Fascinoma:
But the duration of Sternlieb’s infection, its location in a uterine fibroid and the recurring hives made the case something of a fascinoma — medical slang for an unusual and unusually interesting case, a status that would be enhanced by the discovery of its source. [“Medical Mysteries: Years of hives and fevers traced to a startling cause,” Sandra G. Boodman, WaPo]
This week’s nominee is conservative media personality Byron York! As WaPo’s Dana Milbank provides important context, we’ll take it from him:
Then there was [Mr Trump’s] abortion statement in which he expressed his belief that states would “do the right thing.” He also repeated the fiction that “Democrats are the radical ones” on abortion because they support infanticide — “execution after birth.”
But Arizona’s highest court disproved both claims the very next day, vividly showing the wild extremism Trump has unleashed in the states. The timing was so perfect that Fox News aired a new conspiracy theory: that the conservative jurists in Arizona for some reason timed their ruling to hurt Trump. “It absolutely seems scripted,” said commentator Byron York.
And if you’re wondering why an anti-abortion ruling would be considered a blow to Mr Trump and the far-right, it’s because they have finally realized that their dog caught the car position on the abortion issue is both highly and deeply unpopular. It’s nearly existential.
And, yes, this is effectively a single issue voter description, as I mean by deeply that it’s an issue which is quite unlikely to be disregarded, and is considered to be of higher priority than virtually any other, for far more than half the population. While I generally disapprove of single issue voting as being indicative of lazy citizens who are unwilling to engage in the analysis of true voting, in potentially existential cases like this one, it’s sadly acceptable.
Fox News and Byron York are more than willing to chuck a highly conservative Arizona Supreme Court under the bus, just because their rather ridiculous ruling that a law from pre-Statehood times still applies hurts Mr Trump.
Steve Benen is puzzling over the Republican National Committee’s behavior, now under the management of Mr Trump’s daughter-in-law, Lara Trump:
Stepping back, there’s no shortage of Republican insiders who desperately want Donald Trump and his team to move past their focus on 2020, if for no other reason than to appeal to mainstream voters who have no use for such a message.
But for reasons the former president and his political operation haven’t yet explained in a coherent way, they just can’t seem to help themselves.
Given Mr Trump’s prosperity theology and its Name it and claim it facet, this is simply Mr Trump bellowing what he desires, a proven case of election theft, and in so doing prove that God is on his side. In a way, Mr Trump is trying to direct the will of God himself.
I wish I could say that won’t go over well with his evangelical supporters, but neither his poll numbers nor human history supports such a position. Religion may claim to be about supplicating God, but supplicating is just a tool, if you will. The goal is to get God to answer the commands of the faithful. If you’re being honest, that’s the best interpretation. So Mr Trump is simply doing what his supporters do, or have done, or wish they dared to do, all depending on their temperament.
Great. Buy solar panels last year, run across this article this year:
Researchers from Lehigh University have developed a material that demonstrates the potential for drastically increasing the efficiency of solar panels.
A prototype using the material as the active layer in a solar cell exhibits an average photovoltaic absorption of 80%, a high generation rate of photoexcited carriers, and an external quantum efficiency (EQE) up to an unprecedented 190%—a measure that far exceeds the theoretical Shockley-Queisser efficiency limit for silicon-based materials and pushes the field of quantum materials for photovoltaics to new heights.
“This work represents a significant leap forward in our understanding and development of sustainable energy solutions, highlighting innovative approaches that could redefine solar energy efficiency and accessibility in the near future,” said Chinedu Ekuma, professor of physics, who published a paper on the development of the material with Lehigh doctoral student Srihari Kastuar in the journal Science Advances. [TechXplore]
Furballs.
Mutable:
able or likely to change:
the mutable nature of love
Language is not static, it is mutable.
Noted in “April 9, 2024,” Heather Cox Richardson, Letters From An American:
The [Arizona Supreme Court] explained: “A policy matter of this gravity must ultimately be resolved by our citizens through the legislature or the initiative process…. We defer, as we are constitutionally obligated to do, to the legislature’s judgment, which is accountable to, and thus reflects, the mutable will of our citizens.”
Are you afflicted? Citizens of Turkey are positively aflame:
Turkey’s Central Bank, in a unexpected move, hiked interest rates Thursday by another 500 basis points, from 45% to 50%.
The monetary policy committee cited a “higher than expected” surge in the country’s year-on-year inflation last month, which hit almost 70%. The embattled Turkish lira strengthened immediately after the surprise announcement, trading more than 1% up on the day at 14:30 p.m. local time. [AL-Monitor]
A bit hard to borrow money. And this in an Islamic nation? I thought charging interest was against Islamic law?
For those readers confused by claims, often emanating from Gen Z, of identity with a group with which they are either evidently, or admittedly, not, here’s Katherine Dee on Default Wisdom:
… as acceptance of minority sexual orientations and gender identity have grown, these categories have become much more nebulous. Rather than being guided by physical experience, one’s sexuality and gender identity are now determined by something much harder to define: feelings. The YouTuber Contrapoints may have put it best in a now-deleted tweet: “Gen Z people are hard to figure out. They’re like, ‘I’m an asexual slut that loves sex! You don’t have to be trans to be trans. Casual reminder that your heterosexuality doesn’t make your gayness any less valid!”
But to our hypothetical Gen Z member, though, I’d have to reply, Sorry, dearie, but you’re not thinking clearly.
Here’s the situation: there’s an assumption that some bundle of feelings or vibes is inseparable from the group to which it’s associated, be it gays, lesbians, or the asexual.
But this assumption has some hidden troubles. Feelings and vibes are not spontaneously existing things that are independent and unaffected by the surrounding societal context. Consider a comparison of two pairs of men. Each pair is bonded. One pair is living in 1950 in New York City, and, for simplicity, the location of the other pair is also New York City, but in 2020.
The former pair, on average, daren’t reveal their quasi-married status and devotion to each other, except to a few close friends, due to strong societal disapproval, such as losing their jobs or even their lives. The gentlemen of 2020, on the other hand, may have had 200 guests at their wedding, and, if they lose their jobs because they’re gay, they have a solid legal basis for compensation.
These highly differences, in key ways, of society’s reaction will undoubtedly strongly influence the feelings of these men of self, towards their partners, and towards society.
To suggest that feelings/vibes and group identity are inseparable is a difficult, even impossible, proposition to defend in view of the fact they change so easily.
Take it another step: are the feelings and vibes originating from belonging to one group broadly unique? Why would they be? Is it possible that, in the years from the above example, a lesbian pair would feel quite similar?
I think so. The pair of a status and a society, and its mapping to a vibe or feeling portfolio, can hardly be considered to generate a unique such portfolio. Just as dread can occur when faced with a wild tiger or the loss of a job, so can the feelings of being part of some group.
So when I suggest our Gen Z member isn’t thinking clearly, I’m specifically referencing the logical error Affirming the Consequent, in which a system supporting the assertion if (a) then (b), and then b is observed (to be true), and thus a fallacious conclusion of (a) is drawn. That is, just because you feel like you’re gay, asexual, or whatever, you’re not unless you substantially follow the physical practices of said group.
I shan’t speculate on the motivations between such poor reasoning, as none of the conclusions are pleasant; I’ll just suggest that a class in rhetoric may be in order.
Paul Newman and Meryl Streep star in ….
Bulldog Drummond’s Bride (1939), part of the canon of Bulldog Drummond, is a rather dreadful effort that depends on the charm of the lead playing Drummond, John Howard, to carry the load. Howard gives it the old college try, but between American accents ascribed to British citizens, French police rather than gendarmes, and a silly plot centering around a bank robbery and a would-be bride, eager for the role, chasing after an ADHD Drummond, this short movie was difficult to take seriously.
Fortunately, I doubt it was ever anything more than a filler.
Reading Andrew Sullivan’s condemnation of the far-left and far-right for going anti-Semitic, following the incendiary invasion of Israel, with its attendant mass murder and kidnapping of civilians, by Hamas, then in control of Gaza, left me gloomy. Don’t get me wrong: Hamas’ actions, whether taken in a supposed defense of Gaza or, as mooted about in AL-Monitor and other publications, an attempt to break up an imminent rapprochement between Israel and its adversaries, such as Saudi Arabia, certainly constitutes a pure, distilled evil.
But for years, even decades, the activities of Israeli settlers, slowly pushing Muslims out of their long-held homes, has been unsettling as well. Indeed, the assassination of Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin in 1995, a leading figure in the Oslo Accords, thought to be leading to a two-state solution, by a far-right Jewish Israeli, might be considered a signal clue as to the arrogance and, yes, evil that may exist is Israel.
For those readers who may be thinking that I hardly know what I speak of, you’re quite right. The events of the Middle East since the establishment of Israel following World War II by, or at least with the backing of the Allies, as led by David Ben-Gurion, have been curious, even to those conversant with the various religions active in the area; for an agnostic with only a passing interest, the claims, the maneuvering, the actions can all be downright puzzling.
But tonight it occurs to me to take a step back while thinking about the motivations of both sides. The extremists on each have amply demonstrated their extremists’ belief in a Divinity, some sort of force that represents good.
And we know that thinking you are part of a tradition of a Divinity can often lead those in that tradition to think their actions, grim as they may be, are sanctified. Certainly, the more mature individuals will recognize the fallacy; but many do not. They believe in God, they believe the rules only apply to their interactions with others in the tradition, and outside of that tradition?
Much anything goes.
And so we see one of the dangers of believing in a divinity: an illusion of the sanctification of some of the worst, most disgusting actions of human kind. All because of a belief that the Divine favors the perpetrator.
It’s something I’ll be keeping in mind in the future. And it helps explain my gloominess at understanding this situation.
Ramada:
(US) A simple arbour or open porch, typically roofed with branches. [from 19th c.] [Wiktionary]
Funny, all these years and never have I run across ramada, excepting all those Ramada Inns, anywhere until now. I had assumed that Ramada Inn was named after their founder, whoever that might be. I noted it in “Archaeologists discover remarkable ancient O’Odham village and va’aki beneath Tempe,” Tamara Jager Stewart, american archaeology (Spring 2024), but the link is to a partial article that does not contain the usage; I suppose you’ll have to give money to the Archaeological Conservancy, as I do, and then ask them to send the Spring 2024 issue, if this concerns you. Here’s a very partial quote, all typos mine:
A giant steel ramada was built over the great house in 1932 — a New Deal project — to protect it from the elements, replacing an earlier 1903 wooden protective structure.
As a mark of ramada’s rarity in literary usage, the spell check in use by WordPress has marked ramada as a misspelling.
Looking at Mr Trump’s Truth Social company, known by its stock symbol of DJT, kos of Daily Kos reads DJT’s 8-K, and if I were an investor, this would concern me:
- Conservative former Congressman Devin Nunes is paid $750,000 as CEO, despite having zero experience running a tech or media company, and that will go up to $1 million next year. Prior to serving in Congress, he was a farmer. Now, I’m sure you’re thinking, “Gosh, that’s not a lot of money, and there’s no one more qualified at licking Trump’s boots than Nunes. What if he bolts?” Oh ye of little faith, you underestimate Trump’s
griftingnegotiating prowess! Nunes is also getting a $600,000 “retention bonus”! Keep that number in mind.- The company’s chief financial officer Phillip Juhan and chief operating officer Andrew Northwall are getting $337,500 and $365,000, respectively. And you’ll be happy to learn that both of them are also getting $600,000 retention bonuses.
This is looking as this tree in my backyard.
And it doesn’t stop there. For a company showing a loss that’s huge relative to revenue, doesn’t appear to have a reasonable business model, has inexperienced personnel, some arguably incompetent, at key positions, and is not revealing key metrics, these are bright red flags, fluttering in the breeze.
And this is a company that, so far, is dependent on the charisma and reputation of a guy coming up fast on the end of his lifetime. They say they are trying to develop products beyond Mr. Trump, but given the lack of star quality leadership in technology, I have my doubts.
The red flags are thundering in the windstorm, in my opinion.
H.R.7845, a House bill whose sponsor, Rep. Guy Reschenthaler (R-PA), is today’s nominee, has the title:
To designate the Washington Dulles International Airport in Virginia as the “Donald J. Trump International Airport”.
Rep. Reschenthaler is either, or even both:
My congratulations to Rep. Reschenthaler on his achievement.
Correction: The stock symbol of Trump Media & Technology Group is actually DJT. My previous post was wrong.
But I like it.
The 2024 Senate Campaign, as well as the House campaign, which I do not plan to comment on – much – will center around one issue.
Reproductive rights.
By which I mean not only abortion, which has become an issue of flaming importance, but IVF (in vitro fertilisation) and birth control in general.
And, as several pundits have already said, this means women, who will generally be furious at losing a Constitutionally guaranteed right to the willfulness of a conservative SCOTUS in Dobbs, and to IVF in the Alabama Supreme Court, will be the deciding force in a number of races. How do we know this? Those abortion ballot issues, such as this one in Kansas, which have been won by shockingly large margins, possibly without exception, by pro-choice forces.
While the connection between the economy and the Senate is nebulous, its more solid connection to the President may be enough to coax uncertain voters to vote Democratic, even in red states. The Biden Administration’s success in rescuing the economy from previous Republican mismanagement did cause inflation, it’s true, but that fact must be communicated properly; Biden’s success in passing programs such as the infrastructure bill, a signal failure (or simply lip-flapping) of the Trump Administration, also presents a distinct advantage for the incumbent.
As in 2022, candidate quality is definitely a Democratic advantage. This is a result of a toxic culture in the Republican Party, as such qualities as competence, experience, compromise, and moderation are not appreciated by those who select official nominees, and the number of Lisa Murkowskis, a moderate who has won one write in campaign against a right-wing extremist in 2010 and could probably win another with ease, in the Republican Party is limited to three to my knowledge (the others being former Maryland Governor Larry Hogan and current New Hampshire Governor Chris Sununu nyah, not really). Nominated Republican candidates, as in 2022, will win their places through absolutist rhetoric that may excite the base, but will repulse the independents and Republican moderates.
Because they’re paid to do so, traditional pundits will cling to traditional measures and aphorisms in making predictions about the results of Senate races. A popular such aphorism is the observation that, because Democrats are defending more seats, they’re more at risk.
I’m here to tell you that this season will be more like the 2022 shocker, in which Democrats just barely lost the House and picked up a seat in the Senate, when the traditional expectation was that in a Presidential mid-term election, the President’s allies do not do well. In 2022 they did very well compared to expectations, a monster of an overperformance. That overperformance has continued in both special elections and, shockingly, in the behavior of the Republican House contingent, which has behaved like a combination of disgusted old men and self-centered brats, with just a sprinkling of Russian agents mixed in — I exaggerate only slightly.
While overperformances on the order of the Republican Vermont primary of this year are not going to happen in the general election, overperformances of a more modest, yet effective caliber remains possible, and even probable. I think there’s a lot of disgust with Republican incompetence, lies, and grandstanding, enough to overwhelm disgust and distrust with Democrats’ and certain of their missteps, and pollsters, due to their lack of access to the youngest voters, have been and will continue missing that data source.
Democrats must communicate the extremism of their opponents in order to have a chance of winning in contestable seats. President Biden must lead the communication and, additionally, emphasize abortion rights, the superiority of Democratic economic understanding, the Russian alignment of certain Republicans, candidate quality differentials, and moderate extreme-left positions in order to reassure independent voters.
| Arizona | California | Connecticut | Delaware | Florida | Hawaii | Indiana | Maine | Maryland | Massachusetts | Michigan | Minnesota | Mississippi | Missouri | Montana | Nebraska | Nevada | New Jersey | New Mexico | New York | North Dakota | Ohio | Pennsylvania | Rhode Island | Tennessee | Texas | Utah | Vermont | Virginia | Washington | West Virginia | Wisconsin | Wyoming |
Incumbent Senator Sinema (DI-AZ) is stepping down in January 2025, rather than risk being voted out, leaving this an open seat. As primaries have not been held in this State, it’s difficult to discuss the race. At present, Rep Ruben Gallego (D-AZ) is considered a lock for the Democratic nomination, but the Republican nomination is decidedly, ah, undecided. The best known Republican candidate is former broadcast anchor, failed candidate for Governor, and election-denier Kari Lake (R-AZ), but whether or not a candidate who was actively booed by her own Party at a convention can still win the nomination is open for debate. Further sinking her cause is the waning of support from presumptive Presidential nominee Mr. Trump. Having been rejected once in a State-wide race, the omens are not good for a second State-wide race.
Overall, it’s noteworthy that a conservative State such as Arizona has two Senators who were Democrats when elected; Sinema has since moved to the Independent column. Sinema was elected in 2018, unseating appointed incumbent Senator McSally (R-AZ), who replaced the deceased Senator McCain (R-AZ). Sinema won by 2.4 points. A Green Party candidate won 2.4% of the vote as well, suggesting Sinema’s final tally, if the Green Party had not run a candidate, might have been north of 4 points, even closer to 5.
Senator Kelly (D-AZ) was elected to an open seat in 2022, and his victory margin over Blake Masters (R-AZ) was nearly 5 points. While some of that is a reflection of the poor quality, in my judgment, of Mr Masters, it’s still true that a conservative state electing a Democrat as Senator is indicative of a State moving left.
Look for Rep Gallego to defeat whoever his opponent might be. The recent Arizona Supreme Court decision approving an ancient abortion ban as still effective has left Arizona Republicans quite vulnerable to angry pro-choice forces, since the Arizona Supreme Court is entirely made up of Republicans; this remains true despite Arizona’s Legislature moving to mitigate the ban.
This is the late Senator Feinstein’s (D-CA) seat, and, since her death, it has been filled by Laphonza Butler (D-CA). Butler is not running in the election, making this an open seat.
This contest features cries of hypocrisy and manipulation on both sides. California uses the jungle primary model, in which an all-inclusive primary has been held, and the top two contenders, regardless of party affiliation, are promoted to the final. On the Democratic side, the prominent contenders were Rep Adam Schiff (D-CA), who was a leading member of Congress in impeaching President, at the time, Trump (R), and Rep Katie Porter (D-CA), who, in her short time in Congress, has built a reputation for being an effective griller of witnesses.
The accusations flew when Schiff’s campaign began promoting the campaign of baseball great Steve Garvey, running as a Republican. The strategy is to promote an unelectable Republican into the final and avoiding a contest with a solid opponent, such as Rep Porter.
All that said, it’s not clear that Garvey will be easily defeated. It’s Schiff vs. Garvey. Getting information on Garvey is not easy. His financial history does appear to be somewhat checkered.
And neither Porter nor the Republicans are happy about this strategy. There have been no failures in this strategy in its use over the years of which I know, but it has an element of hypocrisy to it.
Still, look for the phrase “Senator Schiff today said …” in the future. It is California, after all, and Schiff is a solid politician.
Incumbent Senator Chris Murphy (D-CT) won his reelection race in 2018 by 20 points. He’s running again, and there seems little reason to think whoever he faces, which remains undetermined, will come within 10 points. There are no recent polls that I, or DuckDuckGo, can see as of yet.
Incumbent Senator Tom Carper (D-DE) is retiring at the end of this term, leaving an open seat, and primaries are not until September 10. No recent polls appear to be available for Brown and Rochester on the Democratic side, nor for Taylor and Hansen on the Republican side.
But this is Delaware. Carper won his last reelection race by 22 points. It’ll be a big surprise if Carper’s successor is a Republican.
Incumbent Senator Rick Scott (R-FL), not yet confirmed in a primary, is defending his seat against Rep Debbie Mucarsel-Powell (D-FL), also not yet confirmed. Assuming they both win their primaries, the closest thing to a current poll comes from The Hill:
A survey from the left-leaning firm Public Policy Polling, paid for by EMILY’s List and first shared with The Hill, shows Scott leading Mucarsel-Powell 44 percent to 41 percent. Because the margin of error is plus or minus 3.5 percentage points, the two are effectively tied.
Because of chronic Republican underperformance compared to predictive polls, this poll suggests Mucarsel-Powell is very much in contention.
But I learned something else during research on Senator Scott: he’s not getting a free pass in the primary. Instead, he has a number of Republican opponents, six at the moment, that he must best. While I’m sure he will, it does speak to Republican dissatisfaction with the Senator, who has recently been responsible for Republican Congressional election strategy, and has made some misstatements concerning social nets for the aged that may hit his constituents hard.
And in his last election, in 2018, he won with 50.1% of the vote, while his opponent, former Senator Bill Nelson (D-FL), lost with 49.9% of the vote. Too close for comfort.
On the other side of the aisle, Mucarsel-Powell is the pick of Democratic Party officials as the Democrat most likely to beat Scott. Her decision to toss her hat in the ring may have been a cause of celebration in Florida Democratic circles.
I look forward to seeing this contest.
Senator Mazie Hirono (D-HI) is running for reelection, having won in 2018 by a margin in excess of 40 points. In 2022, her colleague Senator Brian Schatz (D-HI) won by a similar margin.
This would appear to be a very safe seat for the Democrats.
On The Issues – Rep Jim Banks (R-IN).
Incumbent Senator Mike Braun (R-IN) is retiring at the end of this term. On the Republican side, Rep Jim Banks (R-IN) is the only remaining candidate in the primary race, for which the election is May 7th, and we can assume he’ll be the Republican nominee. He’s had three terms in the House of Representatives, so he’s moderately experienced, which is sometimes a negative for Republican voters, but he’s definitely a conservative, as can be seen to the right. Braun’s election run for an open Senate seat in 2018 resulted in a victory by six points, which is not overwhelming, but, unless Banks has some scandal attached to his name yet to be publicized, it should be enough in this highly conservative state.
In the absence of a prominent Indiana Democratic candidate, which seems to be true, Rep Banks should soon get to change his title to Senator Banks.
Incumbent Angus King (I-ME) is running for reelection against a Republican and a Democrat who have no elective seats between them. In 2018, King faced a Republican and a Democrat and racked up more than 50% of the vote. That may be the question for the Maine Independent: Can he do it again?
If he appears to have a serious challenger I’ll update a post, otherwise expect this Democratic-leaning Independent to cruise to another term in the Senate.
The retirement of Senator Cardin (D-MD) and the candidacy of the anomalously popular moderate Republican and former governor Larry Hogan (R-MD) to replace him makes Maryland an unexpected battleground. If you’re unfamiliar with the contest, in which primary elections have not been held, the Baltimore Sun has a summary:
David Trone, a multimillionaire who has spent more than $40 million in Maryland’s U.S. Senate race, has opened a wide gap between himself and Angela Alsobrooks for the Democratic nomination, a new poll from The Baltimore Sun, FOX45 and the University of Baltimore found.
But either would lose to former Republican Gov. Larry Hogan in the general election if it were held now, according to the poll’s sample of nearly 1,300 likely voters. Hogan’s popularity suggests Maryland, where registered Democrats outnumber Republicans by more than 2-to-1, will be a battleground in the national parties’ push to win a majority in the narrowly divided Senate.
There is, no doubt, a lesson in the fact that a moderate Republican is kicking the shit out of the best the Democrats can offer in a Democrat-leaning state, but since I’m not on the ground in Maryland and I do not have any Maryland contacts, I couldn’t really say.
In blue Massachusetts, Senator Warren (D-MA) is up for reelection. In 2018, she won reelection by 24 points. In 2023 there appears to have been a smattering of polls showing Warren trailing potential opponents, but there’s nothing of the sort of late, and those “reports” may have been fake news. MassLive says,
The general election is still months away, but Democratic U.S. Sen. Elizabeth Warren holds a commanding lead in Massachusetts’ nationally watched, and still developing, U.S. Senate race.
We’ll have to wait for fresh polls and the selection of a Republican opponent.
At the moment I expect Warren to be a safe pick, but information is still scarce.
The upcoming retirement of Senator Stabenow (D-MI) creates a race for an open seat. For the Democrats, it appears former CIA analyst Rep Elissa Slotkin (D-MI) is the favorite for the nomination, while the Republicans appear to have a variety of former elected officials to choose from, such as Justin Amash, Peter Meijer, and Mike Rogers. The first two (well, just Amash now that Meijer has dropped out) are more moderates than far-right extremists, while On The Issues suggests Rogers is more hard-core. Relative to other states, it’s an impressive array of experience and talent.
That said, the Michigan Republican Party has been in robust disarray, featuring far-right extremists holding the chairmanship and other positions, when they’re not in active, fourth-rater warfare with each other, so whether a moderate can win the nomination is an open question with a potentially repulsive answer. The candidate ultimately put forth by the Michigan Republicans, even if not burdened with lawsuits from disappointed rivals – there’s ten candidates as of this writing! – may hold such extreme views on reproductive issues as to make them unelectable.
Finally, the last contest for Michigan Senator was in 2020 and resulted in Gary Peters (D-MI) defeating John James (R-MI) by less than 2 points.
The two major parties have a lot of work to do. I suspect the Republican mountain, given the immaturity of the party’s behavior, is a lot higher, but not insurmountable.
As much as Minnesota is considered purplish, there is little doubt that Senator Klobuchar (D-MN), up for reelection, is one of the State’s most popular politicians. She won reelection 2018 by 24 points. Along with her professional qualifications, her late father was a locally famous newspaper columnist, Jim Klobuchar. Perhaps that’s enough to make the case she’ll retain her position in November.
But it’s also worth noting the last Senatorial race in the state. When Governor Walz was faced with the need to appoint a successor for Senator Franken (D-MN) after Franken’s resignation, he selected his Lt. Governor, Tina Smith (D-MN). She was little known outside of political circles, but when it came time for the special election in 2020, she ran and won, beating Karin Housley (R-MN), wife of hockey great Phil Housley, which is a thing in Minnesota, and an experienced politician in her own right, having won election several times to the Minnesota Senate. Housley was not seen as a pushover.
Smith won by an impressive eleven points.
Primaries have not been held, but looking at the Republican field does not inspire thoughts of a monumental upset. Look for Klobuchar to win in November, unless she has to shift gears into a Presidential race. That becomes dicey.
Incumbent Senator Roger Wicker (R-MS) survived two primary challengers, winning 60% of the Republican primary vote, to move on to the general election in November against Democratic challenger Ty Pinkins (D-MS). Pinkins had a 20+ year Army career and holds several degrees from Georgetown in law and government.
On The Issues – Senator Roger Wicker.
Will Pinkins’ qualifications help him overcome Wicker’s incumbency? Will Wicker’s hard-right ideology cripple his reelection campaign against a fresh face and a different set of ideas concerning how to run government? There are no polls as of yet, so the safe bet is Wicker, who last won reelection by almost 20 points back in 2018, in what has been traditionally a Republican state. But this could change in Mississippi.
Senator Josh Hawley (R-MO) is running for reelection in Missouri. In the primary he’s currently facing one opponent, Christopher Murphy (R-MO); the Democrats will have five candidates for the nomination in the primary. I recall Lucas Kunce (D-MO) from the 2022 primary for the Missouri Senate seat then up for grabs, where he lost in the primary to Trudy Busch Valentine (D-MO); she, in turn, went on to lose to State AG Eric Schmitt (R-MO) in the general by 13 points. Kunce is, I think, the favorite among observers to win the Democratic nomination.
The winning margin may be closer for Hawley, a national laughingstock, than for Schmitt, but my expectation is that Missourians will rally behind Hawley, if only to avoid admitting their blunder in electing Hawley, as well-known election denier and hallway runner, to the Senate in 2018. Ads such as this one may cut into Hawley’s incumbency advantage.
Axios also trumpeted Kunce’s donation total, but voters are the decisive force, not those who donate. I’ll believe Kunce, or whoever beats him in the primary, is someone to contend with once the polls come out saying so, and not before.
On The Issues: Senator Jon Tester (D-MT).
In Montana we come to the curious case, akin to that of former Governor Larry Hogan (R-MD), of Senator Jon Tester (D-MT). The Senator, who is running for reelection, is a Democrat in a strongly Republican state. He is a long-time politico, serving in the State legislature before moving to the US Senate in 2006, so Montanans knows the nature of the beast for which they vote.
And what is that nature? On The Issues summarized it in the graphic to the right: He’s not even a moderate, as might be expected. But he seems to have made a connection to his constituents, resulting in a 3+ point victory in his last election of 2018. That margin is not unusual for his Senate runs.
His opponent is yet to be determined, but I recognized none of the names except Tim Sheehy, who has little political experience, yet seems to be considered the favorite, although a scandal regarding a bullet wound may dog him in the primaries. If Sheehy loses the primary, former Secretary of State Brad Johnson (R-MT) would appear to be in line to take the nomination, with competition from third candidate Charles A. Walking Child. Whether any of these three represent real competition for Tester is yet to be seen.
Tester may also be bolstered by a potential reminder on the ballot, as an abortion rights amendment drive is currently gathering signatures. If it makes the ballot, Tester’s pro-choice position may give him an irrecoverable advantage in this race.
Nebraska is a two-fer. First, in the regularly scheduled competition, Senator Deb Fischer (R-NE) faces no Democratic competition in her reelection run as of yet, although there is still time to enter.
It’s madness to permit Senator Fischer to coast to reelection. The Nebraska Democrats should be severely punished, by something other than their consciences, for this slip-up.
In a special election for former Senator Sasse’s (R-NE) seat, appointee Senator Pete Ricketts (R-NE) is running in the primary against two unrecognized names, while the Democrats, apparently made up of a single person, have the inexperienced Preston Love Jr. (D-NE) as the only candidate in the primary.
In the absence of contrary polling data, it seems likely that Ricketts will win his first election to the Senate.
On The Issues: Sam Brown (R-NV).
Incumbent Jacky Rosen (D-NV), who defeated incumbent Senator Dean Heller (R-NV) in 2018 by five points, is running for reelection, and this year’s opponent has not been determined; indeed, Rosen has primary opponents to face as well, although neither seem particularly threatening.
Rosen’s most likely Republican opponent is thought to be Sam Brown (R-NV), who competed in the 2022 race for the Senate; he lost in the primary to Adam Laxalt (R-NV), a known extremist who just barely lost to incumbent Senator Masto (D-NV). Whether Rosen can repeat her 2018 performance is unclear, although I suspect voters, both independents and moderate Republicans, will tire of Brown’s highly conservative ideology, which is illustrated to the right; Brown may suffer from Republican infighting, as this ad suggest Sam Brown is a “swamp creature”. If the accuser, Jeff Gunter (R-NV), wins the primary, the Brown voters may refuse to vote for Gunter.
This poll suggests Rosen and Brown’s approval ratings are similar.
As incumbent Senator Menendez (D-NJ) has announced he will be retiring from his seat in November in order to defend himself against corruption charges, and, no doubt, in view of his poor showing in polls, this race will be for an open seat. However, he may still run as an independent, and this article gives polling results when Menendez is running in a field of probable opponents.
At present, with primaries still to come on June 4th, Rep Andy Kim (D-NJ) is thought to be the favorite among Democrats, while the Republican nominee doesn’t appear to be clear to New Jersey watchers.
In 2018, Menendez won by twelve points. Between this being a blue state, the relative anonymity of the Republican possibilities, and the anger engendered by the Dobbs decision, I do not expect the Republicans to flip this seat.
Incumbent Senator Heinrich (D-NM) is running for reelection this year, with primaries still to come. So far, only Heinrich is in the Democrats’ primary, and the only Republican is Nella Domenici (R-NM). Senator Heinrich won his 2018 election by more than 23 points, and Domenici has little applicable experience.
It seems safe to assume Heinrich should win this race.
Incumbent Senator Gillibrand (D-NY), who in 2018 won reelection by 34 points, seems to be a shoe-in regardless of who the Republicans nominate, which is not yet known. I do not recognize any other names among the primary challengers for either nomination.
Senator Cramer (R-ND), incumbent and member of the Senate leadership team, defeated incumbent Senator Heidi Heitkamp (D-ND) by nearly 11 points back in 2018.
That’s a lot.
His opponent is Katrina Christiansen (D-ND), who ran against Senator Hoeven (R-ND) two years ago and lost; outside of Dobbs, there’s little reason to think she’ll best Senator Cramer and the power of the incumbency.
In Ohio we have another anomaly, as incumbent Senator Sherrod Brown (D-OH) is running for reelection in a State generally considered to be conservative. Rep Tim Ryan (D-OH) ran for the other Ohio Senate seat two years ago, and lost despite a fine reputation and being known.
Brown, of course, as the incumbent is in a stronger position than Ryan, who was looking for a promotion. But will that be enough to defeat his opponent, Bernie Moreno (R-OH)? Brown was not challenged in the primary, so his finances are not as strained as Moreno’s might be. Moreno faced and defeated two opponents in the primary.
More interestingly, Moreno only received 49% of the votes, which suggests a lot of doubts among the faithful who vote in the primary. How will that translate to the general election? Will Republicans “Fall in line?” Moreno is Trump endorsed, and while that’s harmless in red states, Ohio is more purplish than red – and Moreno was the candidate who had the benefit of Democrats boosting him in the primary, as the least likely to beat Brown.
This should be a very interesting race. I think Brown has a chance, he may even be favored, but Moreno will also have a chance. Will the Trump curse sink him?
Pennsylvania is another State that has seemed to lean Republican but has a Democratic Senator or two. In this case, the incumbent is Senator Bob Casey, Jr (R-PA), who is running for reelection and faced no opposition in the primary.
Casey’s rival is David McCormick (R-PA?). Close readers will note the ‘?’, indicating that Mr McCormick may be another out of state candidate, but it’s not clear. Long term readers and those paying attention to politics may remember Mr McCormick ran for the other Pennsylvania Senator seat two years ago, but was defeated in the primary by Oz Mehmet (R-PA?), aka TV’s Dr. Oz. Much like Casey, he faced no opposition in this year’s primary.
But the general campaign is not off to an encouraging start. Between an incumbent opponent with reasonable approval ratings and a victory in 2018 of 13 points, the Dobbs decision, a scandal involving his hedge fund and China, a Trump endorsement, and, in a just released CBS poll, a 7 point deficit, plus chronic overperformance vs polls by Democrats, McCormick’s mountain is looking quite steep, despite Republican estimations that this seat might be flipped. They may be basing their hopes on McCormick’s greater access to resources; however, resources are not everything. At least some voters are offended by mendacity and a lack of authenticity.
I’ll be surprised if Casey loses this race.
In Rhode Island incumbent Senator Whitehouse (D-RI) is running for reelection. He won in 2018 by 23 points, and in 2020 his fellow Senator Reed (D-RI) won by 33 points. Regardless of who is the opposition, undetermined at this time, it’d be the shock of the year if Whitehouse were to lose.
Incumbent Marsha Blackburn is running for reelection. Primaries have not been held, and they’re contested in both the Democratic and Republican columns, but there doesn’t seem to be a reason to expect the Senator to lose the primary.
In the last two Senatorial races, the Republicans have won by roughly eleven points. Can Tennessee Democrats make up that much ground?
Doubtful. Perhaps it’ll be a horse race, but it’ll be Senator Blackburn in the end.
Texas Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) happens to be a Senator with a 38 point disapproval rating, one of the highest in the country. Will this quash his reelection run? His opponent is Rep Colin Allred (D-TX), an experienced Congressional representative. This poll suggests Cruz is safe. Until polls come out suggesting otherwise, I’ll consider the Republican safe as well.
Senator Mitt Romney (R-UT), prominent Trump critic, is retiring, but this is Utah, not a purple state. I have little doubt that the June 25th Republican primary will select the future Senator from Utah.
Vermont’s Senator Bernie Sanders (I-VT) is running for reelection. As he caucuses with Democrats in the US Senate, Vermont Democrats are refraining from nominating a competitor.
The Republican challenger appears likely to be Peter Welch Gerald Malloy (R-VT), who also ran in 2022, and was crushed.
Look for Sanders to win reelection.
Senator Tim Kaine (D-VA), former candidate for Vice President in 2016, is running for reelection. Assuming he wins the nomination, his record of winning the 2018 election by 16 points, and a reputation as being a very good Senator, suggests he has a very good chance of being re-elected.
Senator Cantwell (D-WA) is running for reelection. Washington features a jungle primary, in which a non-partisan primary leads to the top two finishers being promoted to the final. A November ’23 poll suggests Cantwell will dominate, but time is still passing.
Cantwell is the way to bet, though.
Senator Manchin (D-WV), sometimes more of a thorn in Democratic sides than Republicans’ for his advocacy for fossil fuels, is retiring. Given West Virginia’s conservative lean and resentment over the imminent loss of the coal mining industry, the biggest mystery is how Manchin has managed to get himself elected; by the same token, for most pundits the only question is who will be the Republican candidate, and the size of their winning margin in the general election.
For my money, it’ll be former Democrat and former governor Jim Justice (R-WV), and he’ll win by 15 points. It seems to be nearly as certain as shooting fish in a barrel.
Poor fish.
On The Issues: Senator Baldwin (D-WI).
Wisconsin voters seems to be of two minds. On the one hand, Senator Johnson (R-WI) is a far right extremist loon who appears to be suffering from a touch of dementia. On the other hand, Senator Baldwin (D-WI) appears to be a far-left extremist, as can be seen to the right.
Senator Baldwin is up for reelection, not Senator Johnson.
A recent CBS poll gives Baldwin a 7 point lead over Eric Hovde, a rich, out of state contender who appears to have some views that are out of the mainstream. Hovde still awaits the primaries, though, so the story can still change.
I suspect Wisconsinites will prefer the Senator they know to the far right extremist, and Baldwin is popular, winning by 11 points in 2018. I expect Baldwin to work hard and win big.
In ruby red Wyoming, Senator Barrasso (R-WY), supposedly the most popular Senator, is running for reelection, and barring a shock in the primary, should win easily. Heck, according to Ballotpedia there isn’t even a Democratic contender.
No drama here.
The tale of the tape:
The question in the above is where is a safe seat not safe? Some folks think that Republican Senators Scott (FL) and Cruz (TX) are vulnerable. And then there’s the Democratic overperformance at the ballot box compared to the polls, which could result in upsets.
Or are Democrats overconfident that Biden’s exceptionally competent management and leadership will help them overcome other missteps? Is the Hamas mass kidnapping event and Israeli response really going to destroy the Democrats? Their mismanagement of the transgender issue?
I’ll try to keep an eye on polls and news.
