The GOP has anti-Bensen ads in MI aimed at low-information voters. They smeared the SPLC for giving money to the KKK and Jocelyn Bensen by association. But the SPLC was paying KKK informants for inside information to monitor it and prevent future crimes. But all the low-information voters connect the dots and say “OMG- the SPLC and Bensen support the KKK!”. I don’t think it’s going to have much impact since John James is a pitiful candidate and all the low-information voters are already voting Republican. But this is typical of the smear tactics employed by the GOP.
As it turns out, this particular case at least did have some polling fuckery going on:
https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/6035570-median-strategies-closes-fake-polls/
Yikes. That sucks.
Anyway, just came in here to note that, in Minnesota’s Peggy Flanagan, we now have a counter example of a Midwestern progressive greatly OVERperforming polls and winning an upset victory.
I wonder if that “social experiment” was coupled with a bunch of bets on the prediction markets.
Wait, no, I don’t actually wonder about that, because I already know the answer.
Wasn’t PillowMan also favored by double digits in polls and then lost badly? Looks like pollsters have really botched this primary cycle. But from what I understand, there were few high quality polls in any of these primary elections.
In today’s New York Times, Nate Cohn writes about three kinds of Democratic office-seekers: activist progressives, non-activist progressives, and moderates. His key example of a non-activist progressive is Wisconsin Senator Tammy Baldwin - someone proven to be popular in a purple Midwestern state.
Perhaps it’s worth noting that Baldwin and Flanagan are both white (until you discover that Flanagan is Native American – and, Baldwin is gay. But still white).
Or perhaps it’s not worth noting that. Most people will have some privileged category, especially since usually, it’s the majority category that’s privileged. In this case, you can say (with partial accuaracy) “both of these politicians are white”, but in another case, you might say “both of these politicians are male”, or “both of these politicians are straight”, or “both of these politicians are Christian”, or whatever.
Now, if you took a list of the top 30 progressives who win elections in purple states, or whatever, and you found that all of them had some quality, then it might be worth saying that that quality is what makes them acceptable to purple electorates. But I don’t think you’re going to find that.
Apparently Lindell is asking for a recount of the Governor primary. Hope they get the money first
Brian
As an elections worker (who lives two miles from Minnesota - and you!), if this happened in my state, and the recount actually took place (when the results weren’t in fact anywhere close to a tie), I’d say “FUCK OFF!” Does he have any idea how much (entirely unnecessary) work this would mean for thousands of people, professionals and trained volunteers alike? What a selfish prick.
True enough. Still, I’m quite sure that candidates are judged as “more progressive” than they really are (on average) if they happen to be anything but a white male, and “less progressive” than they really are (on average) if they are a woman or a person of color. I know I saw a study recently on the women-vs.-men aspect of this. It doesn’t apply in the case of Tammy Baldwin, that’s true – quite the opposite (many assume she’s less progressive than her voting record reveals, even though she’s female. Cohn attributes this in part to her “cheesy” ads – literally, this being Wisconsin). Anyway, I agree it’s complicated, and best suited for a different thread.
Then , Flanagan is not “white”. She is a member of the The White Earth Band of the Minnesota Chippewa Tribe.
Yeah, it is not worth noting, especially when incorrect.
Flanagan is of mixed Ojibwe and Irish descent. She’s free to define herself as either white, Native American or both.
Yes, Nate Silver noted that Flanagan has the sort of solid resume of previous elected experience that leftist insurgents often lack. Perhaps that has a lot to do with her success.
And how does she define hereself?
Both. From her campaign website:
In the Iowa governor race, Zach Lahn (R) has a new ad attacking his opponent, Rob Sand (D). The claim is that Rob Sand is a billionaire. (Hmm, so billionaires are bad at governing? An interesting take from a Republican.)
Rob Sand is not a billionaire, having net worth of several hundred thousand dollars to a million or so, which isn’t that unattainable these days.
But Rob Sands really is a billionaire. However, Rob Sands isn’t running for Iowa governor, Rob Sand is. Is Lahn confused, or trying to pull a quick one?
Shocking no one Lindell did not fork over the money for a recount.
https://www.kare11.com/article/news/politics/elections/lindell-withholds-payment-recount-republican-gubernatorial-primary/89-81e33dc0-6cdf-4d58-a1f4-e7b6d0c7f6a0
Brian
He will gladly pay you Tuesday for a vote recount today.