i just hope that people are so upset and angry that they come out in droves next year to vote for a Congress that can stop the destruction and protect whatever we have left until we can return sanity to the White House.
P.S. Emily, isn’t there anyone with some smarts and charisma up there in Maine who could give “perpetually concerned” Susan Collins a run for her money?
At this point, the ones with real name recognition are running for governor, as Mills' term hits its limits next year: Angus King III (son of our former governor & current Senator) and Troy Jackson (former Maine Senate leader who was a Republican, then an Independent, then joined the Dems in 2004). Troy Jackson in particular would have been a great for U.S. Senate: like Collins, he's from Aroostook County (aka The County), has lots of legislative experience, and the ability to relate to his Republican counterparts' talking points that would serve him well communicating with voters. I wouldn't be sad to have him as Governor, but I think he'd serve us well as Senator.
Mark Eves would have been a great option too, but he's too "Southern Maine" to get the votes and support that Collins reliably gets: we'd need another candidate from The County...or at least from somewhere north of Portland. Our former Trumpian governor - Paul LePage (who's now running to oust Jared Golden from his seat next year!) - was so nasty to deal with that Eves ended up leaving politics entirely, which is a real shame.
The only Collins' challenger who's a Dem so far is Jordan Wood, who has little-to-no name recognition here and is likely to suffer from not being Maine *enough* despite being born and raised here. He is openly gay as well - married and has a little girl - but to be quite honest his 10 years of residency in Washington D.C. are going to be the far bigger hurdle to overcome for Maine voters. Collins is still considered a Mainer through-and-through, and she's practically an institution, like the Queen: there is wiggle room to go further to the left, but voters here are absolutely not going to want a radical departure from her relative reliability. We need a dyed-in-the wool Maine moderate who actually has good ideas AND a spine.
B) And I do mean this genuinely: I'm not Maine enough. Being born in Boston is probably forgivable (😉) but I'm from the very southern tip of the state, and simply do not have enough authentic Maine cred. You have to consider that Maine only borders one other state, the majority of our border with NH runs through barely populated forest, and the rest of the state is surrounded either by Canada or by the ocean. We are the least densely populated state east of the Mississippi River, and are the "oldest state" by a wide margin, with more people over the age of 65 than under the age of 18.
Culturally our state is like a peninsula that has been isolated for a long time, and has an aging population with a very long memory and a lot of pride in how they have eeked out their survival - from their perspective, I'm a "young gal" who's practically been living on the mainland my whole life. There is a STRONG resistance here to outsiders (read: tourists, folks from Massachusetts) who come to Maine and want to change it to better resemble where they come from, or who come to Maine actin' like they know best. Being from southern Maine means being treated with more suspicion about our potentially know-it-all tendencies and a lack of understanding what it really takes to make a living off the ocean or the land. I genuinely think this is why our politics tend to be more moderate: we understand the value of community support but we aren't interested in taking too strong of a position on how people should live. We've generally been a fiscally responsible state with a high degree of personal freedom (minus the libertarian kookiness).
I lived in Austin for 7 years, and Texans just *love* to talk about how Austin "isn't really Texas." Austin is more Texas than literally anywhere outside of Texas. Southern Maine is more Maine than anywhere else outside of our state. It's a very, very silly way to rank who really counts as being genuine enough...but it still plays an outsized role in determining who can earn votes in our state.
C'mon, just move to The County and get started! I'm kidding. But I hope that someone comes out of there that grabs people's attention, kind of like when Obama came out of nowhere so many years ago. I know when I first heard about him I never thought he had a chance against John McCain. Guess we will have to wait and see.
There's definitely been a revival of younger Mainers returning home to revitalize their historically agriculture and mill towns, and I do think that's probably where a promising candidate will come from. We do have a brain-drain problem where our high school and college grads are leaving the state for better opportunities, but that seems to be balancing out with a lot of those same folks returning to Maine once they're a decade older and realizing how much they miss living here (I mean, that's what I did!). So I am confident that it will happen...I just hope it happens on the sooner side of things.
Trump's entire agenda hinges on a Republican Congress that has proven itself nothing more than a collection of spineless enablers. The 2026 midterms offer our best shot at confronting this constitutional breakdown where checks and balances have been replaced by blind loyalty and complicit do-nothingness. We're watching as the legislative branch willfully surrenders its oversight powers, rolling over while Trump's executive branch systematically dismantles democratic guardrails.
Isn't it worth investing a lot of energy to fix this, rather than passively waiting to see what happens?
This article got me thinking. For purple or even red states where Trump himself has become unpopular but the Democratic brand remains toxic, we're neglecting a strategy: supporting independents who would "caucus with Democrats" using the Angus King model. These candidates could present themselves with locally palatable messaging—perhaps sounding more like Susan Collins than Bernie Sanders on the campaign trail—while still providing the crucial votes needed to flip the Senate back in the direction of upholding the Constitution. Why should we let the Democratic establishment—who somehow managed to find Trump a difficult candidate to defeat in 2024—dictate the entire electoral strategy? I think they need our help to think outside of the party’s direct involvement.
Consider Maine as a test case. Instead of forcing another Democrat to face the seemingly unbeatable Collins, what if concerned citizens formed local recruitment committees to identify respected community leaders without previous political party affiliations? It’s not like a Democrat who could win Maine would be much of a Democrat, anyway. Jared Golden is often smeared by Democrats when he votes against party lines, and it sounds like he’d be one of Dems’ best shots if we stick to a Dem-vs-Rep binary strategy. Why not go with someone who might have the same voting record as him, but without a “D” label that Maine voters find suspicious?
The process could begin with town halls focused on government dysfunction rather than partisan issues, identifying potential candidates who demonstrate practical problem-solving skills and integrity. Next comes the crucial vetting and persuasion phase—convincing these individuals that running as independents represents a patriotic duty rather than a career move. Fundraising would leverage national small-dollar networks while emphasizing the candidate's local connections and independence from party machinery. The messaging would focus relentlessly on making government functional again rather than ideological positions.
Of course, ballot access remains a significant hurdle for independents in many states. This is by design – the two-party duopoly has deliberately created byzantine qualification requirements that vary wildly across states. But these barriers are surmountable with early organization. In Maine, independents need 4,000 signatures for Senate races – challenging but achievable with volunteer networks. Other states require between 1-5% of registered voters' signatures. The key is starting the signature gathering process 12-18 months before the election, using the very community organizing that will later form the campaign's backbone. Each signature becomes a potential voter contact, volunteer, or donor. This grassroots approach transforms a bureaucratic obstacle into a community-building opportunity that party candidates, relying on institutional support, can't match.
The funding disadvantage against party candidates is real but increasingly surmountable in the digital age. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez demonstrated this by defeating a well-funded incumbent while spending less than $200,000 to his $1.5 million. Independent candidates can leverage social media platforms and targeted digital advertising to bypass expensive traditional media. Their authenticity becomes their greatest asset – genuine, unscripted engagement stands in stark contrast to the focus-grouped messaging of party candidates (especially when Rs are being told to avoid their constituents). Each partisan attack against them becomes an opportunity to demonstrate exactly why voters are tired of party politics, effectively turning their opponents' financial advantage into a liability.
Defeating Collins is critical because despite her moderate reputation, she ultimately has a responsibility to her party to vote with Trump unless she has an extreme reason not to—as we've seen time and again when her "concerns" mysteriously evaporate at vote time. An independent challenger could truthfully tell voters: "I am beholden to nobody except the citizens of Maine," offering authentic independence rather than performative moderation that crumbles under a little partisan pressure.
Maine has already proven this model works through Angus King. First elected governor as an independent in 1994 and later to the Senate in 2012, King demonstrates how a candidate free from party labels can appeal across ideological divides while maintaining principled positions. While he caucuses with Democrats for procedural purposes, he's maintained his independence on key votes. While that might make Democrats mad occasionally, it’s a whole lot better than a default MAGA vote. In 2022, he won reelection by nearly 23 points in a state that remains highly competitive in other races. King's success stems from his authentic commitment to Maine's interests over party loyalty. His approachability and pragmatism have made him one of the most popular senators in America. According to Morning Consult's 2023 senator approval rankings, King was among the top 10 most popular senators in America.
This approach aligns with what could be called "radical moderates" — citizens committed to taking bold, even disruptive action to restore basic governmental functionality. The movement needs a more compelling slogan than what the established parties offer. Perhaps this: "Extremists broke it. Partisans can't fix it. Join the radical middle that gets things done." This acknowledges voter frustration while offering a constructive alternative to both partisan gridlock and un-American authoritarian solutions.
I just don’t agree with your premise that the Democratic brand, whatever that is, is so toxic that it needs to be abandoned for the unicorn independent third party. As I’ve stated before, I believe many people are angry with the party because it hasn’t been sufficiently aggressive to counter Trump. And there are also large Democratic deficiencies in countering MAGA lies and disinformation. Democrats can and are improving in both those areas, especially as more and more information comes to light about how Trump is dismantling so many Biden era programs, policies and legislation that were actually helping people. Maine and Angus King is a special situation that I don’t believe can be easily replicated across the country. Just look at Canada and some European countries and their latest elections, where even though they have long established multiple parties, the threats to liberalism from the rise of the far right was so dire that voters largely coalesced into the two major parties. I believe unity is needed, now more than ever, among people who believe in the Constitution and the rule of law and that the best way to achieve such unity is to improve the Democratic Party, not go into battle with it.
I think we are mostly agreeing, actually! I’m not talking about doing this across the country, just in places where the brand IS toxic. And because of systemic disadvantages Dems face in the Senate, where densely populated states have as much representation as the least populated states, I think a dual-track strategy (Dem support where it’s helpful, stepping aside where it’s not helpful) might be the best way to defeat right wing extremism in places where it has been succeeding.
I do think your analysis for Maine was spot-on! We have a unique situation here, where we've had a robust Independent party for decades and are generally moderate with our politics, but it's often been easier to convince skeptics to vote for someone who "doesn't have to answer to" any Party. Building coalitions can be very effective, especially when the Dem's brand is seen as giving way too much power and control to the DNC and to their own gerontocracy.
Hey that's awesome! I've never been, but it does sound like an amazing place, especially in what I've read in your writing. What do you think about other states, though: New Hampshire? (This question is asked with absolutely zero knowledge of Pappas or his favorability in the race.) Or what if we even thought about thoroughly red states that don't seem to be firmly on any sort of Trump train? Any states especially vulnerable to the Trump tariffs that could come into play? Could we extend the map of what's achievable?
I will say that conservatism here is faaar more fiscal and classic 'small government' - the religious flavor the GOP has in other states, or even nationally, does not play well up here. New Hampshire is the most conservative of the New England states, but it's with a very strong libertarian bent (and less a Christian Nationalist one).
I do think Pappas could have a good shot: he's already been in office since 2019 and is a moderate D with a strong record of bipartisanship. I'd have a hard time speaking to other areas, as the only other place I have lived is Texas and that just gave me political whiplash 😅 But I do believe that "socially liberal/fiscally conservative" is a popular position, has historically been the reason we've elected moderates up here, and is something that I'm sure a lot of people would get on-board with - it's just not a position that comfortably finds a home in either national party.
Timothy -- While I am currently one of those 'rare' citizens who generally support a "two party" system, as opposed to a multi-party/coalition government--I fully agree with your sentiments here. Don't challenge D's in states/districts where D's are strong, and have constituent support. Unfortunately, there do exist states/districts where the "D" label is, as you said, "toxic." In these areas, it matters not what a candidate does, says, espouses...the Democrat label is a non-starter. However, an "independent" the likes of Angus King may actually move the needle.
As always, thanks for your thoughtful (and often provocative) posts.
While it would be nice if I could force everyone in the world to believe what I believe, I suppose I'll settle for "thought provoking" 😌 Haha, I kid, but really: thank you always for your perspective, Todd! I love hearing what everyone else thinks.
There is so much hope for our country if democrats take back both the House and Senate. I am praying democratic leadership has a plan for using trumps corruption as a reason not to vote republican. I have to keep my head down and keep doing my part- hope is a bit scary right now.
We can only hope it and the GOP fall apart. Hopefully the GOP is forced into a spot to reevaluate its identity and what it stands for because they bare no resemblance to the GOP of old.
I keep thinking this, too. I've long been a "principle over party" voter (well before Sharon gave us that lovely and convenient phrase for it), but I love in a very red county in Texas, so I've voted for many Republicans over the years. (Still do locally, and I personally know and genuinely respect some of them.) But the federal GOP is barely recognizable as the party I grew up knowing about, which is why it's so astonishing to me that so many of my Republican friends are so firmly entrenched in the MAGA movement. Apparently, the "R" behind a candidate's name matters more to them than what the actual candidate stands for.
Thanks Gabe for your insight. As history has shown, I am confident that D's will take control of the House. As for the Senate--yes, it is dicey. Based on your comments regarding surprising victors, you imply that voters will be faced with the same ol' "lesser of two evils." While I agree with the premise, I abhor the fact. It also leads my thoughts to a time before primaries. Is it really best practice to have general population voters choose parties' candidates. The initial idea was meant to shift party power to the people. However, "the people" appear to be choosing individuals who are poor candidates and/or poor legislators. They either lose (when they should win), or if they win--they are less than qualified. Many Republicans today--even while supporting Trump--lament that he was probably not the best candidate, and certainly not the best president. Had the old system been in place where party bosses and delegates had chosen the Republican candidate in 2016, and again in 2024, it's doubtful that Donald Trump would have been on the ballot. Maybe something to think about.
Thanks for this information. As a Texan living in a very red county, if I want a say in local governance, I have to vote in Republican primaries because we might have 6 R candidates run in a local race and one D. So primaries are extremely important here because the R who wins the primary will ultimately be the winner. Which means, I'll also be voting for either Paxton or Cornyn come March. And while I strongly believe Cornyn really, really needs to go, I've long thought "over my dead body would I ever vote for that criminal Paxton." This information is making me rethink that stance. Perhaps a vote for Paxton in the primary will get me (and many Texans) closer to our true goal of finally, finally flipping Cornyn's seat. I'll continue to keep a close eye on things over the next 10 months. Thanks for keeping us informed!
Have you seen Nate Silver's analysis of the 2026 midterms and the chances of the Democrats taking the Senate? He puts their odds at +5.5 to take control. It's strictly a statistical analysis based on multiple surveys, but he's been spot on with his election calls over the last few cycles.
At this point I would vote for a rock before I would vote for any Republican running.
i just hope that people are so upset and angry that they come out in droves next year to vote for a Congress that can stop the destruction and protect whatever we have left until we can return sanity to the White House.
P.S. Emily, isn’t there anyone with some smarts and charisma up there in Maine who could give “perpetually concerned” Susan Collins a run for her money?
At this point, the ones with real name recognition are running for governor, as Mills' term hits its limits next year: Angus King III (son of our former governor & current Senator) and Troy Jackson (former Maine Senate leader who was a Republican, then an Independent, then joined the Dems in 2004). Troy Jackson in particular would have been a great for U.S. Senate: like Collins, he's from Aroostook County (aka The County), has lots of legislative experience, and the ability to relate to his Republican counterparts' talking points that would serve him well communicating with voters. I wouldn't be sad to have him as Governor, but I think he'd serve us well as Senator.
Mark Eves would have been a great option too, but he's too "Southern Maine" to get the votes and support that Collins reliably gets: we'd need another candidate from The County...or at least from somewhere north of Portland. Our former Trumpian governor - Paul LePage (who's now running to oust Jared Golden from his seat next year!) - was so nasty to deal with that Eves ended up leaving politics entirely, which is a real shame.
The only Collins' challenger who's a Dem so far is Jordan Wood, who has little-to-no name recognition here and is likely to suffer from not being Maine *enough* despite being born and raised here. He is openly gay as well - married and has a little girl - but to be quite honest his 10 years of residency in Washington D.C. are going to be the far bigger hurdle to overcome for Maine voters. Collins is still considered a Mainer through-and-through, and she's practically an institution, like the Queen: there is wiggle room to go further to the left, but voters here are absolutely not going to want a radical departure from her relative reliability. We need a dyed-in-the wool Maine moderate who actually has good ideas AND a spine.
*EDIT* Apparently there's another, even less well known, Dem that's running as well: https://www.wmtw.com/article/democrat-natasha-alcala-challenge-sen-susan-collins/63933109 (plus an Independent and another Republican)
Are you available?!?!?
A) Good Lord no, at least not yet 😂
B) And I do mean this genuinely: I'm not Maine enough. Being born in Boston is probably forgivable (😉) but I'm from the very southern tip of the state, and simply do not have enough authentic Maine cred. You have to consider that Maine only borders one other state, the majority of our border with NH runs through barely populated forest, and the rest of the state is surrounded either by Canada or by the ocean. We are the least densely populated state east of the Mississippi River, and are the "oldest state" by a wide margin, with more people over the age of 65 than under the age of 18.
Culturally our state is like a peninsula that has been isolated for a long time, and has an aging population with a very long memory and a lot of pride in how they have eeked out their survival - from their perspective, I'm a "young gal" who's practically been living on the mainland my whole life. There is a STRONG resistance here to outsiders (read: tourists, folks from Massachusetts) who come to Maine and want to change it to better resemble where they come from, or who come to Maine actin' like they know best. Being from southern Maine means being treated with more suspicion about our potentially know-it-all tendencies and a lack of understanding what it really takes to make a living off the ocean or the land. I genuinely think this is why our politics tend to be more moderate: we understand the value of community support but we aren't interested in taking too strong of a position on how people should live. We've generally been a fiscally responsible state with a high degree of personal freedom (minus the libertarian kookiness).
I lived in Austin for 7 years, and Texans just *love* to talk about how Austin "isn't really Texas." Austin is more Texas than literally anywhere outside of Texas. Southern Maine is more Maine than anywhere else outside of our state. It's a very, very silly way to rank who really counts as being genuine enough...but it still plays an outsized role in determining who can earn votes in our state.
C'mon, just move to The County and get started! I'm kidding. But I hope that someone comes out of there that grabs people's attention, kind of like when Obama came out of nowhere so many years ago. I know when I first heard about him I never thought he had a chance against John McCain. Guess we will have to wait and see.
There's definitely been a revival of younger Mainers returning home to revitalize their historically agriculture and mill towns, and I do think that's probably where a promising candidate will come from. We do have a brain-drain problem where our high school and college grads are leaving the state for better opportunities, but that seems to be balancing out with a lot of those same folks returning to Maine once they're a decade older and realizing how much they miss living here (I mean, that's what I did!). So I am confident that it will happen...I just hope it happens on the sooner side of things.
Trump's entire agenda hinges on a Republican Congress that has proven itself nothing more than a collection of spineless enablers. The 2026 midterms offer our best shot at confronting this constitutional breakdown where checks and balances have been replaced by blind loyalty and complicit do-nothingness. We're watching as the legislative branch willfully surrenders its oversight powers, rolling over while Trump's executive branch systematically dismantles democratic guardrails.
Isn't it worth investing a lot of energy to fix this, rather than passively waiting to see what happens?
This article got me thinking. For purple or even red states where Trump himself has become unpopular but the Democratic brand remains toxic, we're neglecting a strategy: supporting independents who would "caucus with Democrats" using the Angus King model. These candidates could present themselves with locally palatable messaging—perhaps sounding more like Susan Collins than Bernie Sanders on the campaign trail—while still providing the crucial votes needed to flip the Senate back in the direction of upholding the Constitution. Why should we let the Democratic establishment—who somehow managed to find Trump a difficult candidate to defeat in 2024—dictate the entire electoral strategy? I think they need our help to think outside of the party’s direct involvement.
Consider Maine as a test case. Instead of forcing another Democrat to face the seemingly unbeatable Collins, what if concerned citizens formed local recruitment committees to identify respected community leaders without previous political party affiliations? It’s not like a Democrat who could win Maine would be much of a Democrat, anyway. Jared Golden is often smeared by Democrats when he votes against party lines, and it sounds like he’d be one of Dems’ best shots if we stick to a Dem-vs-Rep binary strategy. Why not go with someone who might have the same voting record as him, but without a “D” label that Maine voters find suspicious?
The process could begin with town halls focused on government dysfunction rather than partisan issues, identifying potential candidates who demonstrate practical problem-solving skills and integrity. Next comes the crucial vetting and persuasion phase—convincing these individuals that running as independents represents a patriotic duty rather than a career move. Fundraising would leverage national small-dollar networks while emphasizing the candidate's local connections and independence from party machinery. The messaging would focus relentlessly on making government functional again rather than ideological positions.
Of course, ballot access remains a significant hurdle for independents in many states. This is by design – the two-party duopoly has deliberately created byzantine qualification requirements that vary wildly across states. But these barriers are surmountable with early organization. In Maine, independents need 4,000 signatures for Senate races – challenging but achievable with volunteer networks. Other states require between 1-5% of registered voters' signatures. The key is starting the signature gathering process 12-18 months before the election, using the very community organizing that will later form the campaign's backbone. Each signature becomes a potential voter contact, volunteer, or donor. This grassroots approach transforms a bureaucratic obstacle into a community-building opportunity that party candidates, relying on institutional support, can't match.
The funding disadvantage against party candidates is real but increasingly surmountable in the digital age. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez demonstrated this by defeating a well-funded incumbent while spending less than $200,000 to his $1.5 million. Independent candidates can leverage social media platforms and targeted digital advertising to bypass expensive traditional media. Their authenticity becomes their greatest asset – genuine, unscripted engagement stands in stark contrast to the focus-grouped messaging of party candidates (especially when Rs are being told to avoid their constituents). Each partisan attack against them becomes an opportunity to demonstrate exactly why voters are tired of party politics, effectively turning their opponents' financial advantage into a liability.
Defeating Collins is critical because despite her moderate reputation, she ultimately has a responsibility to her party to vote with Trump unless she has an extreme reason not to—as we've seen time and again when her "concerns" mysteriously evaporate at vote time. An independent challenger could truthfully tell voters: "I am beholden to nobody except the citizens of Maine," offering authentic independence rather than performative moderation that crumbles under a little partisan pressure.
Maine has already proven this model works through Angus King. First elected governor as an independent in 1994 and later to the Senate in 2012, King demonstrates how a candidate free from party labels can appeal across ideological divides while maintaining principled positions. While he caucuses with Democrats for procedural purposes, he's maintained his independence on key votes. While that might make Democrats mad occasionally, it’s a whole lot better than a default MAGA vote. In 2022, he won reelection by nearly 23 points in a state that remains highly competitive in other races. King's success stems from his authentic commitment to Maine's interests over party loyalty. His approachability and pragmatism have made him one of the most popular senators in America. According to Morning Consult's 2023 senator approval rankings, King was among the top 10 most popular senators in America.
This approach aligns with what could be called "radical moderates" — citizens committed to taking bold, even disruptive action to restore basic governmental functionality. The movement needs a more compelling slogan than what the established parties offer. Perhaps this: "Extremists broke it. Partisans can't fix it. Join the radical middle that gets things done." This acknowledges voter frustration while offering a constructive alternative to both partisan gridlock and un-American authoritarian solutions.
I just don’t agree with your premise that the Democratic brand, whatever that is, is so toxic that it needs to be abandoned for the unicorn independent third party. As I’ve stated before, I believe many people are angry with the party because it hasn’t been sufficiently aggressive to counter Trump. And there are also large Democratic deficiencies in countering MAGA lies and disinformation. Democrats can and are improving in both those areas, especially as more and more information comes to light about how Trump is dismantling so many Biden era programs, policies and legislation that were actually helping people. Maine and Angus King is a special situation that I don’t believe can be easily replicated across the country. Just look at Canada and some European countries and their latest elections, where even though they have long established multiple parties, the threats to liberalism from the rise of the far right was so dire that voters largely coalesced into the two major parties. I believe unity is needed, now more than ever, among people who believe in the Constitution and the rule of law and that the best way to achieve such unity is to improve the Democratic Party, not go into battle with it.
I think we are mostly agreeing, actually! I’m not talking about doing this across the country, just in places where the brand IS toxic. And because of systemic disadvantages Dems face in the Senate, where densely populated states have as much representation as the least populated states, I think a dual-track strategy (Dem support where it’s helpful, stepping aside where it’s not helpful) might be the best way to defeat right wing extremism in places where it has been succeeding.
I do think your analysis for Maine was spot-on! We have a unique situation here, where we've had a robust Independent party for decades and are generally moderate with our politics, but it's often been easier to convince skeptics to vote for someone who "doesn't have to answer to" any Party. Building coalitions can be very effective, especially when the Dem's brand is seen as giving way too much power and control to the DNC and to their own gerontocracy.
Hey that's awesome! I've never been, but it does sound like an amazing place, especially in what I've read in your writing. What do you think about other states, though: New Hampshire? (This question is asked with absolutely zero knowledge of Pappas or his favorability in the race.) Or what if we even thought about thoroughly red states that don't seem to be firmly on any sort of Trump train? Any states especially vulnerable to the Trump tariffs that could come into play? Could we extend the map of what's achievable?
I will say that conservatism here is faaar more fiscal and classic 'small government' - the religious flavor the GOP has in other states, or even nationally, does not play well up here. New Hampshire is the most conservative of the New England states, but it's with a very strong libertarian bent (and less a Christian Nationalist one).
I do think Pappas could have a good shot: he's already been in office since 2019 and is a moderate D with a strong record of bipartisanship. I'd have a hard time speaking to other areas, as the only other place I have lived is Texas and that just gave me political whiplash 😅 But I do believe that "socially liberal/fiscally conservative" is a popular position, has historically been the reason we've elected moderates up here, and is something that I'm sure a lot of people would get on-board with - it's just not a position that comfortably finds a home in either national party.
Timothy -- While I am currently one of those 'rare' citizens who generally support a "two party" system, as opposed to a multi-party/coalition government--I fully agree with your sentiments here. Don't challenge D's in states/districts where D's are strong, and have constituent support. Unfortunately, there do exist states/districts where the "D" label is, as you said, "toxic." In these areas, it matters not what a candidate does, says, espouses...the Democrat label is a non-starter. However, an "independent" the likes of Angus King may actually move the needle.
As always, thanks for your thoughtful (and often provocative) posts.
While it would be nice if I could force everyone in the world to believe what I believe, I suppose I'll settle for "thought provoking" 😌 Haha, I kid, but really: thank you always for your perspective, Todd! I love hearing what everyone else thinks.
Really really hoping for a Beto run (and win!) in Texas!
Would love Beto! I would also like to see James Talarico in the mix - I think he would make an excellent governor
I want Talarico for governor!! That's at the top of my political wish list, lol!
Agree!
There is so much hope for our country if democrats take back both the House and Senate. I am praying democratic leadership has a plan for using trumps corruption as a reason not to vote republican. I have to keep my head down and keep doing my part- hope is a bit scary right now.
We can only hope it and the GOP fall apart. Hopefully the GOP is forced into a spot to reevaluate its identity and what it stands for because they bare no resemblance to the GOP of old.
I keep thinking this, too. I've long been a "principle over party" voter (well before Sharon gave us that lovely and convenient phrase for it), but I love in a very red county in Texas, so I've voted for many Republicans over the years. (Still do locally, and I personally know and genuinely respect some of them.) But the federal GOP is barely recognizable as the party I grew up knowing about, which is why it's so astonishing to me that so many of my Republican friends are so firmly entrenched in the MAGA movement. Apparently, the "R" behind a candidate's name matters more to them than what the actual candidate stands for.
Thanks Gabe for your insight. As history has shown, I am confident that D's will take control of the House. As for the Senate--yes, it is dicey. Based on your comments regarding surprising victors, you imply that voters will be faced with the same ol' "lesser of two evils." While I agree with the premise, I abhor the fact. It also leads my thoughts to a time before primaries. Is it really best practice to have general population voters choose parties' candidates. The initial idea was meant to shift party power to the people. However, "the people" appear to be choosing individuals who are poor candidates and/or poor legislators. They either lose (when they should win), or if they win--they are less than qualified. Many Republicans today--even while supporting Trump--lament that he was probably not the best candidate, and certainly not the best president. Had the old system been in place where party bosses and delegates had chosen the Republican candidate in 2016, and again in 2024, it's doubtful that Donald Trump would have been on the ballot. Maybe something to think about.
Thanks for this information. As a Texan living in a very red county, if I want a say in local governance, I have to vote in Republican primaries because we might have 6 R candidates run in a local race and one D. So primaries are extremely important here because the R who wins the primary will ultimately be the winner. Which means, I'll also be voting for either Paxton or Cornyn come March. And while I strongly believe Cornyn really, really needs to go, I've long thought "over my dead body would I ever vote for that criminal Paxton." This information is making me rethink that stance. Perhaps a vote for Paxton in the primary will get me (and many Texans) closer to our true goal of finally, finally flipping Cornyn's seat. I'll continue to keep a close eye on things over the next 10 months. Thanks for keeping us informed!
Have you seen Nate Silver's analysis of the 2026 midterms and the chances of the Democrats taking the Senate? He puts their odds at +5.5 to take control. It's strictly a statistical analysis based on multiple surveys, but he's been spot on with his election calls over the last few cycles.
C'mon Dems!!!