I just saw the strangest ad. It looked like it was supposed to be an attack ad agains Sherrod Brown, but all it was was brief clips from news shows saying things like “Sherrod Brown elected” and “Brown votes with the Democrats”, without ever even saying what he was voting for. OK, I guess that there are some folks for whom that would be an attack, but those folks can already see the (D) next to Brown’s name, and that’s all the information that was in the ad.
All to try to make Brown look like an incumbent.
I understand why people are pessimistic, but everything seems to be pointing to a blue wave and the only question is just how big. The Times has polling out today showing SC tied, FL within 6, and MN with a 14 point Dem lead. The GOP is spending money in places like MS. Early voting data is difficult to interpret, but where there is a data, Democrats are coming out in way strong numbers than the GOP. 54-56 seats is certainly possible.
Bibi was projected to be way behind in Israel and few were expecting Lulu to win the second round solidly. I am hopeful but until votes are counted and certified I will maintain my anxiety. Polling has to rely on guess work regarding who is going to show. Educated guess work but still.
Same.
Like many, i have already voted. We have already given all the political contributions we budgeted for – early money matters more. My optimism or pessimism has no possible influence on the results. But if I’m optimistic and the Republicans keep both houses, it might break me. I can’t afford that that.
This is exactly where I am. If I expect the GOP to hold things I can handle the surprise of them losing better than I could if I gave in to the wild optimism and get my hopes crushed yet again. Particularly given all the potential hijinks that could take place between Election Day and 1/3/27.
I’m only that way regarding the Senate. It seems that luck or mis polling or whatever has let us down so often that I can’t get my hopes up for more than a 50 / 50 chance of taking it.
But I can’t convince myself that the House won’t go blue no matter how hard I try. It’s like one of the flaws of Pascal’s Wager being that you can’t force yourself to believe something you don’t. It seems so sure that if it doesn’t happen, I will be both disappointed and shocked at some level, no matter how much my conscious brain tries to lower my expectations.
I wonder how fast Troy Jackson could get a “Lumberjack Song” ad on the air. 'The race is over': Ex-Susan Collins staffer says she just torpedoed her own re-election - Raw Story
I don’t get why the add is bad (or worse than all the others). Can someone explain?
A Collin’s ad just told a state full of loggers that loggers aren’t smart enough to be senators.
While the ad does sound like a political miscalculation, it should be noted that there are, in fact, only 1800 people working as loggers in Maine, against a population of 1.4 million - i.e., essentially a rounding error from 0 people working as loggers.
The Maine logging industry is quickly approaching the status of coal in West Virginia - an industry that the average person doesn’t even know an employee of, and that people will do anything to avoid actually working in given the opportunity, but which takes up an outsized, mythical space in state politics.
I was just conflating “loggers” with every damn person in Maine who admires the logger work ethic and a well split cord of wood.
Yeah. It is dissing the working class folk as a group. He’s not an elite. You can sub in a boat of fish, traps of lobsters, a load of crops … common folk don’t have the tools to be Senators. It reinforces his sales pitch being of the Maine working people and her being out of touch with them.
My recent observation is that Congressional “waves” have tended to be underwhelming. So I would expect a split Congress. In the Senate the Republicans just need 50/50+Vance so they’ve a baseline advantage.
Hm - I wonder how much this will affect things in Alaska (ostensibly a gift link)?
Inside Democrats’ Secret Effort to Stack Alaska’s Ballot
In the summer of 2025, a staffer for Mary Peltola, the Alaska Democrat who was eyeing a run for Senate, received unusual instructions from top campaign aides: Find as many people named Dan Sullivan in Alaska as you can.
The plan worked. This spring, a retired teacher from a tiny fishing village along the Alaska Panhandle, reachable only by air and sea, announced his candidacy for Senate. His name was Dan J. Sullivan.
The Peltola campaign has repeatedly denied any involvement in his candidacy. But The Times has found, based on interviews and text messages, along with documents prepared for a potential lawsuit against the campaign, that not only did Ms. Peltola’s team work with people trying to recruit Mr. Sullivan to run for Senate, but the effort was much broader. The group worked to coax other would-be spoilers into the race, to dilute the incumbent’s support and help catapult the Democrat to victory.
The endeavor, which was internally called the ballot composition project, involved secret trips to far-flung Alaskan communities and the appearance of a mysterious Midwestern operative, who traversed the state using a fake name and made his pitch to would-be candidates over beers at brew pubs.
Yep, I just saw that article as well. Peltola’s former campaign manager seems to be one of the main sources for the Times article.
"Alaskan voters need to know,” said Elisa Rios, Ms. Peltola’s former campaign manager and longtime aide, who was fired amid a staff shake-up in August, and agreed to a series of interviews with The Times since then. “There was a lot of speculation, and voters should get the full picture when making their decisions.”
Ms. Peltola was not directly involved in the project, Ms. Rios said, but she was “definitely aware.”
I suppose this could be sour grapes since Rios was fired but he NYT really seems to be out to get Peltola. This is the 2nd article they have run trying to make her look bad.
While this looks like a shitty thing to do it apparently isn’t illegal. “Ratfucking” has a long tradition in our politics.
She nominated a fake candidate to run against the party of 1.6.2021?
Good for her!
It might be legal, but it’s slimy. And I’d prefer my politicians be less skinny than the average politician. Not slimier.
This seems more like a rat squeezer than a rat fuck.
There’s three levels to it in my mind.
Is it true that anyone of the campaign was involved in a ballot stacking program? Not sure. But sounds like the NYT has some decent evidence to back it up.
Assuming true, did the candidate know? If she knew when did she know? And did she approve it? Here we have little to go by - there is only a retracted claim by a disgruntled former staffer who claims that Ms Pelota was not involved but that she was “definitely aware.” That is little to hang on to at any level, from whether that was a guess by or rumor heard by the staffer or direct knowledge, to the fact it was retracted and not something she stands by.
And lastly in a state in which the general idea of these antics is well established as something done, will any voters care? And I highly doubt that. I don’t think it will get anyone feeling the Trump attempt to interfere in the election if Pelota prevails is any less pathetic or despicable.