in the French parliamentary election, coming in at the lower end of expectations.

Tomorrow is special election day. Be sure to check back here at 3p ET today for our preview and at 7p ET tomorrow for our liveblog of the special generals for GA-06 and SC-05. Now, onto the news!


Landrieu: File this one under either ‘columnists don’t understand psephology’ or ‘someone had too many hurricanes on Bourbon Street just before a deadline.’ Apparently, a few Democrats are floating New Orleans Mayor Mitch Landrieu’s (D) name as a possible presidential candidate. Oy. Here we go. For the next few years we’re going to get just about every reasonably-prominent Democrat in the country who does something half-noteable (in this case, a speech on the removal of Confederate monuments) run through the machinery of the Great Mentioner for at least a week or so. Never mind that Landrieu isn’t even the mayor of a mega-city, let alone a senator, governor, or even a celebrity businessman. No, he’s just the mayor of a reasonably-large city in a country full of them. But, The Hill needs something to write about, and stories about presidential campaigns, real or imagined, get clicks. Expect more of this drivel for a few years. Maybe a few of them will actually make also-ran status.

Kander: …And just as I say that, another one drops. At least this article is more intelligently written than the first one. It’s premise is just as stupid, though. Is former Missouri Secretary of State Jason Kander (D) a rising star? Yes. Is he making the rounds that presidential hopefuls make? That’s certainly so. Does he have a snowball’s chance in Hades of becoming President this cycle? Hell no (unless he succeeds Sen. Claire McCaskill first). His performance against Sen. Roy Blunt (R) last year was impressive, though some of it can be put down to Blunt’s ineptitude and lack of likability. As the article rightly points out, Kander has nothing to run for that he could conceivably win unless Sen. McCaskill (D) steps aside. Therefore, he’s making the speaking circuit. I doubt it’s about more than keeping himself relevant. Most politicians have delusions of grandeur, but if he believes he’s going to be nominated for President in 2020 with no office in between, someone should stick him in a psych ward. Another day, another DC journalist has a deadline, another ridiculous presidential Great Mentioner story…


GA-06: Ahead of tomorrow’s special election, WSB-TV/Landmark has Han Solo impersonator John Ossoff (D) up two points over former Secretary of State Karen Handel (R). RRH currently rates this race as Lean D.

NE-02: Is former Rep. Brad Ashford (D) a one-term wonder, or a comeback kid? If that was one of the burning questions that you’ve been dying to know, rejoice! You’re probably about to find out. Ashford has announced a revenge run against the man who beat him in 2016, now-Rep. Don Bacon (R). He’s probably the Democrats’ most credible candidate, and could certainly win in a wave. Still, I’m skeptical. Who wouldn’t vote for more bacon?

WA-03: You have to give former State House nominee Teresa Purcell (D) credit for one thing: confidence. Even though she lost a state house seat that Democrats had held for decades and is currently under investigation by the (Democratic) state attorney general for reporting violations, she still wants to run for Congress. If I were Rep. Jaime Herrera-Beutler (R), though, I’d definitely want Purcell to make Top Two.


KS-Gov: If at first you don’t beat a Democrat in Kansas… try again? Former State Sen. and 2006 gubernatorial nominee Jim Barnett (R) seems to think so. He’s launching a second bid for the office, this time to succeed Gov. Sam Brownback (R).

PA-Gov: This one might be a record. Just days after entering the gubernatorial race, businessman Kris Hart (R) is exiting it. Why, you ask? Because, Pennsylvania has a ludicrous seven-year residency requirement for anyone who wants to be Governor of the Commonwealth. Hart likely wouldn’t have gotten very far, and he only arrived in the state in May. Still, seven years is a tad much for a residency requirement.

VA-Gov: The first real general election poll for this year’s contest in Virginia couldn’t be more exciting. It’s a tie, 46-46, or so says Harper Polling. They did pretty well last cycle, though they tend to have a Republican lean. Both candidates are viewed pretty favorably. It will be interesting to see how those numbers shift as the race progresses and attacks are likely to start flying.


CA-SD-29: Naughty, naughty *wags finger*. California Democrats, fearful that State Sen. Josh Newman (D) would be successfully recalled, changed the rules mid-stream. They slipped a change into the budget requiring the recall to be held at the next general election, likely boosting turnout for the race. Something tells me that they’ll eventually regret this, but that’s politics for you.

CO-Leg: Some people really like to burn money. Take the people featured in this article, for instance; they want to recruit candidates to run under a ‘Centrist’ banner against incumbents of both parties in the Colorado Legislature. Their goal is to beat five incumbents and hold the balance of power in the legislature. The article makes several sound critiques of this plan. The biggest hole in the scheme, though, is that any third party candidate only succeeds in freak circumstances or with established personal popularity. Anyone who gives these people money might as well douse the cash in gasoline and throw a lit match at it.

IN-Redistrict: Here’s a piece talking about the fact that Indiana will likely lose a congressional district in the future. That’s mildly interesting in and of itself. However, what’s more interesting is who the author is: Christina Hale. I said she’d stick around, and she has. This is exactly the kind of ‘talking seriously about the state’s problems’ piece that politicians write when they’re in the wilderness and building up their positive credit for a comeback.

WI-SC: Justice Michael Gableman, a member of the conservative wing on the Wisconsin Supreme Court, will not seek a second ten-year term on that body. There is speculation that he may step down early to give Gov. Scott Walker (R) a chance to appoint his replacement. The court is currently split 5-2 in favor of the conservative faction.

Previous Post Next Post


  • MosheM June 19, 2017 at 7:51 am

    Solid, SOTS!

    29, M, R, NY-10

    • GerGOP June 19, 2017 at 8:16 am

      Agreed. Enjoyable read.

      • Son_of_the_South June 19, 2017 at 10:44 am

        Thanks, guys. I try.

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

  • Ryan_in_SEPA June 19, 2017 at 8:17 am

    PA-Gov: The 7 year requirement is perfectly fine by my standards! Even if you did not have it, do you think the hacks would allow anything less?

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

    • OGGoldy June 19, 2017 at 8:59 am

      Yea, I am completely okay with states setting long residency requirements to govern them. Hell, the Constitution sets residency requirements of twice that long to be president. Not sure why 7 would be out of the question. I think a minimum of 5 and perhaps up to 10 years of residency to be governor is completely reasonable.

      Disclosure: I hate carpetbagging on a nearly pathological level.

      • TennesseeMike June 19, 2017 at 2:32 pm

        I’m with you there. I hate carpetbagging too. I think I residency requirement of a least 5 years is good for an executive office like Governor. You have to live in the state to know it.

        TN-2 District. A Social and Fiscal Conservative Republican

    • GerGOP June 19, 2017 at 8:59 am

      Agreed. Its very common nowadays to move around alot, for work and such … seven years is a bit much.

    • Grant June 19, 2017 at 10:17 am

      Oklahoma’s requirement is 10 years, though I’ve been able to find an information as to whether that is 10 years total or the 10 years immediately preceding election. Anyone know if there have been any court cases on the matter? For any state, really.

      26, R, OK-5

    • Son_of_the_South June 19, 2017 at 10:43 am

      I don’t like them for several reasons, not least of which is that some of these requirements specify immediate residency right before the election. That prevents longtime residents who’ve moved away but know the state well from swiftly returning to run. Also, it’s just anti-democratic. Maybe a requirement of a year or two is ok. That would at least allow a decision to be made at the beginning of a cycle. Seven years is excessive, though.

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

      • roguemapper June 19, 2017 at 2:39 pm

        My only problem with residency requirements is that they can’t be enacted for Congress.

        Dem NC-11

  • MosheM June 19, 2017 at 8:27 am

    Miles rocks it again!


    29, M, R, NY-10

    • GerGOP June 19, 2017 at 8:58 am

      There is something oddly soothing about such maps.

    • lordpet8 June 19, 2017 at 9:58 am

      Good read, though I’m surprised he didn’t mention Wagner. I’m sure Wagner getting 10% of the vote in VA-10 didn’t help Ed Gillespie much either

      • Miles June 19, 2017 at 11:47 am

        Thanks – good point.

        Wagner’s endorsement from the WaPo I’m sure took away votes from Gillespie. I’ll go back and add that.

  • w920us June 19, 2017 at 9:37 am

    Trump’s FEMA head gets voted on today by the US Senate.

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

    • cer June 19, 2017 at 9:48 am

      About time, the US Senate reminds me of a SLOTH.

      Conservative first, Republican second!

      • w920us June 19, 2017 at 9:52 am

        The US Congress and Trump need to pass legislation severely reducing the number of posts that need Senate confirmation. The growth of the Federal government has made it a bit unwieldy in terms of the speed of the nomination and confirmation process. Of course this wouldn’t apply to judicial posts.

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

        • rdw72777 June 19, 2017 at 5:09 pm

          The Senate is going to vote to reduce their own power lol. Sure and then they’ll vote to reduce their own salaries and eliminate their pensions. And then they’ll pass a constitutional amendment granting each state just 1 senator…or hell, 0 Senators. C’mon…

          But seriously though, FEMA is important. Trump didn’t nominate Long until late-April so it’s not like this has been sitting for 6 months. When you consider we have confirmation processes and the former head of the International Arabian Horse Association was still able to get to the head of the Agency and screw up to high holy hell I don’t think I want to remove any oversight of nominations.

    • w920us June 19, 2017 at 6:35 pm

      Senate Democrats have now ground Senate business to a halt with a healthcare talkathon.
      The vote on FEMA director bumped to tomorrow I believe.

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

    • rdelbov June 19, 2017 at 10:42 am

      I consider this good news as the opinion of the judges in the 7th circuit overturning the GOP legislative map would be enforce without this action.

    • Izengabe June 19, 2017 at 1:00 pm

      The efficiency gap theory they are using is complete bunk. It makes no account of natural self sorting of voters or local issues that could cause a local candidate to over or under perform. Using the efficiency gap as a standard in a first past the post district system is completely insane and goes against what a district based representative system is suppose to be about.

      Follow me on Twitter: @Izengabe_

      • rdelbov June 19, 2017 at 1:50 pm

        Yup the efficiency gap is a horrid idea. For instance Illinois CD map is a horrid gerrymander only because the city of Chicago is attached to what 7 or 8 Cds instead of say just four? Sure there are Ds in the suburbs of Chicago but Illinois is a gerrymander because of how the map looks with all of its crazy lines-it could be an accurate reflection of Illinois numbers but Chicago is hughly self packed.

        I looked at the Wisconsin legsilative maps and yes they favor the Rs. Senate seats are 20-13 right now. Milwaukee county is sliced up and one can argue that gives the GOP one seat. I can’t two seats but one seat. One can argue giving Racine and Kenosha counties their own senators might elect another one. The GOP would still be able to draw a smooth map and still have it at about 18 to 20 seats because we have a couple outstate that could go R.

        Of course how does one apply that concept to MA or MD or NY or CA or elsewhere?

        • rdelbov June 19, 2017 at 2:09 pm

          My point about the efficiency was a bit rambling (so what is new) but it is gist of it. When you plug in PVI for a state or wasted votes in house races (not knowing how many races were seriously contested or how good candidates were) then how you remedy inequality? And what is equity? Say 52% of votes in WI went to D house candidates but they got only 40% of the seats-what is the fair number for them and what is the remedy? Do attach downtown Milwaukee to Washington county WI by sewer lines to elect another D member? Or just say 50K population in Dane will now be joined without common boundaries to 30K in population in say Oshkosh county?

          IMO D legislative candidates tend to run well ahead of D numbers in these uncontested races. Local voters like their D house or senate members in Wisconsin and frankly R voters will divide their votes more for legislative candidates then D voters do. So naturally IMO they will be less “efficient” in electing legislative members by Brennan code. Yet what is the solution? Gerrymander up districts to elect more Ds?

    • BostonPatriot June 19, 2017 at 2:01 pm

      I wonder if this is Kennedy’s last stand. There have been lots of credible rumors that he is retiring this summer or next, and it’s getting very late for it to be this summer (although O’Connor did announce at the very end of the term in June, so that’s still a possibility). Partisan redistricting has been one of the only issues Kennedy has continually cared about and not been in the majority on, but there’s a chance that he may be able to get 5 votes to find it unconstitutional (on grounds that may or may not have political merit, but from a purely legal perspective, will be rubbish) when they hear it next year. He may think of that as a nice capstone to his reign of terror judicial service.

      • rdelbov June 19, 2017 at 2:13 pm

        My sense is that Kennedy will not give in to the liberal 4 on this. The concept is totally unworkable and once he retires if the GOP appoints a successor to him it will be overturned.

        Not sure if Kennedy goes now or in Summer 2018 but IMO he will not okay a formula for gerrymandering-which the Brennan idea does not actually advocate. For instance the Professor can say that a plan is a gerrymander but they do not give a definition of what a good plan should look like. They do not advocate for a direct relationship between legislative votes in a state and a number of legislative seats that each party should hold. No one that I know of advocates that.

      • rdw72777 June 19, 2017 at 2:44 pm

        It wouldn’t make sense as a last stand and then retiring. if he actually cared about it he wouldn’t vote to make it unconstitutional and then immediately resign so as to be replaced by someone who would immediately overturn it…

        • roguemapper June 19, 2017 at 3:03 pm

          I agree with you. If in fact Kennedy issues a landmark decision that sets limits on partisan gerrymandering then it makes far more sense for him to stick around for the subsequent wave of cases that will determine how it’s actually put into practice.

          Dem NC-11

    • krazen1211 June 19, 2017 at 3:32 pm

      5-4 stay granted in Wisconsin too.

      • rdelbov June 19, 2017 at 4:53 pm

        Yup the Liberal Four wanted the redistricting process to continue and in essence force the legislators to draw new maps. The high court is unlikely to announce a decision until early 2018. Does anyone believe that in Jan or Feb 2018 the high court will set a new standard for redistricting for all 50 states? I might add this could affect not legislative seats but congressional seats and even city council seats? If there is a right, by free speech or whatever, to have one’s views expressed in honest and fair districts does it not affect the Austin city council!!! Austin TX is a horrible D gerrymander!!! So is New York City council seats!

        • StatenIslandTest June 19, 2017 at 5:44 pm

          So can the NJGOP join in since these are the last election results:
          2011 State Senate: 51 pct D pop vote, 60 pct of seat
          2013 State Senate: 51 pct R pop vote, 60 pct of seats D
          2015 Assembly: 53 pct D popular vote, 65 pct of seats D

          32, Jersey City

          • w920us June 19, 2017 at 5:50 pm

            How do all the New England states and NY figure in such madness?

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

          • Izengabe June 19, 2017 at 6:38 pm

            The NJ gerrymander is especially egregious because of the natural self packing of Democrats in Newark, Trenton, Patterson and other places like that in which Democrats win over 90% of the vote. Any map based on non-political considerations (geographical compactness and communities of interest) should give the GOP a majority. Only when drawing for partisan purposes can you get a map in which GOP gets 51% of the vote get wins only 40% of the seats.

            Follow me on Twitter: @Izengabe_

            • StatenIslandTest June 19, 2017 at 6:43 pm

              The not allowing the municipal splits might hurt us surprisingly. It guarantees the Trenton, Camden and Paterson districts to be monopoly D. It also restricts Rs from picking up friendly parts of D-leaning large towns like Woodbridge and Edison.

              32, Jersey City

              • rdelbov June 19, 2017 at 7:15 pm

                I do not believe that Kennedy wants setting up some sort of gerrymandering standard to be his legacy. Let’s be clear. If the High Court says that a voter has a right to be in any sort of district that is “fair” and “ungerrymandered” it will open up the floodgates. How many congressional and legislative maps would be open to challenge. Frankly a lot of them. From the NY senate to Illinois senate to CA legsilative and congressional maps–Hawaii’s legislative maps!!! GOP routinely gets 40% of the vote in Gov’s race and has no legislators in its party!!!

                Oh by the way if a voter has the right to be fairly represented in a state legislative map how about a city council or county commission map? Exactly folks it would be a torrent of litigation!! Of course the high court could do anything. Rule that just this one map is egregious or just set a standard for the next round of redistricting!!

                Kennedy IMO a modest man who prefers to limit the court’s actions as opposed to opening up the flood gates for more legal actions.

  • edtorres04 June 19, 2017 at 10:58 am

    On the Redskins logo case, Kennedy sided with the liberals and Gorsuch/Roberts with the conservatives. It was 5-4 allowing patents to be rejected if they are offensive.

    • Left Coast Libertarian June 19, 2017 at 12:59 pm

      What are you talking about? The decision was 8-0 in favor of the Slants. Trademarks can’t be rejected if they are offensive. The Redskins win. (Weird to say that.)

      • edtorres04 June 19, 2017 at 1:13 pm

        I’m very sorry. I read the wrong tweet.

      • w920us June 19, 2017 at 1:57 pm

        Beyond awesome that it was unanimous!

        It appears even the courts’ liberals are sick of political correctness.

        And hopefully unanimous when the Redskins case is decided.

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

        • VastBlightKingConspiracy June 19, 2017 at 3:18 pm

          The Redskins case won’t have to be decided by SCOTUS. The Tam case is so clearly controlling, even a hack liberal court would try to avoid blatantly inviting immediate reversal.

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

          • roguemapper June 19, 2017 at 3:32 pm

            That’s especially true since the concurrence by Kennedy, Ginsburg, Sotomayor, and Kagan is even less ambiguous with regard to the unconstitutionality of viewpoint discrimination in the issuance of trademarks.

            Dem NC-11

            • BostonPatriot June 19, 2017 at 3:38 pm

              Yup. Free speech jurisprudence blurs the traditional left-right lines, which is an extremely good thing for democracy.

  • krazen1211 June 19, 2017 at 11:06 am

    I am not aware of any projections of Indiana losing a district by 2020. Maybe 2030? Indiana looks like it’s 10% bigger than the 8 district states and Indiana is basically keeping pace with Massachusetts.

    Arizona blew past both states.

    • Jon June 19, 2017 at 7:11 pm

      Agreed for 2020. It might lose one in 2030, but that looks more likely for 2040.

      Tennessee would be the smallest of the 9 CD states (by 2010 numbers) so until Tennessee passes Indiana, Indiana’s keeping 9.

      Note that basically keeping pace with Mass in growth isn’t good for long term maintaining of CDs, at best it means Mass loses it’s 9th seat at the same time.

      45, M, MO-02

      • roguemapper June 19, 2017 at 7:14 pm

        The 2016 Census Bureau estimate puts Tennessee ahead of Indiana: 6,651,194 for TN, 6,633,053 for IN.

        Dem NC-11

        • formerbuckeye June 19, 2017 at 9:18 pm

          If Indiana loses a seat, Trey Hollingsworth might have to move back to Tennessee to run for reelection after 2020!

          • MosheM June 19, 2017 at 11:09 pm


            I haven’t heard his name since he won.

            29, M, R, NY-10

  • indocon June 19, 2017 at 11:52 am

    As pointed out earlier, Washington LD-19 is in Grays Harbor County, which had not voted at presidential level for a Republican candidate since Herbert Hoover in 1928, until Donald Trump showed up! I wonder if there is any other county like this in US, overwhelmingly white and democratic for so long?

    • OGGoldy June 19, 2017 at 12:05 pm

      Wasn’t there that county in Kentucky that voted Democratic since the dawn of time until 2016?

      • GoBigRedState June 19, 2017 at 12:13 pm

        Yes-Elliott County had voted Democrat in every election since it was created in 1869 before going Republican last year.

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

        • OGGoldy June 19, 2017 at 12:35 pm

          That’s the one. Couldn’t think of the name of it. Thank you GBRS

        • rdelbov June 19, 2017 at 12:44 pm

          I might add that other moonshine-you can’t buy alcohol in Elliott county.

        • Greyhound June 19, 2017 at 12:58 pm

          And it saw the biggest swing to Trump of any county in the country too, going from 49-47 Obama in 2012 to 70-26 Trump in 2016.

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

          • californianintexas June 19, 2017 at 11:10 pm

            I knew the writing was on the wall for Elliott County when it swing from Obama+25 in 2008 to Obama+2 in 2012.

            34, Female, Libertarian, UT-02 (hometown CA-31), theelectionsgeek.com

            • Son_of_the_South June 19, 2017 at 11:49 pm

              What is that, a nearly 50-point swing in eight years? That’s crazy!

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

              • Greyhound June 20, 2017 at 12:21 am

                68-point swing by margin.

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

    • Republican Michigander June 19, 2017 at 1:01 pm

      Gogebic County in my state was the longest running flip – 1972

      Not on the level of Elliot County or Grays Harbor, but probably similar in makeup.

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

  • RogueBeaver June 19, 2017 at 2:18 pm

    WI-SEN/LG: Kleefisch running for reelex. https://twitter.com/sbauerAP/status/876863317528195072

    QC/Blue Tory/M

  • Grant June 19, 2017 at 2:43 pm

    SEN: Fox’s Eric Bolling thinking of carpetbagging into a Southern state to run for Senate at some point in the future.


    26, R, OK-5

    • rdw72777 June 19, 2017 at 2:50 pm

      “Otherwise, though, Bolling said he thinks the administration’s track record is “phenomenal,” pointing to the stock market, low unemployment rate, housing prices and consumer confidence.”

      “The economic accomplishments are astounding. The left will say it’s because of President [Barack] Obama, but Trump told me he was going to do this, Day One ‘I will start rolling back regulations.’ I had no idea the economic impact it would have, the American economic might he unleashed by doing that.”

      Well he’s got his talking point already.

    • Republican Michigander June 19, 2017 at 6:23 pm

      I despise carpetbagging.

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

  • w920us June 19, 2017 at 2:58 pm

    I’m a bit shocked that this is the Post’s opinion on single-payer. For some reason most liberals refuse to acknowledge the true cost.

    Single-payer health care would have an astonishingly high price tag

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

    • roguemapper June 19, 2017 at 3:12 pm

      Of course it would have an astonishingly high price tag. If healthcare spending merely stayed flat at the 2016 level of $3.4 trillion then it would amount to a $34 trillion price tag over the next 10 years. To be sure, it won’t stay level as things stand, but rather will continue to swiftly rise. If single-payer healthcare instead reduced that price tag to $32 trillion over the next decade while obviously covering more people and without reducing the quality of services as this editorial implies then it’d be an impressive achievement.

      Why are you posting this policy editorial here?

      Dem NC-11

      • w920us June 19, 2017 at 3:55 pm

        Trying to convince members of The Resistance that single payer won’t incur a monstrous bill is the issue. I have two BernieBro friends who are nurses and I’ve attempted to explain to them that single payer will result in a significant cut in nurses pay. And it’s like talking to a brick wall.

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

        • roguemapper June 19, 2017 at 4:01 pm

          Are you friends with those two BernieBros on Facebook or some other social media platform? If so, then that’s where you need to post this link if you hope to change their view on single payer. Do your BernieBro friends frequent RRH? If not, then posting it here won’t help your goal of convincing them in any way that I can see. If what you’re looking for here is advice on how to engage your BernieBro friends on this issue, then my inference is that they are less susceptible to straw man arguments than you are. You should look for an editorial that isn’t a straw man argument.

          Dem NC-11

        • CyHawk June 19, 2017 at 4:21 pm

          Nurses unions are among the biggest proponents of single payer for some reason, most notably in California. They seem to think it will result in pay INCREASES because they would no longer have to negotiate for health care benefits. The coverage would be FREE!

          • Left Coast Libertarian June 19, 2017 at 6:33 pm

            If the government paid Medicare rates for everyone then doctors, nurses, and hospitals would all have to take pay cuts. Medicare pays less than private health insurance.

            The scariest part of single payer is what happens if the costs greatly exceed what they expect them to be. Most government programs can be curtailed to the money the government has but they couldn’t do that here.

    • Izengabe June 19, 2017 at 6:41 pm

      LETS END THIS HERE. THIS IS NOT THE PLACE TO DISCUSS HOW AWFUL SOCIALIZED MEDICINE IS!!!! Talking about this in regards to a ballot prop or an election issue is OK. Talking about this in regards to some random Washington Post Op-ed is not what RRH is for. Let’s move on.

      Follow me on Twitter: @Izengabe_

  • Manhatlibertarian June 19, 2017 at 3:09 pm

    Nate Cohn reports high turnout in early vote in Fulton County in Ga6 (One of three counties in CD). There were about 86K votes in total 1st round but the early vote alone for the second round has about 80,500 votes, 23K of whom didn’t vote in the first round. This out of about 216,000 registered voters in the CD from Fulton County. According to the Atlanta Journal Constitution this is the highest percentage turnout in terms of registered voters of the 3 counties in the CD (Cobb and DeKalb are the other 2). This is Handel’s home county but still not totally clear if this is a good sign for her (I think Cobb is probably the most Repub of the 3 counties from what I recall).

    Cohn also points out that GA6 is sixth of the 10 most educated CDs in the US. Interestingly the other 9 are all Dem in areas like the West Coast, NY, Mass etc. So GA6 is an anomaly among the best educated counties in that it has been going for the GOP. So Ossoff winning would correct this anomaly but then how significant is it nationwide?


    • Izengabe June 19, 2017 at 3:33 pm

      What would be interesting it to get an idea who these new voters who did not vote in the primary are. What percentage of them are historic Republican voters, Democrat voters and new voters?

      That could give us a really good idea how this electorate is looking vs the primary one.

      Follow me on Twitter: @Izengabe_

      • rdelbov June 19, 2017 at 5:49 pm

        Not a surprise to me!! Fulton GA GOP has a strong organization in the R area of GA6. The county HQ is elected there and there is also a ton of local office holders who have strong organizations in this area. A ton of people who are neighbors of Handel turned out to vote early. Nate has this information but he did not release on his twitter. The entire early vote was 47R-30D (by last primary voted) so what were the numbers in Fulton county?

        One wonders? It looks like to me that the voters who know Handel best are turning out in the biggest numbers to vote early.

    • indocon June 19, 2017 at 5:33 pm

      This is where so called non partisan redistricting did us in CA, I wonder if the old version of CA52 which Bilbray held on all through 2000’s would rank in most educated districts?

  • MosheM June 19, 2017 at 4:30 pm


    29, M, R, NY-10

  • RogueBeaver June 19, 2017 at 5:59 pm

    NV-SEN/3: Rosen in. Quite bizarre to me given how she barely beat a perennial candidate & is new to politics. You’d think Kihuen would be obvious choice if they wanted a frosh. http://www.politico.com/story/2017/06/19/heller-rosen-nevada-senate-2018-239729

    QC/Blue Tory/M

    • rdelbov June 19, 2017 at 6:01 pm

      If I had to pick a foe it might be Rosen

      • edtorres04 June 19, 2017 at 6:18 pm

        Agreed. I was afraid Ross Miller was going to make a comeback. He would have been formidable.

        Also, NV 3 was won by Trump. I wonder if Heck reconsiders a comeback. I know he’s doing well, but now that there is an open seat…

    • shamlet June 19, 2017 at 6:31 pm

      FP’d. Please move discussion there.

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

  • VastBlightKingConspiracy June 19, 2017 at 8:34 pm

    CBS News’s Scott Pelley: Shooting of Steve Scalise may have been “self-inflicted.”


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

  • edtorres04 June 19, 2017 at 9:03 pm

    Colorado: Mike and Cynthia Coffman are getting divorced. Not sure when they found the time to fight since they live apart?

    • jncca June 19, 2017 at 9:13 pm

      Living apart can lead to other things which lead to divorces.

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

    Leave a Reply

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