The year’s first downballot primaries start Tuesday. Here’s our guide to all the key races

With both parties' presidential nomination contests all but decided, the nation's downballot primary season starts with a bang Tuesday. Five states—including the two largest—pick their candidates for state and federal offices in elections that will help shape the state of play in key races at all levels.

Below, you'll find our guide to all of the top races to watch on Super Tuesday, arranged chronologically by each state’s poll closing times. When it’s available, we'll tell you about any reliable polling that exists for each race, but if we don't mention any numbers, it means no recent surveys have been made public. You can also check out our most recent episode of "The Downballot" podcast for an even deeper dive on many of these primaries.

Two states on the docket will also be using brand-new congressional maps, though for very different reasons. In Alabama, a federal court drew up new boundaries after ruling that the Voting Rights Act required the creation of a second seat where Black voters could elect their preferred candidate. In North Carolina, though, the Republican-controlled state Supreme Court gave GOP legislators the green light to draw up an aggressive new gerrymander, a task they eagerly took on.

You can find interactive maps from Dave's Redistricting App for Alabama and North Carolina's new boundaries, as well as the maps that first came into use in 2022 for Arkansas, California, and Texas.

You can find Daily Kos Elections' 2020 presidential results for each congressional district here, as well as our geographic descriptions for each seat. You’ll also want to bookmark our primary calendar, which includes the dates for primaries in all 50 states.

We'll be liveblogging all of these races at Daily Kos Elections on Tuesday night, starting when the first polls close at 7:30 PM ET. Join us for our complete coverage!

North Carolina

Polls close at 7:30 PM ET. Candidates must take at least 30% of the vote to avert a May 14 runoff, though the second-place finisher must officially request a runoff for one to occur.

• NC-Gov (R & D) (50-49 Trump): Tar Heel State politicos have long anticipated that the race to succeed termed-out Democratic Gov. Roy Cooper will pit Republican Lt. Gov. Mark Robinson against Democratic Attorney General Josh Stein, and every primary poll shows just such a matchup coming to pass.

While Robinson's intraparty critics have warned that his past screeds—which run the gamut from antisemitic and Islamophobic to misogynistic, homophobic, and transphobic—as well as his ardent opposition to reproductive rights could cost them the general election, primary voters appear unconvinced. The Donald Trump-endorsed lieutenant governor holds a wide lead against both wealthy businessman Bill Graham, who has spent millions on ads attacking Robinson's past statements, and state Treasurer Dale Folwell.

Stein, who has Cooper's support, also enjoys a big advantage over former state Supreme Court Justice Mike Morgan and three other Democrats.

• NC-01 (R) (50-49 Biden): Republican legislators targeted freshman Democratic Rep. Don Davis by transforming his seat in the inland, northeastern corner of the state from a constituency Biden carried 53-46 into one he barely won. Now Army veteran Laurie Buckhout and two-time nominee Sandy Smith are competing for the Republican nomination and take on Davis. Both Smith and especially Buckhout have self-funded a significant portion of their campaigns, and both are campaigning as ardent Trump allies.

The Congressional Leadership Fund, a well-funded super PAC that's close to House GOP leadership, has spent about $200,000 to stop Smith from advancing for the second cycle in a row. Two years ago, CLF failed to stop Smith, who was accused of physical abuse by her daughter and two ex-husbands, from winning the nomination, but it's hoping its latest intervention will be more successful. 

Smith, who has run ads declaring that Trump won the 2020 election and denied her own 52-48 loss to Davis, has also sought to portray Buckhout as an interloper from Virginia and attacked her for getting a 2017 DUI conviction removed from the record. Buckhout, for her part, has largely avoided going after Smith.

• NC-06 (R) (58-41 Trump): Six Republicans are competing to replace Rep. Kathy Manning, who is one of three Democratic House members who is not seeking reelection in a seat that Republicans made all but unwinnable for her party.

Lobbyist Addison McDowell arguably became the front-runner hours before he even announced his candidacy, after Trump endorsed his bid for this district in the central Piedmont region. But the first-time candidate faces several opponents who have been on the ballot in North Carolina before, though they and their allies largely focused on attacking one another rather than McDowell.

One familiar name to national observers is Bo Hines, a former college football player who narrowly lost the 2022 general election to Democrat Wiley Nickel 52-48 in the old 13th. Another is former Rep. Mark Walker, who represented previous versions of the 6th from 2015 to 2021. Also in the running are Christian Castelli, a self-funder who badly lost to Manning last cycle under the previous map; former High Point Mayor Jay Wagner; and Mary Ann Contogiannis, who took third against Castelli in the last primary. 

The Club for Growth, a well-funded anti-tax group that's had an on-again, off-again feud with Trump, is supporting Hines and has spent about $1 million attacking Walker. A super PAC backed by hedge fund billionaire Ken Griffin called Conservatives for American Excellence, though, has spent a comparable amount to leverage the Club's anti-Trump apostasies against Hines.

• NC-08 (R) (58-41 Trump): Far-right Rep. Dan Bishop is leaving Congress to run for attorney general, and six fellow Republicans are on the ballot to replace him in a seat based in the eastern Charlotte suburbs and rural areas further east. The two contenders who have the most money by far are a pair of self-funders, state Rep. John Bradford and former Union County Commissioner Allan Baucom, but it's a third hopeful who has attracted the most outside attention.

That candidate is pastor Mark Harris, whose 2018 House campaign for the old 9th District was responsible for one the most ignominious election-fraud scandals in recent memory. Election authorities threw out the result and ordered a do-over election, which Bishop ultimately won, but Harris still insists he was the rightful winner. Despite his baggage, Harris enjoys the backing of the party's front-runner for governor, Lt. Gov. Mark Robinson.

However, a super PAC called America Leads Action, which is funded by a pair of prominent conservative donors, is working to end Harris' political career once and for all, spending more than $1.8 million on negative ads. There's been no accompanying pro-Harris spending.

• NC-10 (R) (57-41 Trump): Five Republicans are facing off to succeed GOP Rep. Patrick McHenry, who startled the political world when he announced his retirement in December, in a seat that includes Winston-Salem and the western Piedmont region. Only two contenders, though, have brought in a serious amount of money, and they're both self-funders: state Rep. Grey Mills and firearms manufacturer Pat Harrigan, who was the 2022 GOP nominee against Democrat Jeff Jackson in the old 14th District.

Harrigan has Lt. Gov. Mark Robinson's backing, and he's benefited from close to $600,000 in support from two groups, the Koch network's Americans for Prosperity and the Elect Principled Veterans Fund. But another conservative group, GOPAC, has spent over $1.5 million attacking Harrigan on immigration and praising Mills.

• NC-13 (R) (58-41 Trump): Republicans have a 14-way primary to replace another Democrat who is leaving Congress because of GOP gerrymandering, Rep. Wiley Nickel, in a seat based in the Raleigh exurbs and nearby rural areas. There's a good chance this packed contest will go to a runoff, and four contenders appear to have a shot to advance

Three of those candidates have unsuccessfully run for office in recent years. Both businessman DeVan Barbour and attorney Kelly Daughtry competed in the 2022 primary for the previous version of the 13th District (the eventual nominee, Bo Hines, is now seeking the 6th District), while businessman Fred Von Canon was the party's nominee for the state House in 2020 and 2022. The final big name is a first-time candidate, former federal prosecutor Brad Knott. A fifth candidate worth watching though, is Josh McConkey, who won more than $750,000 from the state lottery during the campaign.

Daughtry and Von Canon have each self-funded much of their campaigns, while Knott's family has financed a super PAC called American Foundations Committee to aid him and attack those two rivals. Daughtry's backers at Conservative Voters Alliance have also aired ads to boost her and undermine Knott and Von Canon, while no major independent expenditures have been made either for or against Barbour or McConkey.

Barbour attracted unwanted attention a few weeks before Election Day when a woman accused the married candidate of repeatedly propositioning her for sex in 2021, an allegation he denied. Knott also drew unfavorable headlines during the final week of the race after acknowledging he spent close to a decade voting from his parents' address despite owning a home three miles away.

• NC-AG (D) (50-49 Trump): Democratic Rep. Jeff Jackson launched his bid to replace Attorney General Josh Stein right after Republicans gerrymandered his seat in the House, and he goes into Tuesday with a huge fundraising advantage over his two main foes, Durham County District Attorney Satana Deberry and attorney Tim Dunn. A mid-February Change Research poll for the progressive site Carolina Forward shows Jackson outpacing Deberry 38-14.

However, Republicans appeared to make a late push to boost Deberry, whom they likely believe would be an easier candidate to beat. A new group with GOP ties called And Justice For All PAC has been running ads to promote Deberry, an effort Jackson claimed was "on track" to spend $1 million. The winner will face far-right Rep. Dan Bishop, an election denier who has no opposition in the GOP primary. 

Other North Carolina races to watch:

Alabama

Polls close at 8 PM ET / 7 PM local time. A runoff will take place on April 16 in contests where no one earns a majority of the vote.

• AL-01 (R) (75-24 Trump): Republican Rep. Barry Moore decided to run for this southern Alabama seat after the state's new court-drawn map turned his 2nd District into a Democratic-leaning constituency. Moore, however, faces a difficult primary battle against fellow Rep. Jerry Carl. No other candidates are on the ballot, so this contest should be settled without a runoff.

Carl, who serves the existing 1st District, began the race as the front-runner, in part because he currently represents 59% of the new 1st, while Moore's seat forms the balance. Carl also started off with more money than his colleague and has maintained that advantage, though outside groups have spent comparable amounts for both congressmen.

Both incumbents are ardent conservatives who voted against recognizing Joe Biden's 2020 win, and they're each trying to argue that the other has strayed from MAGA orthodoxy. However, there's a key difference between them: Moore is a member of the nihilistic House Freedom Caucus, while Carl is closer to the party leadership. A poll conducted in the final week of the race by Auburn University at Montgomery found Carl ahead 43-35.

• AL-02 (D) (56-43 Biden): Eleven Democrats are running to replace Republican Rep. Barry Moore in a revamped seat that now takes in Mobile, Montgomery, and the eastern Black Belt, so it's very likely this primary will go to a runoff.

The only candidate who has benefited from significant outside spending is former Justice Department official Shomari Figures, who is the son of a longtime Mobile elected official, state Sen. Vivian Figures. The younger Figures has received more than $1.3 million in support from a super PAC with ties to the cryptocurrency industry, while no major groups have spent anything to attack him.

The field also includes five state legislators, though only two of them―state Reps. Napoleon Bracy and Jeremy Gray―actually represent any part of the new 2nd District. But a third lawmaker, state House Minority Leader Anthony Daniels, has emphasized that he grew up in the Black Belt (even though he now represents Huntsville, at the far end of the state), and he's brought in more money than anyone else in the race.

Also in the running are two legislators from the Birmingham area, state Sen. Merika Coleman and state Rep. Juandalynn Givan.

Texas

The first polls close at 8 PM ET / 7 PM local time in the portion of Texas located in the Central time zone, which includes about 97% of the state's population. Polls close in the rest of the state (a much smaller region in the El Paso area that's in the Mountain time zone) one hour later. A runoff will take place on May 28 in contests in which no one takes a majority of the vote.

• TX-Sen (D) (52-46 Trump): Republican Sen. Ted Cruz holds one of just two Senate seats that Democrats have a realistic shot at flipping this cycle, and nine candidates are hoping to take him on. Rep. Colin Allred, who won his own competitive 2018 race for a seat in the Dallas area, has been the party's front-runner from the start, and he's enjoyed a huge fundraising lead over the rest of the field.

Allred's main opponent is state Sen. Roland Gutierrez, who became a prominent gun-safety activist after the 2022 Uvalde school shooting, which took place in his district. Every poll has shown Allred well ahead, but a pair of February polls disagree on whether the congressman is primed to avoid a runoff. The contest also includes state Rep. Carl Sherman and former Nueces County District Attorney Mark Gonzalez.

• TX-12 (R) (58-40 Trump): Longtime Rep. Kay Granger is retiring from her seat in western Fort Worth and its adjacent suburbs, and five fellow Republicans are campaigning to take her place. The front-runner appears to be state Rep. Craig Goldman, who has the support of Gov. Greg Abbott and has decisively outspent the rest of the field. 

Goldman's main rival is businessman John O'Shea, who began running well before Granger announced her departure in November. O'Shea has the backing of Attorney General Ken Paxton, whom Goldman voted to impeach last year, but he's not getting any major super PAC support.

Conservatives for American Excellence, though, has spent around $600,000 on ads boosting Goldman and attacking O'Shea. Also worth watching is businesswoman Shellie Gardner, a self-funder who is also the self-proclaimed "Queen of Christmas Lights."

• TX-18 (D) (74-25 Biden): Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee announced she would seek a 16th term just two days after she was blown out by state Sen. John Whitmire, a fellow Democrat, in December's runoff to serve as mayor of Houston. Now, however, she faces a tough battle to keep her job. Former Houston City Councilwoman Amanda Edwards, who once was a Jackson Lee intern, spent months campaigning for this seat while the incumbent was running for mayor, and she decided to remain in the race even after the congressman sought to run again.

Edwards, who, at 42, is over three decades younger than her opponent, has pitched herself as an agent of change and largely avoided attacking Jackson Lee. The incumbent's critics, though, are hoping that Jackson Lee was weakened by last year's bruising campaign against Whitmire, which included the release of audio where a person who sounded like Jackson Lee berated her employees. (Jackson Lee neither confirmed nor denied the voice was hers but issued a statement saying she had "fallen short of my own standards.")

The only poll we've seen was a University of Houston survey from mid-February that showed Jackson Lee edging out her better-funded rival by a narrow 43-39 margin. Another 3% went to restauranter Rob Slater, who has raised little money but could keep either Jackson Lee or Edwards from taking the majority they'd need to avert a runoff. 

• TX-23 (R) (53-46 Trump): Four hard-liners are trying to deny renomination to GOP Rep. Tony Gonzales, who was censured by the state party last year, in a sprawling West Texas seat. The incumbent infuriated the far right by, among other things, voting to confirm Joe Biden's victory in the hours after the Jan. 6 attacks and later supporting gun-safety legislation after the Uvalde school shooting, which happened in his district. None of these apostasies, though, have prevented Gonzales from far outraising all of his rivals.

The challenger who has attracted the most attention (and money) is gunmaker Brandon Herrera, who has over 3 million subscribers on his YouTube channel, where he's known as "The AK Guy." Another name to watch is former Medina County GOP Chair Julie Clark, who has self-funded around $900,000 but raised little from donors.

• TX-26 (R) (59-40 Trump): Republicans have an 11-way primary underway to succeed retiring GOP Rep. Michael Burgess in the northern Fort Worth suburbs and exurbs, but Donald Trump and his allies know exactly who they want to win.

Far-right media figure Brandon Gill, who is the son-in-law of MAGA toady Dinesh D'Souza, sports endorsements from Trump, Sen. Ted Cruz, and the Club for Growth. Gill, who has self-funded much of his campaign, has outspent his rivals and has benefited from more than $750,000 in outside support from the Club and an outfit funded by D'Souza called Right Texas.

Several major GOP donors, though, are taking action to stop Gill. America Leads Action and Conservatives for American Excellence have spent a combined $2 million to sink him, an effort that includes ads blasting Gill as a "Wall Street banker" whose "bank did business with communist China."

But it's hard to say who might stop Gill because none of the other 10 candidates have attracted anything like this attention. Gill's main rival is arguably Southlake Mayor John Huffman, the sole sitting elected official in the race. But other notables include former Denton County Judge Scott Armey, who lost a previous version of this seat to Burgess in a nasty 2002 runoff; Luisa Del Rosal, who previously served as chief of staff to 23rd District Rep. Tony Gonzales; and former State District Judge Doug Robison.

• TX-32 (D) (66-33 Biden): Rep. Colin Allred's decision to run for the Senate has opened up his diverse constituency in northern Dallas, prompting 10 fellow Democrats to campaign to succeed him. A pair of contenders, though, have stood out as the front-runners since the early days of the race and appear poised to advance to a likely runoff.

Those two candidates are state Rep. Julie Johnson, who was the first Texas legislator with a same-sex spouse, and Brian Williams, a trauma surgeon who attracted national attention in 2016 after he treated Dallas police officers wounded by a sniper. Both have far outraised their eight rivals, while Johnson has further benefited from around $1 million in support from a crypto-aligned super PAC called Protect Progress.

Also in the running are businessman Raja Chaudhry; Alex Cornwallis, who was the party's 2022 nominee for a seat on the state Board of Education; former Dallas City Council member Kevin Felder; and civil rights attorney Justin Moore.

Other Texas races to watch:

Arkansas 

Polls close at 8:30 PM ET / 7:30 local time. A runoff will take place on April 2 in contests where no one earns a majority of the vote.

• AR-03 (R) (60-37 Trump): Republican Rep. Steve Womack, a self-described "institution guy" who voted to recognize Joe Biden's 2020 win, faces a far-right primary challenge from state Sen. Clint Penzo. But while Penzo has pledged to join the Freedom Caucus if elected to this northwest Arkansas seat, like-minded donors and super PACs have done little to help the underfunded legislator get his message out. No other candidates are on the GOP primary ballot.

California

Polls close at 11 PM ET / 8 PM local time. All candidates running for Congress and for state office compete on one ballot rather than in separate party primaries; the two contenders with the most votes, regardless of party, will then advance to the Nov. 5 general election. Candidates cannot win outright in March by taking a majority of the vote, except in some officially nonpartisan elections.

• CA-Sen (63-34 Biden): Democratic Rep. Adam Schiff has massively outspent his 26 rivals in the race for the Senate seat that Democratic Sen. Dianne Feinstein held for 31 years until her death last fall (appointed Sen. Laphonza Butler is not running), and he appears to be on track to continue to the second round. Schiff and his super-PAC allies, though, are also working to make sure he gets to face a Republican in this dark blue state rather than contend with an unpredictable general election against fellow Democratic Rep. Katie Porter.

Schiff's side has aired ads designed to help the leading Republican, former Major League Baseball player Steve Garvey, consolidate right-leaning votes by ostensibly attacking him as a Trump supporter who is "too conservative." A few recent polls show Schiff getting the matchup he wants, though the available data is limited.

While Porter, who has her own national fundraising base, has deployed more money than most of the field, Schiff's side has still vastly outspent her on TV. Porter is trying to avoid defeat by running digital ads designed to help another Republican, Eric Early, peel off conservative votes from Garvey, though her efforts have been on a much smaller scale than Schiff’s. A third House Democrat, Barbara Lee, is also running, but she's struggled to raise money and has not performed well in polls.

All of these candidates are also competing in a simultaneous special election for the remainder of Feinstein's term. Only seven contenders are on Tuesday's primary ballot, though, so it's possible we'll see a different winner in this contest than in the election for a full six-year term.

• CA-12 (89-9 Biden): BART board member Lateefah Simon has the support of the departing incumbent, Senate candidate Barbara Lee, and other prominent Democrats, and there's little question she'll advance to the general election to represent Oakland and Berkley. There's less clarity as to whom Simon's opponent might be, though the only other Democrat who has raised a notable amount of money is Cal State professor Jennifer Tran. The field also includes five other Democrats and two Republicans.

• CA-16 (75-22 Biden): Democratic Rep. Anna Eshoo is retiring from a seat based in Silicon Valley, and the race to replace her has become the most expensive House contest in the state.

Eshoo is supporting Santa Clara County Supervisor Joe Simitian, who is one of several current or former Democratic elected officials in the running. But two others, former San Jose Mayor Sam Liccardo and Assemblyman Evan Low, are also waging well-funded campaigns. And while Palo Alto City Councilmember Julie Lythcott-Haims has considerably fewer resources, she may stand out as the only woman waging a serious campaign.

But the best-financed Democrat is Marine veteran Peter Dixon, a businessman who co-founded the bipartisan super PAC With Honor. Dixon has taken advantage of his huge donor base and ability to self-fund, and he's received over $1.3 million in outside support from a group connected to With Honor. The field also includes former Saratoga City Councilmember Rishi Kumar, who lost the all-Democratic 2022 general election to Eshoo 58-42, as well as three other Democrats and two Republicans.

• CA-20 (61-36 Trump): Former Rep. Kevin McCarthy resigned from this Central Valley seat in December after losing his speakership, and 11 candidates are on the ballot to replace him for a full two-year term. There's also a special election for the remaining months of McCarthy's term, but the first round of voting for that race won't take place until two weeks later on March 19.

McCarthy and Donald Trump are backing Assemblyman Vince Fong, a former McCarthy district director. Fong, however, decided to run for Congress only after filing for reelection to the legislature, and California Secretary of State Shirley Weber is arguing that he's violating state law by seeking both posts at once. A state judge allowed Fong to proceed in December, but Weber has appealed that decision.

The other two major Republicans are Tulare County Sheriff Mike Boudreaux and casino owner Kyle Kirkland, though they each have considerably less money or institutional support than Fong.

Two Democrats, security guard Andy Morales and teacher Marisa Wood, are also running, and at least McCarthy's network seems to believe the latter's presence could be beneficial to Fong. A group called Central Valley Values, which is partially funded by the former speaker's leadership PAC, has spent over $640,000 on messaging to help Fong. That messaging has also included anti-Boudreaux ads and what appears to be an attempt to make sure Wood is Fong's general election foe.

• CA-22 (55-42 Biden): Republican Rep. David Valadao faces a rematch against the Democrat he beat in a tight 2022 battle, former Democratic Assemblyman Rudy Salas, but the presence of two more candidates is causing problems for both candidates and their national party allies.

Salas' backers fear that state Sen. Melissa Hurtado, a Democrat who represents most of this Central Valley seat but has raised little money, will split the Democratic vote and allow two Republicans to advance to the general election. Republicans, though, are likewise wary of far-right contender Chris Mathys, a wealthy perennial candidate who almost beat Valadao in the 2022 primary. As a result, national Democrats are waging an expensive campaign to boost Salas even as their GOP counterparts have deployed their own seven-figure effort to derail Mathys.

• CA-30 (72-26 Biden): Democratic Rep. Adam Schiff's decision to run for the Senate has set off a packed and unpredictable 15-way race to succeed him in a seat that includes part of Los Angeles as well as the cities of Burbank and Glendale.

The Democratic field features two state lawmakers, state Sen. Anthony Portantino and Assemblywoman Laura Friedman, while Los Angeles Unified School District Board of Education member Nick Melvoin is also waging a well-funded effort. Another notable name belongs to former Los Angeles City Attorney Mike Feuer, who ran an abortive campaign for Los Angeles mayor in 2022 but has the support of that race’s eventual winner, Mayor Karen Bass.

The field also includes Ben Savage, the "Boy Meets World" actor who has been self-financing most of his campaign. West Hollywood Mayor Sepi Shyne and former State Department official Jirair Ratevosian are also campaigning as Democrats, though they haven't brought in anywhere near as much money as their rivals. Ratevosian may also benefit from being a member of the area's large Armenian American community, though local leaders tell Politico they don't have a deep relationship with him. Another five Democrats, as well as two Republicans and an unaffiliated candidate, round out the field.

• CA-31 (64-33 Biden): Rep. Grace Napolitano is retiring from this seat in the eastern San Gabriel Valley, and five fellow Democrats appear to be waging serious bids to replace her.

The most familiar name is former Rep. Gil Cisneros, who was elected to his only term in office in the 2018 blue wave in a competitive district that includes almost none of the voters he now wants to represent. But while Cisneros, who lost reelection in 2020 to Republican Young Kim, may have begun with little name recognition, the onetime $266 million lottery winner's wealth has allowed him to far outspend his rivals. 

Napolitano herself is supporting state Sen. Bob Archuleta, who would be 79 on taking office and would set the record for the oldest freshman representative in American history. That's not the only concern his critics have leveled at him, though: Archuleta, who has long characterized himself as a moderate, is currently being sued by a former staffer for alleged sexual harassment and retaliation, allegations he's denied.

The field also includes two other candidates who are often identified as centrists: state Rep. Susan Rubio, who represents over 70% of this district, and self-funding attorney Greg Hafif, who touts himself as a "moderate Democrat." Rounding out the big names is Mary Ann Lutz, a local community college trustee and former Napolitano staffer. 

Two Republicans, attorney Daniel Martinez and perennial candidate Benito Bernal, are also on the ballot, and their presence could play a role in what happens next. Cisneros has been sending out mailers ostensibly attacking Martinez as "too close to Trump," a tactic Politico says is aimed at making sure Rubio can't advance. Rubio is trying to counter with text messages to elevate Bernal. The rest of the roster consists of one Democrat and a pair of unaffiliated candidates.

• CA-40 (50-48 Biden): Democrats are hoping that they can put up a strong fight against Republican Rep. Young Kim in this eastern Orange County seat, and two hopefuls are vying to take her on.

Retired Orange County Fire Capt. Joe Kerr, a self-described "centrist" who twice unsuccessfully ran for local office, has brought in considerably more money than Allyson Muñiz Damikolas, the president of the Tustin Unified School District Board of Education. Kerr also enjoys the backing of several California House members, including Senate rivals Adam Schiff and Katie Porter. Damikolas, for her part, was in the news in 2022 when conservatives unsuccessfully tried to recall her for allegedly promoting what they called "critical race theory."

• CA-45 (52-46 Biden): Republican Rep. Michelle Steel will likely be a top Democratic target this fall, and four Democrats are campaigning to face her in western Orange County. 

The two contenders who have generated the most attention are attorney Derek Tran and Garden Grove City Councilwoman Kim Nguyen-Penaloza. Tran has raised significantly more money, but Nguyen-Penaloza, who lost a tight 2022 race for the county Board of Supervisors, has the state Democratic Party in her corner. Attorney Cheyenne Hunt, who has a large social media presence, may also have the resources to advance.

• CA-47 (54-43 Biden): Democratic Rep. Katie Porter's Senate bid has opened up a competitive seat based in coastal Orange County and Irvine. Former Orange County GOP Chair Scott Baugh, who lost to Porter 52-48 in 2022, is running again, and he appears on track to easily move forward to the general election. But the battle between the two leading Democrats, state Sen. Dave Min and attorney Joanna Weiss, is more uncertain.

Min, who has the backing of Porter and the state party, remained the front-runner for most of the race even after he was arrested for drunk driving in May. However, the hawkish pro-Israel group AIPAC has deployed a huge $4.5 million to stop Min, with many of its ads focused on his DUI. EMILY's List, likewise, has dropped over $800,000 to help Weiss, which alone is more than twice as much as all the pro-Min spending combined.

The only recent poll we've seen was a mid-February internal for Baugh that showed him leading with 22%, while Min outpaced Weiss 22-16. The survey also found a second Republican, businessman Max Ukropina, at 9%, while none of the other six candidates on the ballot attracted much support.

• CA-49 (55-43 Biden): Democratic Rep. Mike Levin will be hard for Republicans to beat, but two self-funding Republicans are betting he's not invincible. Those contenders are businessman Matt Gunderson, who came close to winning a Democratic-leaning seat in the state Senate in 2022, and media executive Margarita Wilkinson.

Two more Republicans, businesswoman Sheryl Adams and Marine veteran Kate Monroe, are also campaigning for a constituency located in coastal southern Orange and northern San Diego counties.

Other California races to watch:

Campaign Action

Democrat launches rematch for one of the bluest GOP-held seats in the nation

Former Democratic Assemblyman Rudy Salas on Tuesday launched his long-awaited rematch against Republican Rep. David Valadao, who beat him last year 52-48 after an intensely expensive battle for California's 22nd District. Joe Biden carried this district, which is based in the southern Central Valley and eastern Bakersfield area, by a 55-42 margin in 2020, which makes it one of the bluest seats the GOP holds nationally; only New York's Long Island-based 4th would have favored Biden by a larger margin.

Valadao, though, has a long history of running well ahead of the top of his party's ticket, and both parties are prepared for another pricey battle. The congressman himself raised $710,000 during the second quarter of the year, and he finished June with $980,000 in the bank.

The incumbent proved he wasn't quite invincible in 2018 when Democrat TJ Cox narrowly denied him a fourth term in what was one of the biggest shocks of that year's blue wave, but Valadao won their second bout the following cycle by a tight 50.4-49.6 margin as Biden was carrying the old version of the seat, then numbered the 21st District, 54-44.

A third successive major battle ensued the following cycle, though Democrats had hopes of avoiding Valadao altogether. Just days after being sworn in for his new stint in the 117th Congress, Valadao became one of the 10 Republicans to vote to impeach Donald Trump for his role in the Jan. 6 attack, a decision Democrats thought might again cost him his seat—this time, in the top-two primary.

It almost did. The House Majority PAC, a top Democratic super PAC, aired commercials ahead of the primary aimed at boosting Valadao's far-right intra-party foe, former Fresno City Councilman Chris Mathys, by ostensibly attacking him as "100% pro-Trump and proud." The congressman's allies at the Congressional Leadership Fund, though, deployed even more money on their own ad campaign to sink Mathys, an investment that helped Valadao fend off the upstart 26-23 for the second spot in the general election. (Salas, the only Democrat on the ballot, easily took first with 45% of the vote.)

Despite the fact that Valadao had survived his brush with Mathys, Democrats still believed that Salas, who had established a moderate image in the legislature, would still put up a strong fight, especially since the state's independent Redistricting Commission had made the district a bit bluer. Republicans, though, did all they could to puncture Salas' centrist profile by trying to link him to a 2017 bill that increased the state's gas tax to fund road repairs even though he'd voted against that legislation.

Both parties were also aware that, since Democrats historically struggle to turn out their Central Valley base in non-presidential years, the electorate would be considerably more conservative than the one that delivered Biden his 13-point win. Altogether HMP, CLF, and their respective allies at the DCCC and NRCC collectively spent $22 million—more than they put into any other single House race in America last year.

Valadao ended up prevailing by a 3-point margin in a race that took weeks to call, though he actually ran slightly behind Republican Brian Dahle's 4-point win over Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom here. Valadao's victory made him, along with Washington Rep. Dan Newhouse, one of only two Republicans who'd favored impeachment to return for another term. Salas, however, quickly filed paperwork for a second go-round, and Inside Elections wrote in June that Democratic operatives were convinced he'd face little intra-party opposition.

The former assemblyman kicked off that new effort on Tuesday with a video portraying Valadao as a puppet for Speaker Kevin McCarthy, the "Trump lackey [and] insurrection apologist" who represents the neighboring 20th District. Salas himself also noted he'd be "the first ever-Central Valley Latino" to serve in the House. (Valadao is one of several people of Portuguese descent who has represented this heavily Latino area.) The NRCC, meanwhile, quickly made it clear it would reprise the same tax attacks it used against Salas last time.

Feinstein: ‘I haven’t been gone. I’ve been working’

Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), 89, told reporters Tuesday that she hadn't been away from Washington while recovering from an illness for more than two months, despite her being hospitalized and not being at the Capitol during that time.

“No, I haven’t been gone,” Feinstein said when a reporter asked her about the well-wishes her Senate colleagues have given her since she returned to the Capitol last week. “You should — I haven’t been gone. I’ve been working.”

The Los Angeles Times and Slate both reported on the exchange, in which Feinstein said that she is “feeling fine” after her lengthy bout with shingles.

When a reporter asked if she was referring to working from home, Feinstein reiterated that she's been in Washington. 

“No, I’ve been here. I’ve been voting,” Feinstein said. “Please. You either know or don’t know.”

A Feinstein spokesperson declined to immediately comment on the reports.

Feinstein was hospitalized and stayed away from the Capitol for weeks because of complications from shingles.

Her absence led four House Democrats, including Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.), to call for her resignation as Democrats struggled to move judicial nominations through the Senate. Critics have argued she can no longer serve America’s most populous state effectively, given her health.

Feinstein and her office have pushed back at some suggestions, and the pressure to resign has not come from Democratic colleagues in the Senate, key allies in the House, the White House or California Gov. Gavin Newsom (D).

The exchange with the reporters, however, is likely to raise more scrutiny about Feinstein’s acuity — and her ability to effectively serve her state.

Feinstein has been told by doctors to maintain a lighter workload since she returned to the Capitol last week for the first time since February. 

The longtime California Democrat, a political legend in the state, announced earlier this year she would not seek another term in the Senate.

Feinstein helped Senate Democrats last week advance three judicial nominees that had been unable to move toward full Senate confirmation votes in her absence. She also took part in some Senate floor votes Wednesday and Thursday. 

The Downballot: Monster flip in Virginia + reredistricting preview (transcript)

Hell yeah! Election season is here, and it's already off to an amazing start with Democrats' huge flip of a critical seat in the Virginia state Senate, which kicks off this week's episode of The Downballot. Co-hosts David Nir and David Beard dissect what Aaron Rouse's victory means for November (abortion is still issue number one!) when every seat in the legislature will be on the ballot. They also discuss big goings-on in two U.S. Senate races: California, where Rep. Katie Porter just became the first Democrat to kick off a bid despite Sen. Dianne Feinstein's lack of a decision about her own future, and Michigan, which just saw veteran Democratic Sen. Debbie Stabenow announce her retirement.

The Davids also delve back into a topic that frequently came up last year: redistricting. “Didn't every state just draw new maps?” you might ask. Yes! But many have to do so again thanks to court rulings. Unfortunately, this gives Republicans in North Carolina and Ohio the opportunity to gerrymander once more, though there's an outside chance some Southern states could be required to draw new congressional districts where Black voters can elect their candidates of choice.

This transcript has been lightly edited for clarity.

David Beard:

Hello and welcome. I'm David Beard, contributing editor for Daily Kos Elections.

David Nir:

And I'm David Nir, political director of Daily Kos. The Downballot is a weekly podcast dedicated to the many elections that take place below the presidency, from Senate to city council. Please subscribe to The Downballot wherever you listen to podcasts, and leave us a five-star rating and review.

David Beard:

What are we going to be talking about this week, Nir?

David Nir:

Well, we kicked off the brand-new year with a freaking awesome special election flip in the Virginia state Senate. We are going to dive deep into that. We also want to talk about the United States Senate. We have some action in two key states, California and Michigan. We also need to talk about what's going on at the legislative level in Michigan; of course, we flipped both chambers of the legislature last year and Democrats are now moving forward with a fantastic progressive agenda, so we're going to talk about the implications of that. Then finally, we are going to discuss an old favorite topic: redistricting. Redistricting isn't done. Even though every state drew new maps in 2022, many have to do so again thanks to court orders in 2023. So we are going to preview what we can expect as new lines are drawn once more in the reredistricting process. Please stay with us.

David Beard:

Even though it's not even halfway through January, we already have an election for 2023 to talk about. Down in Virginia, we had a state Senate special that was pretty competitive, so tell us about that one.

David Nir:

Beard, man, I am so stoked. This was such a great way to kick off 2023. It was already a great year with all the Kevin McCarthy nonsense, but we flipped a state Senate seat in Virginia in a Republican-held district. Democrat Aaron Rouse, who's a Virginia Beach city councilman, beat Republican Kevin Adams by just about 1 point. And this was a district held by Republican state Sen. Jen Kiggans. Unfortunately, in November, she beat Congresswoman Elaine Luria in the 2nd District, but it also meant she had to give up her state Senate seat. And this was very competitive turf. This was a district that Joe Biden won by 10 points in 2020, but the following year, Republican Glenn Youngkin in the race for governor carried this district in the Virginia Beach area by 4 points.

And in 2019, this was an open seat. Jen Kiggans, the new congresswoman, she won this district by 1 point in the regular November general election, a time when Democrats were quite pumped up. Trump was in the White House, and in fact on that night, Democrats actually flipped the Virginia state Senate in 2019, but they didn't take this seat. So Democrats did better in a special election in the middle of January coming straight off the holidays than they did at a normal election when everyone is accustomed to voting.

Aaron Rouse—he is a former NFL player, also perhaps more importantly, a former Virginia Tech football star, and he is also adamantly pro-choice, and this is really the crux of the election. Going into this race, Democrats had just a 21-19 advantage in the state Senate, and the problem is that one of those 21 Democrats is someone we've mentioned before on this show, Joe Morrissey, who is a total scumbag. He has been just scandal-ridden his entire career, but on top of all that, he calls himself "pro-life" and there's always a possibility that he would screw over his party and decide to join with Republicans to pass some sort of abortion ban, which Republicans, including Gov. Youngkin, have been really eager to pass.

And if Morrissey were to do that, well then that 21-19 majority turns to 20-20, it's a tie, and then the far-right lieutenant governor Republican Winsome Sears would be able to break a tie in favor of an abortion ban. That can't happen now. Now the Democratic majority is 22-18, and no matter what Joe Morrissey tries to do, no matter what stunts he tries to pull, it doesn't matter: Democrats have a solid 21 vote pro-choice majority, and that includes Aaron Rouse.

I should also add this district actually is going to be much bluer come November when every member of the legislature is up for reelection, both in the House and the state Senate. This district was held under the old lines, like I said, Biden plus 10. The new lines are more like Biden plus 20, so Rouse definitely should be the favorite for reelection. He is going to almost certainly be facing Adams in a rematch. We will be talking about the overall picture for both the state House where Republicans have a narrow advantage; Democrats are going to be trying to undo that. And the state Senate where, of course Democrats have this four-seat advantage and they will be trying to defend that in an upcoming episode. But man, I love starting a new year with a flip of a major, major seat.

David Beard:

Yeah, it's great to kick off 2023 like this and continue the relative success of 2022. I think a couple of points that we can take away from this special: one, I think we've seen continually now that as coalitions have changed and the Democratic Party has become more and more the home of more educated voters who tend to vote in these specials, the drop off that we used to see ... particularly when there was a Democrat in the White House. Obviously when we had Trump or later in the Bush years, there was always great Dem enthusiasm. But what we're seeing is even with a Democratic president, Democratic turnout is holding up reasonably well in special elections. In large part, I think because we have a lot more better-educated voters who make an effort to make sure that they go and vote in these special elections. So that's good news for us. As these special elections go along, we don't have as much to fear from them as we once did under a Democratic president.

I also think this is obviously a big swing area of Virginia as a whole, particularly as we've seen northern Virginia get bluer and bluer. The swing area of the state has really become the Richmond suburbs and the southeast Virginia/Virginia Beach area. So the fact that we are able to take this seat, put up a good margin compared to what it could've been had we had a bad result, I think that portends well for the fall 2023 elections. Like you said, we're going to talk about that a lot between now and then, but the Senate and the House are both up and so I think this is a good starting point to kick off victories in hopefully both those chambers.

David Nir:

I also want to circle back to the number one topic of 2022, which is also going to be the number one topic of 2023, and that is abortion. I talked about Joe Morrissey, but I want to make it clear, Aaron Rouse campaigned heavily on abortion rights. He ran ads about it, and Adams, the Republican, he tried to sidestep the issue, as Republicans did throughout 2022. So I think it still bears repeating: We are in a post-Dobbs world, and we talked about this after the midterms; the pundit conventional wisdom was, "Oh, well it'll fade." I'm certain that it hasn't, and it certainly didn't fade in November and I don't think it's faded now, come January. I think this is going to remain potent for a long time to come.

David Beard:

2024 has already started when it comes to Senate races, we had a couple of big developments in the past week and we're going to hit both of those. I'm going to start us off with California Senate where incumbent Sen. Dianne Feinstein has not officially said that she's not going to seek reelection in 2024. But due to her advanced age—she's 89 now and somewhat declining health—that's led many to anticipate that she's not going to run again, that that decision is essentially inevitable. So there are many Democrats that are making moves toward running in 2024.

One of the big names that went ahead and made that move, and officially announced that she was running for Senate, is Rep. Katie Porter. She announced her Senate bid on Tuesday and she also said later in the day that she was in, whether or not Sen. Feinstein ran again. Which again is not expected to be the case, but is one of those brash moves where I think others are waiting for Feinstein to say that she won't seek reelection before announcing and giving that sense of respect and deferral. Katie Porter is saying, "I'm in, I'm running for Senate, whether or not the senator decides to run for reelection or not, that doesn't matter. I'm in."

What that does do, that gives her a little bit of a head start. She gets to go, she gets to start campaigning and raising money. She doesn't have to wait on the senator to make an official announcement, but it's also possible that some people may see that as somewhat of a sign of disrespect. Now, I mentioned that there are a lot of people looking at this race. Another prominent candidate is Rep. Barbara Lee, a longtime, very progressive member of Congress from the Bay Area. She reportedly told the Congressional Black Caucus that she was going to run, but to a reporter, she later said that she'd make an official announcement "when it's appropriate." So she's clearly somebody who is likely going to wait until Feinstein officially announces that she's retiring before making any sort of public announcement or campaign launch.

Rep. Adam Schiff is another person who's widely expected to run. And some of his folks criticized Rep. Porter for her announcement because of the floods that are currently taking place in California, saying that it wasn't an appropriate time to make this sort of announcement and start raising money when many people in California are being affected by this natural disaster. This is just the start of what's probably going to be a very long, very messy campaign once all these candidates get in. But we'll just have to wait and see how it develops as we head towards the 2024 California primary, which will give us two candidates of course, because of their top two system. And then likely even more mess if those top two candidates are Democrats and we'll have that very strange idea of two Democrats competing in a general election with no Republican candidate.

David Nir:

That's exactly what happened the last time California had an open Senate seat, back in 2016 when Kamala Harris beat Loretta Sanchez, and those Dem-on-Dem statewide races in California can be weird and difficult to handicap. Porter released a poll of her own, showing that she would be leading in a hypothetical primary and also leading Adam Schiff in a one-on-one general election. But the reason why she's leading Adam Schiff is, believe it or not, because she's doing much better with Republicans.

Now, many Republicans would probably undervote; they would skip the race if it were between two Democrats, we've seen that before. But Katie Porter is this huge liberal icon, but so is Adam Schiff, perhaps even more so thanks to all of Trump's attacks during the impeachment. So again, it's going to be pretty tricky to figure out who might actually pick up those independent or Republican votes if we do have a Dem-on-Dem race. But there is so much game left to be played until we get to that point, so I don't even want to begin to guess how this one is going to unfold.

David Beard:

Yeah, this definitely feels like the first mile of a marathon. It's going to be a very long, very complicated race.

David Nir:

Well, we have another Senate seat that definitely is going to be open in 2024 that we need to talk about, and that is in Michigan where veteran Democrat Debbie Stabenow announced her retirement after four terms. And as you would expect in a swing state like this, there are tons of candidates on both sides who are reportedly considering, who actually have said they're considering, who have been mentioned by the proverbial Great Mentioner, just names that get floated in newspaper articles without any quote attached to them whatsoever. Some of the best known Democrats whose names have come up so far are Congresswomen Elissa Slotkin, Debbie Dingell, and Haley Stevens; Lt. Gov. Garlin Gilchrist also hasn't ruled out a campaign. He would be Michigan's first Black senator if he were to prevail.

For Republicans, they also have a bunch of names. Maybe the most prominent is actually freshman Congressman John James, who like Garlin Gilchrist, would also be the state's first Black senator. However, James, who ran twice for this seat unsuccessfully before, only just barely squeaked into the House in November after being expected by just about everyone, including the party organizations, to absolutely dominate. I think he won by maybe just like 1% or so. So he might prefer to actually spend some time getting familiar with his district and trying to secure reelection as opposed to immediately seeking a promotion when he kind of entered office in a pretty shaky way. Again, this is one where there is so much left to unfold, but unlike in California, we have traditional primaries in Michigan. Those typically take place in August of the election year, which is very, very late. So it could be quite a long time before we have nominees in that race too.

It's so hard to know what Michigan is going to do in a general election. Trump obviously won it in 2016. It was absolutely heartbreaking. More than heartbreaking. It was devastating. But Biden came back and won it by 3 points in 2020. And then Gov. Gretchen Whitmer, the Democratic incumbent, she won reelection last fall by an 11-point margin. So is Michigan really a solidly blue-leaning state or is it a swing state? Does it matter if it's a state-level election or a federal election? I guess we'll really have to see, but I am sure that Republicans will try really, really hard to win this seat, especially since they have a very favorable map overall where Democrats are in defense throughout most of the country. And of course we will be talking about the 2024 Senate playing field extensively in upcoming episodes.

David Beard:

And of course, we all know that the top of the ticket affects the Senate races when it's a presidential year. So that's obviously going to be a factor, particularly now that this is going to be an open seat. How Michigan goes at the presidential level will definitely have an effect on this Senate race. Though we've certainly also seen circumstances where really strong or really weak candidates can change that dynamic and you could have a Republican win, even if Biden is reelected or vice versa if there's some other scenario. So that's a big factor that we're going to have to watch as we go on. But candidate quality as we saw in 2022, even in a presidential year that's coming in 2024, candidate quality really matters. So we're going to have to see who comes out of these primaries.

David Nir:

It absolutely does. And I was thinking as you were saying that, Beard, Democrats don't really have any weak candidates. I mean, yeah, sure, I suppose someone could emerge and sneak through that we're not expecting, but all the names that have surfaced so far and beyond just those that I rattled off earlier, they would all be good in one way or another. Republicans have so many disaster candidates, any one of whom could win a primary. I mean, what if Tudor Dixon, the candidate who lost to Whitmer by double-digits in November, decides to run again? Anything is possible with them.

David Beard:

Yeah. And we've seen as the Republican Party continues to fail in these races that they think they should be doing better in, it largely chalks up to the fact that they nominate bad candidates. Democrats have nominated really strong candidates in recent years, and as a result, Democrats do better than you would expect on a race-by-race basis because of our good candidates. So we can only hope that continues. As long as the Republican Party is like this, we have to take advantage of the fact that we have such better candidates than they do.

David Nir:

I'm totally loving it. And speaking of better candidates leading to great success, there is a great success that is on the way in Michigan—still talking about Michigan—that we just have to talk about because it directly stems from one of the best Democratic victories of 2022.

David Beard:

Yes. In case you somehow weren't with us in 2022 and missed this, Democrats took control of both the Michigan state House and state Senate last year, giving them the first trifecta in the state along with Gov. Whitmer for the first time in decades. Which means that they're going to be able to pass legislation without any support of Republican members in either chamber, which is great news because they're going to be able to do some really, really good things for Michigan.

Now, obviously, we don't usually get a lot into the weeds of various state-level legislation here, but it's good to see the positive actual outcomes that result when we elect Democrats in a state like Michigan, then they're actually able to take power. So Michigan Democratic legislative leaders released a list of bills that they're going to take up first and hopefully pass quickly, and that includes some really great legislation including LGBT anti-discrimination protections, and restoring the prevailing wage, which is something that ensures that state workers on construction projects are paid a good wage.

And then ending right to work. Right to work is something that we've talked about a little bit. When a state is "right to work," it allows someone who's in a job that would be unionized to not pay anything to the union that represents them on legal issues and on collective bargaining and all of this stuff. And conservatives like to frame it as this freedom idea. But what it really does is weaken the unions because unions are forced to represent all of the workers whether they pay anything or not. And so in states that don't have “right to work,” all workers represented by the union have to pay a fair share fee, specifically just on that legal and bargaining representation. And so when right to work is in effect, the union has to pay to represent all these workers who aren't a part of it without any compensation.

And so getting rid of right to work is both fair in terms of what people are getting for this fair share fee that they pay. It gives the unions a stronger footing in terms of bargaining, and then also in terms of fighting for workers' rights at the political level. And that's why Republicans always go after it. They want to weaken the unions because the unions fight back against the Republicans’ attacks on workers. And so we've seen Republicans go after and pass right to work whenever they take over a state. And now that Democrats have taken over Michigan, one of the strongest union states in the country, they're going to be able to end right to work, strengthen unions, strengthen workers' rights, and make a level playing field once again.

We're also seeing that the Democrats are going to repeal the abortion criminalization statute, even though it's not in effect. Obviously, it's good to officially repeal it and make sure no changes in the judicial system or anything in Michigan or the Constitution would result in somehow that ever coming into effect. And they're also going to enact some progressive tax changes. So just good policy after good policy that we're hopefully going to see passed really soon here in Michigan.

David Nir:

Well, that does it for our weekly hits. Coming up, we are going to be discussing redistricting. I know you're thinking, "Didn't we just finish up with redistricting last year?" Absolutely not. A whole bunch of states have to draw maps once more, and we are going to be taking a deep dive to find out what we can expect in the new reredistricting process this year. Stay with us.

So Beard, we got to talk about redistricting. Even though every single state in the nation redrew its congressional map and almost every single state in the nation redrew their legislative maps, a whole bunch have to do it all over again in almost every case because of some sort of court ruling saying that, "You did something wrong. You passed an illegal map. You didn't follow proper procedures. There is something that you have to do over." And we are therefore going to see a whole bunch of new maps across the country, both at the congressional level and at the legislative level. And some we know for certain are coming; others, we are still waiting on the outcome of various lawsuits. But at the top of the list is a state that we definitely know will be drawing a new congressional map and also one new legislative map. And that is your home state, David Beard.

David Beard:

Yes. Redistricting is really a never-ending process for some states, and North Carolina has definitely been one of those over the years. Though as we'll talk about, once this final process happens, they may stick with those maps for the rest of the decade. The North Carolina Supreme Court struck down both the congressional map and the state Senate map, and for the congressional map, they used a court ordered map in 2022 that was only in effect for 2022. So the state legislature will have to draw a new map for 2024.

Unfortunately, the Republican state legislature in North Carolina is who draws the map. The governor, who is a Democrat, doesn't have any role in redistricting in North Carolina. And so the only check on the legislature is the court system and the court that struck down that gerrymandered map was a Democratic-majority North Carolina Supreme Court. And due to the 2022 elections, it's now a Republican-majority state Supreme Court. So it's very unlikely that that court will strike down a gerrymandered map from the state legislature. So they will largely have carte blanche to draw whatever they want and be as aggressive as they want.

The results from 2022 ended up electing seven Democrats and seven Republicans from a 14-district map. That could easily be 9-5, 10-4. Obviously there are some Voting Rights Act considerations around African American districts in North Carolina, but beyond that, the state legislature can be as aggressive as they would like, which is really not good news for Democratic incumbents in North Carolina.

David Nir:

I think in a worst-case scenario, there are really four Democrats who could be targeted, and that includes three freshmen—Don Davis, Jeff Jackson, Wiley Nickel—and also Kathy Manning. So you could potentially see all four of those districts become unwinnable red. That alone would really add to the hurdle that Democrats face in taking back the House in 2024. That said, no matter what North Carolina Republicans do, I still feel very optimistic about our chances of flipping the House in two years’ time, but this could really suck.

David Beard:

Yeah, absolutely. And I don't want to write off anybody particularly, because, as we've seen, there are situations where Republicans put up a terrible candidate. You've got a strong incumbent, and I think a lot of these incumbents, even though they're freshmen, are pretty strong, and they can really outperform the district by quite a lot. We saw, of course, in Ohio, which we're going to talk about in a minute, Marcy Kaptur way outperform the partisanship of her district against a terrible Republican candidate. And so it's totally possible something like that would happen, but you have to admit it's more the exception than the rule. If they go after all four of these seats really aggressively, it would be great if we could hold one or two, but it would be almost impossible to hold all four if they go all out to go after these seats.

David Nir:

So yeah, let's talk about Ohio. That state was an absolute shit show. Republican maps, both for Congress and the legislature, were repeatedly struck down by the state Supreme Court for violating the state constitution's ban on partisan gerrymandering. But once again, just like in North Carolina, that court had a 4-3 anti-gerrymandering majority. It was three Democrats plus one moderate Republican who was the chief justice. She stepped down, and Republicans now have an outright majority on that court. And so, even though Republican legislators managed to run out the clock and use unconstitutional maps in 2022, now they get a chance to draw maps again, just like in North Carolina, and the only possible check on them is the Supreme Court, and it's very unlikely that these very partisan Republican justices will do anything to stop a more aggressive gerrymander. And, what, Beard, would you say there are probably three Democrats who could be targeted by Republicans if they go hog wild once again? You have two freshmen, Emilia Sykes and Greg Landsman, and plus also Marcy Kaptur, who you were mentioning. It's certainly possible that Republicans could try to strike at all three.

David Beard:

I do think there is slightly more of a question in Ohio about how aggressive Republicans will be at the congressional level, whereas we've seen North Carolina Republicans repeatedly go all out in terms of this sort of gerrymandered aggressiveness. We do have the recent thing that we talked about last week where a slightly more moderate Republican speaker of the House was elected on the backs of Democratic votes. And so there may be a situation where maybe they don't go to the absolute partisan wall to try to pass a new map, given the uncertain situation in the House. But we'll have to see. There are absolutely three seats that were very competitive in 2022. If this same map were somehow used again, it would absolutely be competitive again.

I think the person with the best chance to either have a seat they could win or maybe be left alone is Greg Landsman in Ohio's first district. It's based in Cincinnati. There are some rules in the Ohio Constitution that are pretty straightforward about how many times you can split a county, and so they can't split the county that holds Cincinnati more than once. And so you do have to put all those Democratic voters somewhere.

I think in some ways it would be easier just to give him Cincinnati in the way that there's a big Columbus district where they make a huge Democratic vote sink, and the same with Cleveland, where they make a huge Democratic vote sink, and just put the Democrats into that district rather than try to split it up. But we'll see. I do think Kaptur held a very Republican seat this past cycle. It wouldn't surprise me if hers got maybe slightly even worse. And then, Sykes in northeast Ohio, it's obviously difficult to tell because there's a lot of voters moving in different directions there. So it's hard to know exactly how they might want to change it, but they could absolutely go after her if they really want to.

David Nir:

Regarding that 1st District, the one in Cincinnati now held by Greg Landsman, one point that's worth making is that most incumbent lawmakers don't want to take on new territory. Not just because it might put them at risk in a general election, but also because it might put them at risk in a primary. You could always get a challenge from someone who represents the new turf that you haven't previously represented, and we saw this in particular play out in Missouri, where the far-right faction of the Republican Party there really, really, really wanted a congressional map that created seven Republican districts and just one Democratic district. But they wound up passing a 6-2 map, just as they had before, because in large part, a lot of these Republican incumbent congressmen simply didn't want their districts to change all that much.

So that is something we actually have seen in Ohio as well in the previous decade. When Ohio was dropping a district due to reapportionment, they actually carved up a district that belonged to a Republican congressman, a guy named Steve Austria, simply because they wanted to make sure that they could elect all the other Republicans safely. So that might be the one saving grace. Basically, the desire to protect incumbents could outweigh the desire to screw over Democrats. North Carolina. Man, those Republicans just don't seem to care. They will go absolutely balls to the wall no matter what, and incumbent protection, just, I don't know, either it doesn't matter to them or they've just figured it out so brilliantly with these perfect 55% Republican districts. But they never really seem to have any of those fears.

David Beard:

I do think because there are, on the whole, probably fewer swing voters in North Carolina than there are in Ohio, it is easier for them to be more aggressive because the numbers won't change that much. So if you think of the band of the range of outcomes in a lot of those North Carolina districts, they're a lot narrower than you were in some of these Ohio places, where we see a lot of swing voters. Obviously we've seen Republicans rack up some massive victories. We saw a relatively close Senate race. We saw Sherrod Brown win in 2018. So there is somewhat more swing voters, I think, in Ohio, than North Carolina, which is a factor.

And to go back to your point about how much does a Republican want to take on Democrats, in Hamilton County, which is the county that Cincinnati is in: the district that shares it with CD 1, where Landsman is the Democrat, is congressional district 8, held by Republican Warren Davidson. Now, he won comfortably, of course, in 2022. He won by about 19 points. Sure, he could take on a few Democrats, but the question is, how many Democrats does he really want to take on to try to make that seat a few points more Republican to potentially give himself a competitive race? Because right now it's a nothing race, and if it gets a few more points more Democrat, even if he'd still be favored, he might have to start raising a lot of money, doing a lot more campaigning, and he may not want to do that, which may mean that Landsman may have a slightly easier time, because they have to give any precincts in Hamilton County that go away from Landsman to CD 8, because they can only split it once.

David Nir:

Now, we should also talk about several legal challenges that are still underway, attacking Republican-drawn maps for violating the rights of Black voters. We talked about a couple of these cases last year. I want to highlight two in particular because they are very, very similar, from Alabama and Louisiana. In both of these cases, federal courts ruled that under the Voting Rights Act, the state was obligated to draw a second district where Black voters would be likely to elect their candidate of choice, who would almost certainly be a Black Democrat. In both Alabama and in Louisiana, there is a single Black district, and in both of these cases, plaintiffs sued and said there should be a second such district. And applying a set of criteria required by the Voting Rights Act, both courts held that, in both cases, the plaintiffs were right.

And I read both of these decisions. They were amazing decisions. Incredibly thoughtful. Very, very lengthy, dealing with absolutely every aspect of these cases with incredible thoroughness and seriousness. In some cases, these decisions were written by Trump-appointed judges, and in both of those two cases, the Supreme Court said, "It's a little too close to the election, so, we got to go with the existing GOP maps that only have one Black district apiece." And those rulings from the Supreme Court were just absolute garbage. There was plenty of time to draw new maps in both of those states. That's absolutely what should have happened. But these cases are still pending. So, what that means is that once there is a full trial on the merits, the case is adjudicated fully as opposed to in a preliminary fashion, then hopefully these courts will both rule the same way and, again, say, "Yes, like we said before, you need to draw a second Black district in both of these states." Of course, even if they do come to those conclusions, the Supreme Court could still overrule them on the merits.

Previously, they said, "No, we're putting this ruling on pause because there isn't enough time." But now, going forward, they could say, "We are simply overturning this ruling because you got it wrong." They absolutely didn't get it wrong. These judges wrote really tremendous rulings, as I said, but there is no way to know for sure. I'm not that optimistic about these cases standing up, but if they do, that would mean two more districts almost certain to elect Democrats in two otherwise dark red Southern states. And that would be a huge bonus for Democrats, but not just that, it would be a huge bonus for the cause of Black representation.

I mean, that's why the Voting Rights Act exists. It exists to further the cause of minority representation in this country. And the Voting Rights Act says you cannot try to dilute the strength of Black voters, of Latino voters, of other minority groups, language minority, other groups of voters of color. You cannot try to deprive them of the kind of representation they ought to have if you drew normal, sane, sensible maps, is more or less my layman's interpretation of what the VRA requires here, and I think that's basically right. So, we'll see what the Supreme Court does. Again, don't keep your fingers crossed on these, but that could be plus two to the upside for Democrats if those go the right way.

David Beard:

Yeah, and the Supreme Court heard this case. They specifically heard the Alabama case, which is Merrill v. Milligan. It will almost certainly control the Louisiana case that comes after it. That happened in October, so we could get a ruling anytime in the next few months. Obviously, people often take tea leaves from the oral arguments. It was largely not great for the side arguing for the additional Black districts in Alabama. It seemed like, unsurprisingly, the court really wanted an outcome that resulted in not an extra district. They sort of went around a lot of different ways to get there, whether to just make the requirements more difficult so that the plaintiffs wouldn't meet it, or to just strike down this whole aspect of the voting rights altogether. But either way, I think we would be really surprised if these Republican justices came and were like, "Actually, yes. There should be a second Black Democratic district," despite that being the obvious intent of the Voting Rights Act. And so, we're likely going to have to continue on with the districts as they are, is what I would expect.

David Nir:

There was also a similar ruling, actually, just in the past week, out of South Carolina, that held that the 1st Congressional District, this is a Republican seat along the coast, was an unconstitutional racial gerrymandered, meaning that Republican lawmakers overly relied on race when they drew that district. And what in fact they did was this was a seat that Democrats actually flipped in 2018. Republicans narrowly flipped it back in 2020 and after that, Republican lawmakers wanted to make it redder in order to protect the new incumbent, Nancy Mace. And they did just that, except they did so by deliberately moving Black voters from the 1st District to the neighboring 6th District where Black voters predominate. That is the state's one Democratic district. We'll see whether this ruling survives on appeal.

I honestly don't really expect too much change. Even if it does, because if Republicans have to draw a new map, they'll probably just be smarter the next time. We've seen that happen a number of cases where Republicans simply get busted for being just kind of stupid or overly aggressive or cocky about the way they drew maps in South Carolina.

They were really explicit about their target in terms of the percentage of Black voters they wanted in each district, and that just sets off alarm bells of overly relying on race in doing redistricting. And if you do something that's stupid then even a really hardcore Republican judge is kind of like, "Ugh, God, why did you give me this mess? I have to rule against you. You were just too dumb." And probably the next time they'll be a little bit smarter about this. But we'll see how aggressive they try to be. It'll still be a red-leaning district no matter what happens with this case, no matter what kind of new map we wind up seeing, if any.

But this is also an area, one of these better-educated suburban areas that seems to be trending Democrats’ way. So maybe further down the road, this is an opportunity for a pickup once again.

David Beard:

And of course, what they often do in cases like this is they pretend that they made these moves for partisan gain. The Republicans will say, "Oh, we were just doing this for partisan reasons and they just happened to all be Black people that we moved out of the district." What are the odds? When obviously there's also a very obvious clear racial element to this districting? One of the judges that ruled and wrote on this case said, and I quote, "If you see a turtle on top of a fence post, you know someone put it there." And I'm like, "That's pretty good because you can claim all sorts of things. But of course, ultimately someone put the turtle on the fence post. Somebody moved all these Black voters to the other district and you can claim it for all sorts of other things that were going on.”

David Nir:

The turtle got on top of the fence post for purely partisan reasons.

David Beard:

Of course. He was too partisan to not be on the fence post.

David Nir:

So there's one more state in this bucket that we need to talk about, and that's Florida. But the litigation that is ongoing there is in state court, and it relies on amendments to the state constitution that voters passed quite some time ago. These amendments try to crack down on partisan gerrymandering and they also prohibit undermining minority representation. And in fact, in 2016, litigants successfully used these amendments to get the state to draw a new congressional map.

In fact, one that was more favorable for Democrats because of course the map had been drawn by Republicans. The problem is that since that time, Florida's Supreme Court has undergone dramatic changes. Former Gov. Rick Scott appointed several members and the current Gov. Ron DeSantis has also appointed more justices to the court. The majority that wrote that previous decision that cracked down on partisan gerrymandering and also supported Black representation no longer exists.

And the map that Republicans passed last year which was drawn by DeSantis himself. He just told the legislature, "My way or the highway. You better pass this map." It was a really stunning self-aggrandization of power on the part of the governor and state lawmakers simply handed it over to DeSantis. They have just no self-respect. That map was an extreme partisan gerrymanderer, shredded a number of Democratic districts and also completely shattered a predominantly Black district in northern Florida that seemingly is protected by the state constitution, and in fact, a lower court originally ruled that it was, but that ruling was overturned on appeal, and I would expect the Florida Supreme Court to really basically ignore these amendments and say that they don't matter. They don't apply for whatever reason.

They'll wave their hands at it. The judicial reasoning doesn't really matter to them. So even though we had success a decade ago in overturning Florida's map, I'm not optimistic this time.

David Beard:

Yeah. I think outside of FL-05, which is the Black opportunity district that was dismantled, I would be shocked if any of the other districts got ruled against by the conservative Florida Supreme Court. And I also honestly don't expect the Florida Supreme Court to do anything about FL-05 either. There has been a case filed in federal court under the Voting Rights Act about the dismantling of Florida's 5th District, and it sort of remains to be seen. No ruling has taken place yet in that case. The 5th District was a Black opportunity district where African American voters could elect a representative of their choice, and then it was just ultimately destroyed and turned into a couple of districts where Republican-leaning white voters could elect congressmen of their choice.

So we haven't seen that really just brazenly taken place in other states, so we don't know how the conservative-leaning court federal courts will respond to that. It may be a case where they see this as a good opportunity to prove their supposed neutral bonafides and be like, "Oh yeah, we didn't let Alabama and Louisiana create second Black districts and all these other cases we ruled for the conservatives, but we will reinstate this one district in Florida to prove that we're fair."

So it wouldn't shock me if that sort of outcome resulted, but that's probably quite a ways away. I don't even know if we'll have that in time for 2024 because that case seems to be going much slower than the other cases and the rest of the districts in Florida, I don't think anybody should count on.

David Nir:

So we mentioned at the top of this segment, a number of state legislative maps also have to be redrawn, and we've alluded to a couple of them, the North Carolina Senate, both chambers in the Ohio legislature. The South Carolina State House already redrew its map, so they are definitely going to have a new map for 2024. The most interesting one though is Montana. I said at the start that almost every state redrew its legislative maps in 2022. The one exception was the state of Montana. This one is completely, completely bizarre. The issue in Montana is a totally nonsensical state law.

The state has an evenly divided bipartisan redistricting commission that has the authority to draw maps. That commission has to submit those maps to state lawmakers at the first regular session of the legislature after census figures are available. The problem is that that session of the legislature always ends in April, which means that there was absolutely no chance of the commission finishing a map in time before the end of the session.

In fact, it's almost always impossible for that to happen, but it was definitely impossible in 2021 because census data was so heavily delayed, particularly because of COVID. So that means that because the legislature only has a regular session every other year in odd-numbered years, that the next session of the legislature that the commission can submit maps to state lawmakers for the review is not until 2023, and that means that elections with the new maps couldn't possibly be held until 2024.

The reason why this is also completely cockamamie and stupid is that the same law doesn't actually give state lawmakers the power to make changes to these maps. All they get to do is review them and submit comments to the commission, and the commission can take them into account, or it cannot take them into account. The commission gets the final say on this.

The legislature doesn't have any power over the maps. So basically there is this two-year delay for a purely ministerial process that very likely won't affect the final maps. And this isn't just some sort of ticky-tack complaint. The districts that Montana has that were used in 2022 are completely out of whack. The population is totally imbalanced. Some districts have way too many people. Some districts have way too few people. So it was very probably unconstitutional, this law in Montana to wait a whole extra two years.

The thing is, no one sued about it. No one has ever sued, and I think that a lawsuit would very likely succeed if someone actually ever brought one. Maybe in the next decade someone will, but it's too late now. The commission's work is underway. They'll probably have maps finished soon, and we'll have new maps, but they're going to be two years late.

David Beard:

Yeah. It's a reminder that there's a ton of things out there that are probably illegal or unconstitutional, but due to the way that our justice system works, they only actually get stopped or changed if somebody files a lawsuit, shows harm, gets a ruling, that actually changes the issue. Otherwise, these things just sort of continue on weird relics of badly written constitutions.

David Nir:

It really is a case of justice deferred as justice denied, because even if someone sues as we have seen in so many of these cases, like the ones we were just talking about in Louisiana and Alabama, these cases can take forever to play out in the courts. And Republicans know this. They know that delay benefits them, so they have no problem passing totally illegal maps because they'll benefit from them for at least one election. Maybe two, maybe three, maybe even more, maybe almost the whole decade. And if it eventually gets overturned, so what? You at least got three good elections out of it from the perspective of the GOP. Our approach to dealing with unconstitutional election maps is deeply flawed, as badly flawed as many of the maps themselves.

David Beard:

And as this may be the last full redistricting episode we have for a while, let me just put in one last call for a fair redistricting process nationwide, which Democrats do want to enact so that all states have fair redistricting maps and fair policies, but Republicans steadfastly oppose that. So we just need to take back the House, have a Senate that will get rid of the filibuster, and make fair redistricting happen.

David Nir:

And keep the White House.

David Beard:

Well, yes. Obviously, we need to keep the White House as well. That's all from us this week. The Downballot comes out every Thursday everywhere you listen to podcasts. You can reach out to us by emailing thedownballot@dailykos.com. If you haven't already, please subscribe to The Downballot on Apple Podcast and leave us a five-star rating and review. Thanks to our producer, Cara Zelaya, editor Trever Jones. We'll be back next week with a new episode.

What we know about suspected Paul Pelosi attacker  

The man who allegedly attacked Paul Pelosi on Friday reportedly had an active online presence in which he posted QAnon conspiracy theories and was previously a pro-nudity activist.

San Francisco police have identified the suspect as 42-year-old David DePape, who was booked on several charges, including attempted homicide, elder abuse, aggravated battery with serious bodily injury, and threatening a public official or family member. 

DePape allegedly attacked 82-year-old Paul Pelosi, the husband of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), with a hammer after repeatedly asking, "Where is Nancy?"

Details that have emerged of the suspected attacker since Friday show that he was active in promoting conspiracy theories online and "very consumed by darkness."

Here's what else we know about DePape.

Conspiracy theories and antisemitism

DePape had a complicated political presence online, making posts that questioned the 2020 election outcome and promoted QAnon conspiracy theories. 

After moving to California from British Columbia, DePape became known in Berkeley as a pro-nudity activist, protesting against rules requiring people to be clothed in public, according to The Associated Press.  

He was also a “hemp jewelry maker” connected to pro-nudity activist Gypsy Taub, who pushed conspiracy theories about the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks, according to the San Francisco Chronicle

Taub's daughter, who said DePape helped raise her until she was 13, wrote on her blog, "There is some part of him that is a good person even though he has been very consumed by darkness."

DePape has also been tied to a number of social media accounts and blogs sharing far-right conspiracy theories. 

Two blogs authored by a “daviddepape” included recent posts with antisemitic content and claims of election fraud as well as a video of Nancy Pelosi at one of former President Trump’s impeachment proceedings, according to CNN

In some posts, the author defended former President Trump and the rapper Ye, formerly known as Kanye West, who has come under criticism for antisemitic comments.

In one post from last month, an author under DePape's name wrote that journalists who denied the former president's fraud claims about the 2020 presidential election “should be dragged straight out into the street and shot,” according to the AP.

Echoes of Jan. 6 Capitol riot

Police reportedly arrived at the scene to find Paul Pelosi and DePape struggling with a hammer — and before officers could tackle and disarm DePape, he allegedly took control of the hammer and assaulted Paul Pelosi with it. 

Both Paul Pelosi and DePape were then transported to a local hospital. There, Paul Pelosi underwent surgery for a skull fracture and other significant injuries to his arm and hands, according to the Speaker’s spokesperson. 

The suspect reportedly entered the Pelosis’ San Francisco home on Friday in search of the Speaker, who was in Washington, D.C., at the time, and shouted, “Where is Nancy? Where is Nancy?”  

The question is reminiscent of chants heard during the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol as some rioters searched the halls for the Speaker. One rioter was sentenced to 60 days behind bars earlier this year for threatening to shoot Nancy Pelosi “in the friggin’ brain” during the insurrection. 

DePape also reportedly brought zip ties with him when he entered the Pelosis’ home, another move seen from some Jan. 6 rioters who were spotted carrying zip ties into the Capitol. 

The San Francisco District Attorney has said multiple felony charges will be brought against DePape on Monday, with an arraignment expected Tuesday.

Kevin McCarthy must face consequences for promoting Trump’s Big Lie

Donald Trump still has a hammer lock on the Republican Party. That was amply demonstrated in the days after all but seven Senate Republicans voted to acquit Trump for his role in the Jan. 6 insurrection. Of those who joined the bipartisan rebuke of Trump’s conduct and voted to convict, Sen. Richard Burr and Bill Cassidy have been censured by their state parties, while the other five face calls for their censure.

Yet an even clearer and starker indication of the hold Trump still has on the GOP came much earlier, on Jan. 28, when House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy flew to Mar-a-Lago to meet with him. The topic? How to take back the House in 2022. This came on the heels of McCarthy voting to object to the certification of Joe Biden’s victory, hours after the insurrection—thus not only giving succor to the insurrection, but to the false claims of election fraud that triggered it.

It is impossible to overstate just how outrageous this was. The leader of the House Republicans, the second most powerful Republican on Capitol Hill, saw fit to publicly kiss the ring of a man who spent months attempting to steal a second term—an effort which culminated in a deadly insurrection that came frighteningly close to claiming the lives of members of both chambers of Congress (and the vice president). And yet, as near as can be determined, McCarthy has faced almost no blowback for it, nor for effectively promoting the Big Lie by voting to object.

To be sure, Sens. Josh Hawley and Ted Cruz have gotten well-deserved scorn, and even calls for their expulsion, for their “leadership” in the effort to object to the certification of Joe Biden’s victory. Sen. Lindsey Graham has crassly declared that the GOP needs Trump’s help to win. He has been pilloried in the reality-based community for this, and rightly so. But it is one thing for backbench senators to subvert the will of the American people. It is quite another for the leader of the House Republicans to do so.

The leadership of the Republican Party in situ, January 28, 2021. pic.twitter.com/40lYItNPpw

— Bill Kristol (@BillKristol) January 28, 2021

McCarthy objected to Biden’s victory, and then embraced Trump, despite knowing full well that Trump had told the biggest lie in a political career shot through with them. The fact that McCarthy hasn’t had his feet held to the fire for either of these outrages can only be described as political malpractice of the highest order. It’s long past time to correct that oversight.

Minutes after the insurrection died down and the Capitol had been finally secured, Dave “I’ve seen enough” Wasserman, House editor of Cook Political Report, tweeted that McCarthy had acknowledged what the nation already knew: Trump had lost the election.

A few weeks after the election, House Republican Leader Kevin McCarthy acknowledged Trump's clear loss to me and I asked him if the president's refusal to concede would lead the country down a dangerous road. His response: "Maybe."

— Dave Wasserman (@Redistrict) January 6, 2021

Wasserman doubled down the next day, noting that McCarthy objected to the certification of Biden’s victory even after repeatedly acknowledging to Wasserman that Biden had won. Then, five days after the insurrection, Wasserman revealed that McCarthy had previously told him that if Trump made good on his repeated threats to reject any result other than his reelection, he knew he’d have to enter the fray.

True story: the day before the election, House GOP Leader Kevin McCarthy told me that if Trump refused to concede, he and McConnell would eventually have to come out and issue a joint statement acknowledging the result. In the end, McCarthy left McConnell twisting in the wind.

— Dave Wasserman (@Redistrict) January 11, 2021

McCarthy knew that Trump was blowing smoke when he claimed the election had been stolen. And yet, McCarthy remained silent even in the face of reports of election officials being harassed, trolled, and threatened due to these claims. He remained silent even as an employee at Dominion Voting Systems was forced into hiding after being targeted with vicious smears and threats.

When I first saw these reports, my thoughts turned to Frank DiPascali, who helped Bernie Madoff run his Ponzi scheme from 1986 until Madoff’s arrest in December 2008. Though he died before he could be sentenced, DiPascali pleaded guilty to his role in the racket, nine months after Madoff’s scheme imploded. He admitted that he had known since at least the early 1990s that Madoff wasn’t trading. And yet, not only did DiPascali squander numerous chances to come clean over the previous two decades, but he actually helped Madoff further the scheme. For instance, according to the Securities and Exchange Commission, when Madoff realized he was on the brink of collapse, DiPascali persuaded Madoff to use the remaining balance in Madoff’s now-infamous Chase account to cut $350 million in checks to relatives and favored investors.

McCarthy’s behavior in the months after the election isn’t much different from DiPascali’s behavior in the last two decades of Madoff’s fraud. Based on Wasserman’s accounts, McCarthy knew the Big Lie was, well, a lie—and he didn’t do a damn thing about it. He didn’t speak out publicly, nor did he tell Jim Jordan, Mo Brooks, Paul Gosar, Andy Biggs, Lauren Boebert, Marjorie Taylor Greene, and the rest of the Sedition Caucus to call off their plans to object.

We won't forget what you said on 11/5/2020 and your complicity in the insurrection @GOPLeader: "Trump won this election, so everyone who’s listening, do not be quiet. We cannot allow this to happen before our very eyes... join together and let’s stop this.” pic.twitter.com/bLOieBxlh2

— Alfred Spellman (@AlfredSpellman) January 20, 2021

This was a time where the leader of the House Republicans had a chance to, you know, lead. In this case, it was a chance that McCarthy was morally, and almost certainly legally and constitutionally, required to take. He blew that chance eight ways to Sunday. In so doing, McCarthy did something that, on paper, takes a lot of effort: For a time, he made McConnell look like a paragon of integrity.

What in the world could McCarthy have been thinking, you might ask? Well, one answer can be found in a profile that The New York Times ran on him in January, days after Trump was impeached for a second time. McCarthy was getting a lot of blowback from Republican constituents back home in California’s 23rd district, based in Bakersfield and the Central Valley, for not being supportive enough of Trump. When McCarthy publicly stated that Trump bore responsibility for the attack during the certification of the Electoral College votes, hours after the Capitol had been secured, it ruffled a lot of feathers among his Republican constituents. According to The Times, at least one local tea party activist, who ran against McCarthy in 2016, is giving serious thought to primarying McCarthy again in 2022. Before Trump, it would have been unthinkable for a party leader in the House to face a substantive primary challenge.

McCarthy may have taken a trip to Florida to smooth things over back home in Bakersfield, but he seems to have forgotten that he is not only the congressman for CA-23, he is also the leader of the House Republicans. As such, he would have the inside track to becoming speaker if the GOP retakes the House. If McCarthy has any ambitions of peeling off swing voters and suburbanites in 2022, being seen publicly with a man who stirred up a deadly insurrection can only be described as an unforced error. It’s particularly outrageous when combined with the fact that he knew Trump had lost and said nothing for months.

House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) blames *you* as he tries to clear up his statements on whether Trump bears responsibility for the January 6th attack on the Capitol or not. “I also think everybody across this country has some responsibility," Rep. McCarthy says. pic.twitter.com/aBeGBsA9sJ

— The Recount (@therecount) January 24, 2021

Recall that in 2020, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi caught a lot of scorn from the right for ripping up a copy of Trump’s State of the Union speech. Self-promoting conservative law professor (and Fox News pundit) Jonathan Turley went as far as to call for Pelosi to step down saying that she forgot she was representing the whole House.

McCarthy’s meeting with Trump is far, far worse. There is something wrong if merely ripping a copy of a speech draws more hackles than meeting with a president who spread pernicious lies about an election being stolen, then incited a deadly insurrection to overturn his defeat. By meeting with Trump, McCarthy thumbed his nose at the many police officers who were injured, including one who died in the line of duty and two others who died by suicide soon after. He thumbed his nose at those who were harassed, trolled, and threatened as a result of the Big Lie that he knew it was a lie. That’s hardly behavior becoming of someone with ambitions of representing the whole House.

McCarthy will never resign, of course. But that doesn’t mean we can’t make him answer for his misdeeds. According to the latest Cook Partisan Voting Index, there are only four districts in California with ratings of R+10 or worse. McCarthy sits in one of them; with a PVI of R+14, on paper, it’s the reddest district in the state. There’s no denying it: This district is one of the few red smudges left in a state that has turned an unrecognizable shade of blue. But the trendline suggests that if done right, a Democrat can at least keep McCarthy tied down.

Bakersfield is undergoing considerable demographic change, for one thing. Once dominated by the descendants of people who fled Oklahoma, Texas, and Arkansas during the Dust Bowl, figures from the 2010 census showed Bakersfield was 45% Latino and 38% non-Hispanic white. According to The New York Times’ profile from January, Bakersfield is now majority Latino. This shift suggests that the city’s Latino population is growing too rapidly for neighboring CA-21, which has long served most of the Latinos in the Fresno-Bakersfield corridor.

Add that to the fact that McCarthy’s district as a whole is currently just barely majority white, at 50.5%. Wasserman suggested earlier this month that CA-23 could potentially become whiter and more Republican in redistricting. But that seems hard to believe if Bakersfield is already majority Latino, or close to it. While Wasserman argues that it’s very likely the state’s nonpartisan redistricting commission will create two Latino-majority districts in the Fresno-Bakersfield corridor, mathematically it’s hard to see how the 23rd would not absorb more Latino voters if its central city is already majority-Latino. Coupled with the right candidate, policies, and outreach, this shift can only help Democrats.

The vote margins between McCarthy and his challenger are a FIFTH of McConnell’s. CA-23’s demographics (+30% Latino) are similar to CA-25, whereas Kentucky is 87% white. CA-23 can be flipped by investing in Latino working class enfranchisement and turnout.#GetThatMangone https://t.co/Uc22ihrsS2

— Ricardo Gutiérrez (@icaito) June 17, 2020

Beyond demographic shifts and redistricting, Trump actually underperformed in a McCarthy’s district, which the Grey Lady describes as an area with “bobbing oil pump jacks (that) dot the landscape like a page out of West Texas,” with a strong historical bent of social conservatism. In other words, classic MAGA territory. According to the latest numbers crunched by the folks at Daily Kos Elections, while Mitt Romney won this district over Obama 61-36 in 2012, Trump only won it 58-36 in 2016 and 57-41 in 2020. Contrast that with IA-04, the former balliwick of Steve King, now held by Randy Feenstra. It swung from a 53-45 win for Romney to a 61-33 win for Trump in 2016 and 63-36 in 2020. Or OH-05, Jim Jordan’s domain. It swung from a 56-42 win for Romney to a 64-31 win for Trump in 2016 and 67-32 in 2020. What’s more, in 2020, McCarthy sits in the only district in the Fresno-Bakersfield corridor, long one of the more conservative parts of the state, where Trump won by double digits.

Moreover, McCarthy’s own winning percentages have been tailing off. After winning his first five terms with 70% or more of the vote, his totals have actually dwindled since Trump: 69% in 2016, 63% in 2018, and 61% in 2020. It’s no coincidence that McCarthy’s vote totals have tailed off as his Democratic challengers have spent more money. His 2016 challenger only raised $35,300 for the entire cycle. By comparison, his 2018 challenger raised $106,000; an improvement, but still nothing to write home about. His 2020 challenger, Kim Mangone, raised $1.6 million … not what you’d expect for a Democrat in an R+14 district. 

If the blue team plays it right, McCarthy could potentially face a reckoning back home for first remaining silent the wake of the Big Lie, and then kissing Trump’s hand after said lie triggered an insurrection. There’s already at least one Democrat running against him: naval veteran and ironworker Bruno Amato.

Looking at his website, Amato doesn’t have the look of the sacrificial lambs and Some Dudes that typically surface in districts that are R+10 or worse. Moreover, it’s not often that you see Democrats already stepping up to run in districts this red.

Amato has a lot of work ahead of him, as will any other Democrat challenging McCarthy. This is a tough, tough district. But given the prospect that he’ll be running in a district that will be a bit more Latino than its predecessor, there’s a chance that he’ll be in a position to give McCarthy heartburn.

But we can do even better than that. Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee chairman Sean Patrick Maloney should tie McCarthy’s duplicity about the Big Lie around the GOP like an anchor. For the last two cycles, the Republicans have tried to position the Democrats as a radical socialist mob. It would more than even the score to point out that the leader of the House Republicans remained silent about the Big Lie despite knowing that it was a lie, even after that lie stirred up an actual mob. That he did so to put out fires back home is no excuse, and Maloney and his team ought to remind the nation that this is not the kind of behavior we should expect from the likely speaker of a Republican-led House. If swing voters and suburbanites recoil from McCarthy over his embrace of Trump, it will all but assure that the GOP stays in the minority.

One way or another, McCarthy must answer for behaving beneath the dignity of someone who has ambitions of becoming speaker. We can make McCarthy do some heavy lifting in his own district, tie his duplicity around the entire House Republican Conference, or some combination of the two. Either way, McCarthy must learn that when you have ambitions of representing the whole House, you cannot forsake your oath in the name of keeping the wolves from your door back home.

‘Lies, lies, lies’: Arnold Schwarzenegger’s speech about Trump and fellow Republicans goes viral

In the days since a group of pro-Trump insurrectionists stormed the U.S. Capitol in Washington, D.C., sending elected officials into temporary hiding and the nation into a period of shock and horror, a number of Republicans have spoken out against Donald Trump. Whether they’ve criticized his endless insistence that he actually won the 2020 presidential election (he didn’t), called for Trump to resign, both long-standing critics and newly vocalized GOP members are speaking out against Trump.

In a moving, personal video, former California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger succinctly described Trump as a “failed leader” and someone who “will soon be as irrelevant as an old tweet.” Direct jabs aside, however, Schwarzenegger also dove deep into serious matters and discussed intergenerational trauma, personal examples from his youth in Austria, and directed a very important message to not only Trump but the Republicans who enabled him. He also wished “great success” to President-elect Joe Biden for when he takes office in less than a month. Let’s check out the video below.

First, in reference to Trump, Schwarzenegger states, “President Trump sought to overturn the results of an election. He sought a coup by misleading people with lies. He will go down in history as the worst president ever. The good thing is he will soon be as irrelevant as an old tweet.” Obviously, the extra layer of zing here is that Twitter (as well as a handful of other social media platforms) recently permanently suspended Trump from their platforms.

On a personal note, Schwarzenegger discussed growing up in the long-term wake of Kristallnacht (also known as the Night of Broken Glass). Schwarzenegger described Kristallnacht as “a night of rampage against the Jews carried out in 1938 by the Nazi equivalent of the Proud Boys,” and said the insurgent’s attack on the Capitol last Wednesday was “the Day of Broken Glass right here in the United States. But the mob did not just shatter the windows of the Capitol. They shattered the ideas we took for granted [and] trampled the very principles on which our country was founded.”

Schwarzenegger talked about how intergenerational trauma (though he didn’t use that term) can affect an entire society. In his case, Schwarzenegger described being a child and watching his father come home drunk once or twice a week, hitting and scaring his mother. He said it felt normal because he knew it happened at neighbors' houses, too. Why? According to Schwarzenegger, this behavior tied to collective guilt and horror after World War II, saying these men were “in emotional pain for what they saw or did.” In his words, he grew up “surrounded by broken men drinking away the guilt over their participation in the most evil regime in history."

“It all started with lies, lies, lies, and intolerance,” Schwarzenegger stated. “Being from Europe I’ve seen firsthand how bad things can spin out of control.”

In terms of his fellow Republicans, Schwarzenegger called out those who “enabled” Trump’s “lies and his treachery.” He also quoted former President Teddy Roosevelt to them, saying, “Patriotism means to stand by the country. It does not mean to stand by the president.”

“To those who think they can overturn the United States constitution, know this: You will never win,” he stated, asking for the people responsible for the attack on the U.S. Capitol to be held accountable. 

Here’s the video on Twitter, which has garnered more than 6 million views at the time of writing. It’s about seven minutes long, but honestly, is worth the full watch.

My message to my fellow Americans and friends around the world following this week's attack on the Capitol. pic.twitter.com/blOy35LWJ5

— Arnold (@Schwarzenegger) January 10, 2021

You can watch the full video on his YouTube channel below.

There are currently 159 House members, and 24 senators who are on record supporting impeachment & removal. Regardless of where your members of Congress stand, please send them a letter.

California Republican Party says it won’t take down illegal ‘ballot boxes’ despite state orders

On Monday, it came to light that the California Republican Party was placing what they called "official ballot drop off boxes" in locations deemed to be Republican-friendly (such as, no kidding, "gun stores") in apparent efforts to make it easier for Republican voters to vote than not-Republican voters.

There are two problems with this. First: It's not legal. California law allows voters to designate a person to drop their ballot off at an official location rather than going themselves; it does not allow the "designated person" to be an unattended cardboard box. (And yes, some of the "official ballot drop off boxes" are merely "simple cardboard boxes with no locking security mechanism.")

The second problem is, yes, ballot security. Voters may not be aware that these very much not official "drop off boxes" are managed by unknown Republican operatives, and there's no guarantee the ballots collected in such boxes won't "accidentally" be, to use a recent Trumpian example, dumped into a river. (I kid. Here in California we don't have rivers. They could be dumped into storm drains, though, which would be problematic because all the aspiring sewer actors do not need more lines to practice.) There's nothing to say the ballots the Republican Party claims to be collecting won't be sorted through, perhaps to weed out non-Republican looking names, or otherwise disposed of. That's why California ballot-harvesting laws require a designee.

California officials have now warned the state Republican Party that what they're doing is illegal and may even result in prison time. The Republican Party has responded in the expected way: They don't care, and won't be complying with state demands to remove the boxes.

More specifically, the California Republican Party intends to continue the operation while daring state officials to do anything about it. Party spokesperson Hector Barajas noted that a 2018 state law prohibits election officials from rejecting a ballot solely because it was returned without the required designee signature or relationship to the voter, signaling that the party intends to collect ballots however they want, handle and turn them in however they want, and dare election officials to throw those votes away. Election officials will almost certainly not do that, so here we are.

It's another case of the party's all-encompassing insistence that laws don't matter if bending the law would benefit the party. See also: Dinesh D'Whateverguy, and literally every member of Donald Trump's inner circles, past and present, indicted and not, and the Republican gutting of the Federal Election Commission, and the nullification of election-related impeachment charges against Dear Leader, and take your pick.

And yes, everyone involved is aware of the dichotomy of the Republican Party going to furious lengths to restrict voting access in Texas and other Republican-led states while bending restrictions that they believe are harmful to their own voters. It's not irony, it's fascism.

What California voters need to know right now, however: Do not use those boxes. Don't. California is mailing ballots to all voters; follow the instructions provided to the letter and mail them back. Do not put your ballot in a cardboard box, or a burlap sack, or into the mouth of a large wooden horse that has appeared, overnight, in the empty parking lot of an abandoned mall. Just mail them in, or turn them in where the state itself tells you to.

There's no guarantee that the local Chuckles' Gun Club and Shoebox Votin' Booth will be handling your vote, as America decides between authoritarian rule and democracy, with anything resembling care. The Republican Party is playing fast and loose with the votes of their own most loyal supporters, and that is not something you want to get involved in.

Kamala Harris Is The Biggest Gift Biden Could Have Given To Trump 

Sen. Kamala Harris used to be a Joe Biden critic, and now, willing to run on his ticket all for her own ambitions and also knowing that she is ONLY being picked because she is a black female.

On Tuesday, former Vice President Joe Biden chose Harris as his running mate for the 2020 Democratic ticket. With all the attacks she laid on him during the primary, he looked past that and chose her, eh?

Democratic Party politicians are the lowest of the low who have no morals or principles – and if they do, they are willing to trade on them in a heartbeat.

MORE NEWS: Kamala Harris Once Stood By Biden Accusers – ‘I Believe Them’

As a Trump supporter, I could not be happier about this pick. She has a horrible record. Not to mention that Biden is going to win California no matter what.

Trump-Pence will win in a landslide.

WEIRD AND INTERESTING CHOICE

Biden choosing Harris is an interesting choice since. She couldn’t even finish the Democratic race for the nomination.

This woman allegedly has so much baggage. I don’t live in California and know a lot about her. She was Willy Brown’s alleged mistress, so Democrats can’t say anything about Trump’s supposed womanizing any longer. They won’t dare find another woman to use.

Also, as California Attorney General, she stomped hard on Blacks and also deliberately withheld evidence that might have freed a man from prison. Weird indeed.

I’m not seeing Rust Belt swing states swinging behind Kamala-as-President. And, if they think this is going to guarantee massive Black voter turnout, they are sniffing [pardon the pun] glue.

MORE NEWS: Michael Moore Floats Conspiracy Theory About ‘Rehearsal’ For Coup Against Trump

ON THE OTHER HAND, TRUMP’S A SHOE-IN

I feel our country dodged a bullet when then-candidate Donald J. Trump was elected. I wanted to break into St. Mary’s Church, downtown, and ring the bells in the middle of the night, except I would not want to damage the church by breaking in.

Disregard personality and you have a courageous fighter who has a backbone, tenacity and keeps marching onward helping our country become stronger, more stable (less dependent on foreign ties), with more manufacturing work right back here in River City.

It is disgusting that our politicians and American corporations have allowed thousands, if not millions, of our jobs to go to Communist China. I cannot think of a single other politician who could have plowed onward while constantly being shot with hurtful accusations of racism, sexism, impeachment, hatred, and threats of all kinds. Trump worked for much better trade deals with Mexico, Canada, and China.

MORE NEWS: Flashback: Biden VP Pick Kamala Harris Blasted Him for Racist Past

He pulled us out of WHO, which seems to be a fraudulent self-serving organization.. He has insisted our immigration laws be enforced, which, by the way, will actually decrease suffering and separations. Just lately he fired the CEO of the Tennessee Valley Authority for trying to fire American IT workers and outsource those jobs. The man was paid over eight million dollars, which is obscene and Trump limited that position to $500,000.

Trump is working for our own people and country. He knows nonsense and rip-offs when he sees them. He has a genuine love for this country as do thousands of immigrants who are thrilled to be here to freely build a prosperous life.

Trump is the only president in my 51 years that I have sent a Christmas card to thank him for working so hard.

WAYNE’S RECOMMENDATIONS

 

The post Kamala Harris Is The Biggest Gift Biden Could Have Given To Trump  appeared first on The Political Insider.

Morning Digest: After blocking liberal bills, conservative Dem lawmakers lose New Mexico primaries

The Daily Kos Elections Morning Digest is compiled by David Nir, Jeff Singer, Stephen Wolf, Carolyn Fiddler, and Matt Booker, with additional contributions from David Jarman, Steve Singiser, Daniel Donner, James Lambert, David Beard, and Arjun Jaikumar.

Leading Off

NM State Senate: Conservative Democrats in the New Mexico State Senate have blocked some important pieces of legislation, but progressives scored several key wins in Tuesday's primaries. Five incumbents lost to progressive challengers: Richard Martinez, Gabe Ramos, and Clemente Sanchez, who lost renomination to opponents who each took more than 60% of the vote; Senate Finance Committee chair John Arthur Smith, who lost 55-45; and finally Senate President Pro Tem Mary Kay Papen, the highest-ranking Democratic senator in the chamber, who lost 49-44.

Campaign Action

Republicans may make a play for some of these seats in the fall. Smith's SD-35 in the southwestern corner of the state backed Donald Trump 50-41, while Sanchez and Ramos' districts were very closely divided in the 2016 presidential contest. The other two constituencies, though, were overwhelmingly Democratic, and it would be a huge surprise if Team Blue's 26-16 majority is threatened.

Despite the partisan makeup of the chamber, though, conservatives have stopped progressive legislation supported by Democratic Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham and the state House, where the party also holds a sizable majority. Conservative Democrats have been blamed for weakening legislation to increase the minimum wage and of blocking efforts to legalize marijuana.  

Perhaps worst of all, though, is the conservatives' actions on abortion rights. Last year, the House passed a bill to repeal a 1969 law that made it a felony to perform an abortion in most cases. However, all five of the aforementioned Senate Democrats, as well as three others, joined with the GOP minority to kill the legislation. The current anti-abortion law is unenforceable thanks to Roe v. Wade, but there's the terrifying possibility that a U.S. Supreme Court decision could make provisions like this one more than just a legal relic.

However, Tuesday's results, as well as a successful showing in November, could give progressives the chance to finally shape the agenda in New Mexico.

Election Changes

Please bookmark our litigation tracker for a complete compilation of the latest developments in every lawsuit regarding changes to election and voting procedures.

California: Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom has issued an order allowing county election officials to reduce the number of in-person voting sites for the November general election, but in exchange, they must provide at least three days of early voting. Democratic Secretary of State Alex Padilla also said that there would be at least one in-person polling place for every 10,000 residents.

Meanwhile, a committee in California's Democratic-run state Senate has approved a bill requiring counties to send ballots to all voters for the November election. Newsom previously issued an order instituting the same mandate, but that order has been challenged by two Republican lawsuits that claim Newsom usurped the legislature's powers. If lawmakers pass legislation similar to Newsom's order, that could help insulate the state's vote-by-mail plans from further legal attack.

Michigan: A new federal lawsuit brought by the Democratic super PAC Priorities USA on behalf of a pair of civic organizations and three voters is seeking to have the state of Michigan pay for return postage on absentee ballots and accept all ballots postmarked by Election Day and received within 14 days, both for the state's Aug. 4 primary and the November general election.

Currently, ballots must be received by election officials no later than Election Day in order to count. Plaintiffs argue that their unusually long proposed receipt deadline is justified because state law does not require election results to be certified until 14 days after Election Day.

Ohio: Ohio's Republican-led state House is preparing to advance a bill that would eliminate three days of early voting right before Election Day and end the state's practice of sending absentee ballot applications to all active voters. Republican Secretary of State Frank LaRose and an organization representing election officials both expressed their opposition to the measure, saying it would lead to longer lines at polling places.

The bill's sponsor, Republican state Rep. Cindy Abrams, claims that cutting early voting would "clarify existing law" and that no longer mailing ballot applications would "save the state money." According to cleveland.com, Ohio spent $1.1 million to send out applications in 2016, the previous presidential election year. The state's most recent annual budget was $78.8 billion.

The legislation's claimed goal is to establish a set of emergency procedures that would allow for an all-mail election during the pendency of a public health crisis like the current pandemic. Republican Gov. Mike DeWine would have to issue a recommendation that the election be conducted by mail at least 60 days before Election Day, and the legislature would have to approve any such recommendation.

However, the state would not send ballots or even ballot applications to voters. Instead, the secretary of state would send postcards to voters explaining how they can request absentee ballots—similar to the heavily criticized procedures the state deployed for its canceled-then-rescheduled primaries earlier this year.

Pennsylvania: On Tuesday, a state court judge ruled that officials in Bucks County could count mail ballots cast in Pennsylvania's June 2 primary so long as they were postmarked by June 1 and are received by June 9. Bucks was not included in a Monday order by Democratic Gov. Tom Wolf that granted a similar extension to six other counties.

However, one of those counties, Delaware, sought and received further relief in the courts. Officials there had said they would be unable to send out 400 to 500 mail ballots in time for voters to return them and therefore planned not to send them at all. However, after a different state judge ruled that any such ballots could be counted as long as they are received by June 12—regardless of when they are postmarked—Delaware officials decided to send them out. The ruling is potentially subject to challenge since it allows voters to cast ballots after Election Day.

Vermont: Vermont's Democratic-run state Senate has passed a bill that would remove Republican Gov. Phil Scott's power to block Democratic Secretary of State Jim Condos from ordering that the November general election be conducted by mail, a plan Condos has long sought to implement. The state House, which is also controlled by Democrats, reportedly will also approve the measure. Scott has said he does not oppose the effort to remove him from the decision-making process.

Senate

CO-Sen: Former state House Speaker Andrew Romanoff is out with his first TV spot ahead of the June 30 Democratic primary. Romanoff talks about his work improving mental healthcare and declares, "But it shouldn't take a crisis to teach us our healthcare system is broken." Romanoff concludes by saying that "when you're fighting for your life, you shouldn't worry about how to pay for it."

GA-Sen-A: The GOP firm Cygnal is out with a survey of Tuesday's Democratic primary to face Republican Sen. David Perdue that shows investigative filmmaker Jon Ossoff very close to the majority of the vote he needs to avoid an August runoff. Cygnal, which conducted a general election poll for the Georgia House GOP Caucus about a month ago, tells us this poll was done for "an interested party," and the firm said it was not involved in this primary.

Cygnal finds Ossoff taking 49% of the vote, while former Columbus Mayor Teresa Tomlinson leads 2018 lieutenant governor nominee Sarah Riggs Amico 16-8 for second. The only other poll we've seen of this contest was a March University of Georgia survey that had Ossoff at 31%, while Tomlinson edged Amico 16-15. Cygnal also showed Ossoff beating Tomlinson 58-24 in a hypothetical runoff.

MN-Sen: Candidate filing closed Tuesday for Minnesota's Aug. 11 primaries, and the state has a list of contenders available here.

Appointed Democratic Sen. Tina Smith won the 2018 special election 53-42, and she's now seeking her first full term. Donald Trump and the rest of the party establishment have consolidated behind former Rep. Jason Lewis, who lost his re-election last cycle 53-47 to Democrat Angie Craig and faces minimal intra-party opposition in August.

Lewis, a former conservative radio host who has a long record of racist and misogynist tirades, hasn't attracted much outside help so far, though. Smith ended March with a wide $4.6 million to $714,000 cash-on-hand lead, and no major outside groups on either side have booked airtime here. Trump came surprisingly close to winning Minnesota in 2016, but he'll almost certainly need to flip the state this time for Lewis to have a shot. Daily Kos Elections rates this contest as Likely Democratic.  

MT-Sen: The Democratic group Majority Forward's new ad declares that GOP Sen. Steve Daines "voted for a $500 billion dollar slush fund to bail out big corporations, even Wall Street, on top of trillions in special tax breaks Daines voted to give them already." The narrator continues, "But Daines voted against paid leave for Montanans and refused to support relief for our hospitals and nurses."

NC-Sen, NC-Gov: The GOP firm Harper Polling is out with another survey for the conservative Civitas Institute, and it gives GOP Sen. Thom Tillis a small 38-36 edge against Democrat Cal Cunningham. Democratic Gov. Roy Cooper also leads Republican Dan Forest 49-37, while the sample favors Donald Trump 47-44. Back in mid-April, Harper showed Tillis and Cooper ahead 38-34 and 50-33, respectively, while Trump held a 49-42 advantage.

House

HI-02: Democratic state Sen. Kai Kahele, who launched his campaign early last year as a challenge to Rep. Tulsi Gabbard, now finds himself on a glide path to Congress after Tuesday's candidate filing deadline passed with no serious alternatives entering the race for Hawaii's safely blue 2nd Congressional District.

Gabbard's endless string of apostasies—from cozying up to Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad to bashing Barack Obama for refusing to use the phrase "radical Islamic terrorism"—had made her a favorite of Fox News and anathema to progressives. However, she remained popular at home, making her a daunting target for any would-be rivals.

But Kahele, a combat pilot with the Air National Guard who's flown missions in Iraq and Afghanistan, was undeterred. He kicked off a bid in January of 2019, just after Gabbard embarked on a vanity run for president. That created an opening for Kahele, who was able to meet voters across the district while Gabbard was spending time in New Hampshire diners, underscoring a common complaint that Gabbard was more interested in boosting her national profile than in addressing problems at home.

Under Hawaii law, Gabbard was able to both pursue the presidency and seek re-election at the same time, though she long kept the political world guessing as to what she'd ultimately do. Finally, in October, she announced she wouldn't run for a fifth term, though it wasn't until after Tuesday's filing deadline that Kahele could be sure she wouldn't have a last-minute change of heart. (Gabbard of course eventually bailed on her presidential ambitions, too.)

Most surprisingly, in the long stretch from Gabbard's retirement announcement until now, not a single notable Hawaii Democrat joined Kahele in running for what had become an open seat, and few even considered it. Kahele's early start may have played a role, since he'd been able to amass a sizable war chest by the time Gabbard called it quits. He'd also earned support from several key figures in the state's political establishment, a movement that crescendoed in the spring when Hawaii's entire congressional delegation—minus Gabbard, of course—endorsed him.

While several other candidates did enter the race, none have even filed a single fundraising report with the FEC, making Kahele the prohibitive favorite to win the Aug. 8 primary. Assuming he does, he'll also be a lock for the November general election, given that Hillary Clinton carried the 2nd District by a 61-30 margin.

Victory in the fall would make Kahele just the second Native Hawaiian to represent the state in Congress after the late Sen. Dan Akaka. He'd also be he first from Hawaii's more rural Neighbor Islands, the term for every island apart from Oahu, which is home to the capital of Honolulu—and to every U.S. senator and representative the state has ever had.

IA-04: While state Sen. Randy Feenstra is no less extreme than the notorious figure he beat in Tuesday's primary, he does a much better job of saying the quiet parts quietly than soon-to-be-former Rep. Steve King. As such, that makes him what passes for a bog-standard Republican these days: build the wall, ban sanctuary cities, ban abortion, ban gay marriage, and swear undying fealty to Donald Trump—Feenstra's on board with the whole program.

And that in turn makes him a sure fit for Iowa's conservative 4th Congressional District, a heavily Republican area that's only grown more so in the Trump era. King's ability to generate funds for Democrats just by opening his mouth, plus a perception at home that he'd grown more interested in buffing his reputation with international members of the far-right than the concerns of his district, nearly cost him his career against Democrat J.D. Scholten in 2018, when he survived by just a 50-47 margin. That backdrop gave Scholten an opening once again, however slight.

But as the GOP's new nominee, Feenstra, won't trail the top of the ticket, where Trump is sure to dominate. Daily Kos is Elections is therefore changing our rating on this race from Likely Republican to Safe Republican.

MN-01: Republican Jim Hagedorn defeated Army veteran Dan Feehan 50.1-49.7 in a 2018 open seat contest, and Feehan is back for a rematch. Feehan, who faces no primary opposition, ended March with a wide $1.1 million to $787,000 million advantage, and outside groups on both sides have booked TV time in this area.

Despite his tiny win last cycle, though, Hagedorn has the edge this time. This southern Minnesota seat swung from 50-48 Obama to 53-38 Trump, so Feehan will likely need to win over a significant number of Trump voters to win this time. Daily Kos Elections rates this contest as Lean Republican.

MN-02: Democrat Angie Craig unseated Republican Rep. Jason Lewis 53-47 in 2018 to flip a suburban Twin Cities seat that both Barack Obama and Donald Trump narrowly carried, and Republicans don't seem to have a strong candidate to try to take it back. The only Republican in the running is Marine veteran Tyler Kistner, who ended March with a wide $2 million to $100,000 cash-on-hand deficit in a contest we rate as Likely Democratic.

MN-03: Democrat Dean Phillips unseated GOP incumbent Erik Paulsen 56-44 after an expensive race, but the new incumbent doesn't appear to be in any danger this time.

The only notable Republican in the race is healthcare executive Kendall Qualls, who trailed Phillips $346,000 to $242,000 in cash-on-hand at the end of March. While Phillips didn't have a large war chest for an incumbent, the district's shift to the left will make it hard for Qualls to gain traction: This suburban Twin Cities seat moved from 50-49 Obama to 51-41 Clinton, and Daily Kos Elections rates this contest as Safe Democratic.

MN-05: Rep. Ilhan Omar, who has been one of the most high-profile members of the freshman Democratic class, faces four opponents in the primary for this safely blue Minneapolis seat. Omar's most high-profile foe is attorney Antone Melton-Meaux, who has argued that Omar "appears to be more focused on her own celebrity than on serving the district." Omar ended March with a wide $1.3 million to $200,000 cash-on-hand lead over Melton-Meaux.

MN-07: Democratic Rep. Collin Peterson has held this rural western Minnesota seat for 30 years even as it has become more and more Republican, and he faces his greatest test this fall. The GOP establishment, including Donald Trump, has consolidated behind former Lt. Gov. Michelle Fischbach in this 62-31 Trump seat. A few other Republicans are running including self-funding physician Noel Collis and 2016/2018 nominee Dave Hughes, but it's unlikely they'll be able to stop Fischbach.

Peterson, who chairs the important House Agriculture Committee, ended March with a wide $1.1 million to $312,000 cash-on-hand lead over Fischbach. However, this seat gave Trump the highest vote share of any House district that Democrats currently hold, and with Trump almost certain to easily carry this seat again, it's likely that Republicans will invest plenty of money in their campaign to unseat the longtime incumbent. Daily Kos Elections rates this contest as a Tossup.

MN-08: Republican Pete Stauber flipped this seat 51-45 last cycle, and the new incumbent looks secure this time. The Democrats are fielding diabetes research advocate Quinn Nystrom, who is a former member of the Baxter City Council. Stauber ended March with a wide $849,000 to $103,000 cash-on-hand lead in a northeast Minnesota seat that swung from 52-46 Obama to 54-39 Trump, and Daily Kos Elections rates this contest as Safe Republican.

NJ-05: Glen Rock Councilwoman Arati Kreibich, who is challenging Rep. Josh Gottheimer in the July 7 Democratic primary, is out with a survey from Data for Progress that shows her losing 64-17. Kreibich argues that she makes gains when voters learn about her, though she still trails when respondents are exposed to positive and negative messaging about both contenders.  

NY-16: Veteran Democratic Rep. Eliot Engel, on his first visit back to his district in months, was caught on camera Tuesday pleading with Bronx Borough President Ruben Diaz Jr. for the chance to speak at a press conference, telling Diaz twice, "If I didn't have a primary, I wouldn't care."

While Engel was referring to his lack of a speaking slot at the event, which was convened after a night of looting along the Fordham Road retail corridor, the gaffe was quickly refracted as a commentary on Engel's feelings about his race and his constituents. Engel tried to explain away the remarks, saying, "In the context of running for re-election, I thought it was important for people to know where I stand, that's why I asked to speak," but his leading opponent, educator Jamaal Bowman, immediately seized on the blunder to call the 16-term incumbent out of touch and said he raised $150,000 in the 24 hours following the incident.

Last month, Engel was the subject of an unflattering profile in the Atlantic highlighting the fact that he had holed up in his DC-area home for the duration of the pandemic, not even returning to New York when the state's first coronavirus epicenter was identified in the city of New Rochelle, which is in his district. (Many other members of New York's delegation, including several fellow committee chairs, had managed to split time between Washington and their home turf.)

Bowman's campaign had in part centered around Engel's alleged absenteeism even before the pandemic, immediately making Tuesday's hot mic comments part of a pre-existing narrative about the race. But Bowman only has three more weeks to make his case ahead of the June 23 primary for the safely blue 16th District, and Engel had a roughly five-to-one cash advantage as of the end of March. However, the financial picture—and the race itself—might now look very different going forward.

P.S. Oddly, the event Engel was attending wasn't even in his district: It was held at an intersection on the border of the 13th and 15th Districts. 13th District Rep. Adriano Espaillat was in attendance, as were a long list of other local politicians. It's understandable, then, why Diaz told Engel, "I cannot have all the electeds talk because we will never get out of here" and snapped back, "Don't do that to me—everybody has a primary" when Engel tried to plead his case.

NY-17: In his second TV spot for the June 23 Democratic primary, attorney Mondaire Jones tells the audience, "I'm grateful to the grocery store workers and delivery people who help us get through this crisis. Don't they deserve affordable healthcare? Doesn't everyone?" Jones talks about growing up on food stamps and declares, "No one should lose their healthcare because they've lost their job." Jones concludes by saying he's the one Democrat in the contest who backs Medicare for All.

NY-27: On Tuesday, Donald Trump implored his Twitter followers to vote for state Sen. Chris Jacobs on June 23. Trump had already endorsed Jacobs in February for the special general election to succeed disgraced Rep. Chris Collins, though the political calendar looked different at the time. Back then, the special was set for late April while the regular primary was in June, but the coronavirus pandemic led Gov. Andrew Cuomo to consolidate the two contests.

Jacobs' primary opponents have insisted that Trump's earlier endorsement only applied to the special, but that's a tougher argument to make now. Trump himself didn't refer to either the special or the primary, though, he simply tweeted, "Chris has my Complete and Total Endorsement! Vote for Chris on June 23!"

TX-10: 2018 Democratic nominee Mike Siegel picked up an endorsement this week from freshman Rep. Veronica Escobar. Siegel faces physician Pritesh Gandhi in the July 14 Democratic primary runoff to take on veteran GOP Rep. Michael McCaul.

Election Result Recaps

Baltimore, MD Mayor: With 80,000 votes counted, former Mayor Sheila Dixon leads City Council President Brandon Scott 30-25 in the Democratic primary for mayor. It's not clear how many votes remain to be counted, though the head of the city's board of elections says that it will resume tabulating mail-in ballots on Thursday. Whoever emerges with the Democratic nomination should have no trouble winning the general election in this very blue city.

Ferguson, MO Mayor: Ferguson elected its first-ever black mayor, as well as its first woman leader, on Tuesday when City Councilwoman Ella Jones defeated colleague Heather Robinett 54-46. Voters in this St. Louis suburb also made history by electing a black majority to the local school board.

Ferguson attracted global attention in 2014 after a white police officer shot and killed unarmed black teenager Michael Brown, sparking focus for Black Lives Matter. One big fact stood out amidst the city's botched handling of the protests that followed Brown's death: While Ferguson is two-thirds black and heavily Democratic, this municipality of 21,000 was led by a white Republican mayor, James Knowles. Five of Ferguson's six city councilmembers were also white, as were six of the seven local school board members. In large part because local elections didn't take place the same day as state or federal ones, very low turnout produced a majority-white electorate.

However, reformers made gains the next year when Jones and another black candidate won seats on the City Council in a contest that attracted much higher turnout than normal. Another African American joined the body the next year, which gave it a black majority for the first time. In 2017, though, Jones challenged Knowles for re-election and lost 56-44. But Knowles, who has been in office since 2011, was termed-out this year, and Jones won a three-year term to succeed him.

IA-Sen: Businesswoman Theresa Greenfield won the Democratic nomination to face GOP Sen. Joni Ernst by defeating retired Navy Vice Adm. Michael Franken 48-25. Greenfield had the support of national Democratic groups like Senate Majority PAC, which spent close to $7 million on her behalf, and EMILY's List.

Greenfield will be in for a difficult race against Ernst in a state that moved hard to the right in 2014 and 2016, but as SMP's big primary investment demonstrates, this is a contest that outside groups are taking very seriously. The DSCC and SMP have booked $20.4 million to unseat Ernst, while the senator's allies at the NRSC and the Senate Leadership Fund have reserved a total of $15.2 million to defend her. The only survey we've seen here all year, an early May poll from the Democratic firm Public Policy Polling, had Ernst ahead just 43-42. Daily Kos Elections rates this contest as Lean Republican.

IA-02: State Sen. Mariannette Miller-Meeks, who was the party's nominee here in 2008, 2010, and 2014, won the GOP nod for this competitive seat once again by beating former Illinois Rep. Bobby Schilling 48-37. Miller-Meeks will take on former state Sen. Rita Hart, who had no Democratic primary opposition, in the contest to succeed retiring Democratic Rep. Dave Loebsack.

This southeastern Iowa seat swung from 56-43 Obama to 49-45 Trump, and it will be one of the House GOP's top targets. However, this terrain has been more difficult for Team Red downballot. Loebsack turned back Miller-Meeks 52-47 during the 2014 GOP wave, and 2018 Democratic gubernatorial nominee Fred Hubbell, who had Hart on his ticket as his nominee for lieutenant governor, carried the district 51-47 as he was narrowly losing statewide. Daily Kos Elections rates this contest as Lean Democratic.

IN-01: In a surprise, North Township Trustee Frank Mrvan defeated Hammond Mayor Thomas McDermott 34-29 in the Democratic primary to succeed retiring Rep. Pete Visclosky in this safely blue seat. Mrvan will take on Republican Mark Leyva, who has run here during 10 of the last 12 election cycles and never come close to winning.

McDermott, a self-described moderate who considered challenging Visclosky before the incumbent retired, looked like the frontrunner for this northwest Indiana seat. The mayor deployed the most cash, and he also received a $525,000 boost from third-party groups—mostly from VoteVets and an organization called Democratic Progress, whose treasurer works for a super PAC that backs independent candidates. Another candidate, state Rep. Mara Candelaria Reardon, also benefited from outside support.

Mrvan, meanwhile, raised very little money, though some allied PACs dropped about $110,000 to help him. However, Mrvan had the support of Visclosky and the local branch of the United Steelworkers of America, which is a prominent force in a district with a large steel industry. Mrvan may have benefited from some family name recognition: His father and namesake is local state Sen. Frank Mrvan, who was first elected in 1978 and has served in the legislature almost continuously since then.

IN-05: State Sen. Victoria Spartz won a truly ugly GOP primary to succeed retiring GOP Rep. Susan Brooks in this open seat by defeating businesswoman Beth Henderson 41-18. Spartz will take on former state Rep. Christina Hale, who beat 2018 nominee Dee Thornton 39-28 in a race that didn't attract much outside attention.

Spartz used her personal resources to decisively outspend all of her opponents, while her allies at the anti-tax Club for Growth ran ads attacking Henderson and another candidate, former Marion County Prosecutor Carl Brizzi. Henderson, who was backed by Sen. Mike Braun, in turn launched a xenophobic and misogynist ad against the Ukrainian-born Spartz.

This suburban Indianapolis seat was safely red turf until the Trump era, but Democrats are hoping to score a pickup here this fall. This district moved from 58-41 Romney to 53-41 Trump, and former Democratic Sen. Joe Donnelly narrowly prevailed here 48.4-47.9 in 2018 even though he lost 51-45 statewide. So far, no major outside groups on either side have booked TV time in the Indianapolis media market, which covers the entire district, though there's still plenty of time for that to change. Daily Kos Elections rates this contest as Lean Republican.

MD-07: Democratic Rep. Kweisi Mfume, who recently returned to the House after a 24-year absence, beat former state party chair Maya Rockeymoore Cummings 78-9 in the primary for this safely blue Baltimore seat. Mfume defeated Rockeymoore Cummings 43-17 back in February in the special primary to succeed her late husband, Rep. Elijah Cummings.

MT-Gov: Rep. Greg Gianforte won the GOP primary by defeating Attorney General Tim Fox 53-27, while Lt. Gov. Mike Cooney beat businesswoman Whitney Williams 55-45 to secure the Democratic nod. Gianforte and Cooney will face off in the fall in the contest to succeed termed-out Democratic Gov. Steve Bullock, who is Team Blue's nominee for the Senate.

Republicans last won the governorship in Montana in 2000, but that losing streak may finally come to an end in 2020 thanks to the state's increasingly red trend. Gianforte, who threw down $1.5 million of his own money for the primary, also may be able to decisively outspend Cooney. Daily Kos Elections rates this contest as Lean Republican.

However, while Gianforte is the favorite in the fall, he's hardly invincible. The now-congressman was the party's nominee back in 2016, and Democrats ran a barrage of ads portraying the former New Jersey resident as a greedy outsider eager to deny the public access to waterways for fishing and swimming that were located near his "riverfront mansion"—so much so that he in fact went to court. Gianforte ultimately lost to Bullock 50-46 even though Trump carried Montana by a dominant 56-35 margin.

Undeterred by his loss, Gianforte ran in a special election for Montana's lone House seat when Rep. Ryan Zinke temporarily got beamed up to Trump's cabinet. Gianforte made international news the night before Election Day by body-slamming reporter Ben Jacobs after he asked Gianforte a question about Obamacare. Gianforte filed a statement with the police afterwards in which he claimed that Jacobs had provoked the attack—an utter lie, and a particularly shameful one since several witnesses were present and the incident was also captured on audiotape.

Gianforte ended up winning 50-44, but since most voters had already cast their ballots ahead of Election Day, it's not clear how much damage this story did or didn't do to the Republican's political fortunes. A few months after the election, Gianforte pleaded guilty to misdemeanor assault. The congressman paid a $385 fine and was sentenced to 40 hours of community service as well as another 20 hours of training for anger management. However, Gianforte was never charged with lying to the police. He and Jacobs also reached a settlement in which Gianforte accepted responsibility for his actions and agreed to donate $50,000 to the Committee to Protect Journalists, heading off a lawsuit by Jacobs.

Gianforte faced an expensive re-election contest last cycle against Democrat Kathleen Williams, who ran ads going after the incumbent for his attack on Jacobs. However, one high-profile Republican was very much not bothered by Gianforte's transgressions. Donald Trump ventured to Montana in October and told a rally, "Greg is smart and, by the way, never wrestle him." In case that was too subtle, Trump pantomimed throwing someone to the ground and added, "Any guy that can do a body slam—he's my guy." Gianforte went on to beat Williams by a modest 51-46 margin.

MT-AL: State Auditor Matt Rosendale, who was the GOP's nominee for Senate last cycle, defeated Secretary of State Corey Stapleton 48-33 in the primary for this open seat. Rosendale, who had Donald Trump's endorsement, will take on 2018 Democratic nominee Kathleen Williams, who defeated state Rep. Tom Winter by a lopsided 89-11 margin.

Williams held GOP Rep. Greg Gianforte, who gave up this seat to run for governor, to a 51-46 win last cycle. However, while Rosendale's 50-47 loss against Democratic Sen. Jon Tester shows he can be defeated in this red state, he'll probably be harder for Williams to attack than the notorious Gianforte was. Daily Kos Elections rates this contest as Likely Republican.

NM-02: 2018 GOP nominee Yvette Herrell beat businesswoman Claire Chase 45-32, which earned Herrell a rematch against freshman Democratic Rep. Xochitl Torres Small. This was a truly ugly primary, with both candidates calling one another enemies of Trump; Herrell was even accused of spreading rumors about Chase's first marriage.  

This southern New Mexico seat backed Donald Trump 50-40, but Herrell lost it to Torres Small 51-49 two years later. Team Blue was eager to face Herrell again following that defeat, and the Democratic group Patriot Majority even ran ads during the final weeks of the primary designed to help Herrell against Chase. A GOP establishment-flavored group called Defending Main Street tried to counter with anti-Herrell ads, but it was too little, too late.

Still, while Democrats have the opponent they want, Herrell could still win in a seat this red. Torres Small is a very strong fundraiser, though, and she proved in 2018 that she's able to secure crossover votes. Daily Kos Elections rates this contest as a Tossup.

NM-03: Attorney Teresa Leger Fernandez won the Democratic primary to succeed Senate nominee Ben Ray Luján in this reliably blue seat by beating former CIA agent Valerie Plame 42-25.

This was a very expensive contest and Plame, who was at the center of a national firestorm that lasted for years during the presidency of George W. Bush after her name was publicly leaked, decisively outspent Leger Fernandez. However, several outside groups, including EMILY's List, spent heavily on ads touting Leger Fernandez's local roots in northern New Mexico.

P.S. Tuesday's primary results mean that all of New Mexico's House seats will almost certainly be represented next year by women of color, which would be a first in American history for a state with more than two districts. Leger Fernandez is Latina, while 1st District Rep. Deb Haaland, who holds a safely blue seat, is a member of the Laguna Pueblo Native American people. Over in the 2nd District, Democratic Rep. Xochitl Torres Small is the granddaughter of Mexican immigrants, while GOP nominee Yvette Herrell is a member of the Cherokee Nation.

PA-01: In a surprise, GOP Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick held off underfunded businessman Andrew Meehan, who was challenging the "anti-Trump, Trump hating RINO" congressman for renomination, just 57-43. On the Democratic side, Christina Finello, who has worked as a Bucks County housing department official, beat businessman Skylar Hurwitz 77-23.

While much of the party base seems quite angry at Fitzpatrick, who has always portrayed himself as a moderate, it remains to be seen if Democrats can exploit his problems. Finello, who became the party's frontrunner after the two most prominent contenders dropped out, raised a total of just around $210,000 through mid-May, and we'll need to see if she can do better now that she's the nominee. Fitzpatrick, meanwhile, is a very strong fundraiser who will have all the money he needs to defend himself.  

This seat, which is centered around Bucks County north of Philadelphia, narrowly backed both Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton, but Fitzpatrick won an expensive contest 51-49 during the 2018 Democratic wave. With the cash battle so lopsided, at least for now, Daily Kos Elections rates this contest as Likely Republican.

PA-07: Businesswoman Lisa Scheller defeated 2018 primary runner-up Dean Browning, who is also a former member of the Lehigh County Commission, 52-48 in the GOP primary to face freshman Democratic Rep. Susan Wild. Scheller, who has self-funded much of her campaign, decisively outspent Browning, and she also had the backing of House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy. Scheller picked up an endorsement in the final days of the contest from Donald Trump, a tweet that may have made all the difference in this close race.

This Lehigh Valley district shifted from 53-46 Obama to just 49-48 Clinton, but Wild decisively won an open seat race last cycle after national Republicans abandoned their nominee. Scheller may prove to be a better contender, but Wild has over $1.5 million to defend herself in a race we rate as Lean Democratic.

PA-08: Former Trump administration official Jim Bognet beat former police officer Teddy Daniels 28-25 in the GOP primary to take on Democratic Rep. Matt Cartwright; Army veteran Earl Granville, who had House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy's endorsement, finished just behind with 24%.

This seat in the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre area swung from 55-43 Obama to 53-44 Trump, but Cartwright turned back a self-funding opponent last cycle by a convincing 55-45 margin. However, the incumbent could be in considerably more danger with Trump at the top of the ballot. Bognet, for his part, has made sure to emulate the GOP leader by running racist ad after racist ad declaring that he'll punish China for having "sent us the Wuhan flu."

Bognet raised only about $300,000 from when he entered the race in January through mid-May, though he may attract considerably more attention now that he's the GOP nominee. Democrats are already preparing for an expensive race in any case: House Majority PAC has reserved $1.8 million in fall TV time in the Wilkes-Barre media market, which contains most of this seat, though Republicans have yet to book time. Daily Kos Elections rates this contest as Lean Democratic.

PA-10: With 38,000 votes counted, state Auditor General Eugene DePasquale leads attorney Tom Brier 63-37 in the Democratic primary to take on GOP Rep. Scott Perry. The Associated Press has not yet called the race, and The Patriot-News reported Wednesday that there are still 40,000 ballots to be counted in Dauphin and Cumberland Counties, while most votes are in for DePasquale's York County base. (This district includes 80% of Cumberland County and all of Dauphin County.)

Brier is leading 66-35 in Dauphin County, while he has a bare majority in Cumberland County, so he'll likely pick up ground as more votes come in. Gov. Tom Wolf's recent executive order requires any mail ballots in Dauphin County that are received by June 9 to be counted as long as they were postmarked by Election Day, so we may not have a resolution here until next week.

Special Elections: Here's a recap of Tuesday's two Massachusetts special elections, including a Democratic flip:

MA-HD-3rd Bristol: Democrat Carol Doherty defeated Republican Kelly Dooner 57-43 to flip this seat for Team Blue. Though this district backed Hillary Clinton 52-42 and Barack Obama 58-40, former GOP state Rep. Shaunna O'Connell routinely won re-election, making Doherty's win a significant downballot shift for this district.

This victory continues Democrats' streak of flips in the Bay State; two weeks ago, Democrats flipped two state Senate districts that were similarly blue at the federal level.

MA-HD-37th Middlesex: Democrat Danilo Sena easily beat Republican Catherine Clark 74-26 to hold this seat for his party. Sena's win was large even for this strongly Democratic district, running well ahead of Clinton's 62-31 win and Obama's 57-41 win here.

The composition of this chamber is 127-31 (with one independent member) with one other seat vacant.