I wouldn't consider a 78 year old man having a heart attack a "non-severe medical issue."Even he admitted that he'll be taking it easier for the rest of the campaign.
Obviously I have my biases, but his polling has been stagnant for awhile now, and the fact that he had the health scare and is slowing down his campaign doesn't help his prospects of winning. I'm not surprised that progressive voters would be looking for other options, especially when Warren gaining momentum as a very progressive candidate.
I don't think anyone bombed or came off like a big loser, but I don't think anyone was an obvious standout. Biden did have that one rambling moment near the end, but I think he came off well overall. Bernie was the same and Warren came off likable, although I wish she could have gone a little more in-depth on some of her proposals. I thought Beto came off better tonight compared to his previous performances, and the lower polling candidates like Buttigieg, Klobuchar, and Booker did well imo, although they didn't do anything to move their poll numbers. I personally thought Castro came off as petty in his attacks, but he generally had good answers. Overall, this debate won't move the needle anymore than the previous two and I am waiting for the field to narrow down before taking the debates too seriously.
To be fair, John Delaney was also on Fox News complaining about the debate qualifications. But the qualifications are laughably easy and anyone complaining about it is just coming off as desperate. If anything, the DNC was *too* accepting of lesser-name candidates.
I do like McGrath and think she'll definitely raise a lot of money, but she couldn't win KY-06 despite the national attention, so I don't really expect her to win statewide. Rocky Adkins is the only candidate that has a chance against Mitch McConnell.
Great first ad. I'll be keeping an eye on this race as it has the highest chance of flipping from red to blue in Texas. Kim Olson also had a great first ad, but Valenzuela's advantage from what we know so far is that, as a school board member in Carrollton, she has closer ties to the district, whereas Olson lives outside the TX-24.
I don't see the Democratic nominee losing any state that Hillary won in 2016. Unless something crazy happens, I can't see the nominee getting worse favorability ratings than Clinton's numbers in 2020. Even Biden, who gets the same attacks from the left as Clinton did, will likely do better than Clinton due to not having to go through the sexism factor as well as being more strongly associated with Obama, who still has high favorability ratings within the party.
We also see this in the midterm results. The states that Clinton barely won, such as Minnesota and Nevada, saw big Democratic wins on election night. Nevada Dems flipped every statewide office except one from red to blue and has increased their strength through the state legislature.
Democrats also had good nights in Midwestern Obama/Trump states such as Wisconsin, Michigan, and especially Pennsylvania, and I wouldn't just chalk it up to a high-turnout Democratic midterm year, as turnout was high among both Democrats and Republicans (the highest since 1914). Winning these states back is still easier said than done (especially in Wisconsin), but the Democrats will definitely be taking these seats seriously to avoid what happened last time around.
Trump's campaign can try, but there's absolutely no chance Trump wins New Mexico, a state with solid Democratic majorities in the state legislature with all-Democratic congressional representation and nearly every statewide candidate winning re-election by double digits in 2020. And Gary Johnson was irrelevant, just as he was in 2018 when Heinrich still won with well over 50% of the vote while Johnson took in 15%. He has a better chance in New Hampshire, but again, I don't see him flipping any states Clinton won in 2016.
Here's the first general election poll showing Brexit Party with a lead:
I'm not sure if UK voters will swing back to the two main parties when campaigning starts, but the first two post-European election polls point to a very uncertain result for the next election.
The first time that the Lib Dems have lead a poll since 2010. Also the first time that the two main British parties haven't lead a general election poll since...probably ever? [Link]
Also worth noting: Among remain voters, Lib Dems lead with 41% compared to Labour's 27%, Tories' 11%, and Greens 10. 46% of Leave voters support Brexit Party, followed by Tories at 30%, and Labour at 10%. Interestingly, UKIP is polling at 2% among Leave voters, which shows just how irrelevant they are without Farage.
I would like to see Adkins run against McConnell next year. His chances of winning would be low since McConnell is a household name and Trump is on the ballot in a state that's still behind him, but I think he could run a close race and possibly do very well in rural counties.
I'm really not looking forward to the divisiveness of the 2016 primary all over again, and I don't trust Bernie to act any differently.
Also, while Bernie will have the advantage of name recognition coming into 2020, he will no longer just be the "anti-Hillary" candidate this time, as other progressive politicians like Warren and Harris will be in the race.
If you're referring to the Morning Consult poll where he has a 63% approval rating, that's referring to polling within their own state, not the entire nation. [Link]
A poll was done of 18 counties in the Florida Panhandle that showed DeSantis with 30 percent and Putnam with 28 percent. Graham polled with 39 percent throughout the panhandle, with Gillum in second with 17% and the rest spread out among the remaining candidates.
I just posted this under news instead of posting a poll since it was only looking at one region of Florida.
Nevada is always gonna be close no matter who wins it. This one poll three months out isn't indicative of anything except that the race is a tossup. I still think Rosen has a good chance to overcome because of the national environment. I don't see Heller winning in a state that Clinton won in 2016, especially now that Democrats are more energized.
I didn't know where else to post this, but the New York Times just released "an extremely detailed map of the 2016 election" that shows the results precinct-by-precint. Very cool stuff. [Link]
to EastTexasDem
