Heads up: our 2026 election season discount is currently live! It’s 20% off paid subscriptions for first-time subscribers at gdpolitics.com. Join us for the final stretch of the midterms, election night and the aftermath — then it’s on to 2028! You’ll get Thursday episodes, virtual happy hours, merch discounts and access to our subscriber chat to ask questions and suggest topics. Join us!

The full episode is available to paid subscribers. Once you become a paid subscriber, you can connect your account to your preferred podcast player here.

Subscribe now

What would it take for Donald Trump’s voters to give up on him? And if they did, would that mean giving Democrats a chance or just staying home?

With less than two weeks until the midterms, those questions are being put to the test. Trump is 23 percentage points underwater with the American public, and Democrats lead on the congressional generic ballot by nine points.

My guest today has spent the past eight years listening to voters explain why they support Trump, why they’ve turned against him, and sometimes why they’ve gone back. is a former Republican, publisher of The Bulwark, and host of The Focus Group. Her new book, How to Eat an Elephant: One Voter at a Time, argues that it’s possible to build a coalition that defeats Trump’s style of politics for good.

That’s a bigger ambition than winning a midterm. So we examine what would have to change to make it happen and whether the dissatisfaction Longwell hears from Trump voters could translate into lasting support for Democrats.

We also discuss how today’s swing voters have changed and when better messaging can help versus when voters simply don’t like a party’s policies. Finally, Longwell weighs in on the 2028 Democratic presidential field, including the picks from our recent candidate draft over at Still Counting.

Share

Read more

Heads up: our 2026 election season discount is currently live! It’s 20% off paid subscriptions for first-time subscribers at gdpolitics.com. Join us for the final stretch of the midterms, election night and the aftermath — then it’s on to 2028! You’ll get Thursday episodes, virtual happy hours, merch discounts and access to our subscriber chat to ask questions and suggest topics. Join us!

The full episode is available to paid subscribers. Once you become a paid subscriber, you can connect your account to your preferred podcast player here.

Subscribe now

What would it take for Donald Trump’s voters to give up on him? And if they did, would that mean giving Democrats a chance or just staying home?

With less than two weeks until the midterms, those questions are being put to the test. Trump is 23 percentage points underwater with the American public, and Democrats lead on the congressional generic ballot by nine points.

My guest today has spent the past eight years listening to voters explain why they support Trump, why they’ve turned against him, and sometimes why they’ve gone back. is a former Republican, publisher of The Bulwark, and host of The Focus Group. Her new book, How to Eat an Elephant: One Voter at a Time, argues that it’s possible to build a coalition that defeats Trump’s style of politics for good.

That’s a bigger ambition than winning a midterm. So we examine what would have to change to make it happen and whether the dissatisfaction Longwell hears from Trump voters could translate into lasting support for Democrats.

We also discuss how today’s swing voters have changed and when better messaging can help versus when voters simply don’t like a party’s policies. Finally, Longwell weighs in on the 2028 Democratic presidential field, including the picks from our recent candidate draft over at Still Counting.

Share

Read more

Heads up: our 2026 election season discount is currently live! It’s 20% off paid subscriptions for first-time subscribers at gdpolitics.com. Join us for the final stretch of the midterms, election night and the aftermath — then it’s on to 2028! You’ll get Thursday episodes, virtual happy hours, merch discounts and access to our subscriber chat to ask questions and suggest topics. Join us!

Subscribe now

Since President Trump’s attempt to overturn the 2020 election, there’s been an extra question hanging over American elections. Not just who will win, but whether the will of the voters will be respected.

With roughly two weeks until Election Day, I wanted to sort through the concerns surrounding the midterms and distinguish the plausible threats from the more farfetched scenarios. So today, Votebeat managing editor and friend of the pod Nathaniel Rakich joins me to walk through what could go wrong before, during and after the election.

First, a brief soapbox moment: Republican and Democratic GDers are equally welcome here. Disagreeing about how the country should be governed is why we have elections. But respecting the results once we’ve settled on the rules is a prerequisite for that disagreement to mean anything. And so this is an area of coverage where we don’t really mess around.

That said, Nathaniel’s assessment is somewhat reassuring. In Votebeat’s informal survey of 31 election experts, respondents generally expected challenges to the election, but did not expect those challenges to overturn the results. That still leaves plenty of room for damage.

We discuss bureaucratic errors, the strain on local election offices, the difference between routine poll monitoring and intimidation, and the possibility of federal interference in counting ballots.

The biggest variable in Nathaniel’s outlook is also a familiar one: the margin. A decisive result leaves much less room for mischief. A razor-thin race that determines control of the Senate, with ballots still being counted days later, is a more concerning prospect.

So how much anxiety is warranted, and where should we direct our attention? That’s the conversation today.

Heads up: our 2026 election season discount is currently live! It’s 20% off paid subscriptions for first-time subscribers at gdpolitics.com. Join us for the final stretch of the midterms, election night and the aftermath — then it’s on to 2028! You’ll get Thursday episodes, virtual happy hours, merch discounts and access to our subscriber chat to ask questions and suggest topics. Join us!

Subscribe now

Since President Trump’s attempt to overturn the 2020 election, there’s been an extra question hanging over American elections. Not just who will win, but whether the will of the voters will be respected.

With roughly two weeks until Election Day, I wanted to sort through the concerns surrounding the midterms and distinguish the plausible threats from the more farfetched scenarios. So today, Votebeat managing editor and friend of the pod joins me to walk through what could go wrong before, during and after the election.

First, a brief soapbox moment: Republican and Democratic GDers are equally welcome here. Disagreeing about how the country should be governed is why we have elections. But respecting the results once we’ve settled on the rules is a prerequisite for that disagreement to mean anything. And so this is an area of coverage where we don’t really mess around.

That said, Nathaniel’s assessment is somewhat reassuring. In Votebeat’s informal survey of 31 election experts, respondents generally expected challenges to the election, but did not expect those challenges to overturn the results. That still leaves plenty of room for damage.

We discuss bureaucratic errors, the strain on local election offices, the difference between routine poll monitoring and intimidation, and the possibility of federal interference in counting ballots.

The biggest variable in Nathaniel’s outlook is also a familiar one: the margin. A decisive result leaves much less room for mischief. A razor-thin race that determines control of the Senate, with ballots still being counted days later, is a more concerning prospect.

So how much anxiety is warranted, and where should we direct our attention? That’s the conversation today.

Heads up: The GD POLITICS merch store is back for election season! We’ve got super comfy “Good Data, Bad Data, Not Data” T-shirts, baseball caps, and totes. Paid subscribers can find a discount code in the paid-subscriber chat!

The full episode is available to paid subscribers. Once you become a paid subscriber, you can connect your account to your preferred podcast player here.

Subscribe now

Democrats need to gain just three seats to take control of the House. But with a favorable national environment opening up opportunities in Republican territory, the bigger question is probably how far they can go and what might limit their gains.

On today’s episode, Cook Political Report’s Erin Covey and Inside Elections’ Jacob Rubashkin join me to tour the House battlefield. They explain what district-level polling reveals about the election, why some traditionally Republican areas are seeing particularly large shifts toward Democrats, and how campaign spending is keeping vulnerable Republicans competitive.

We also debate whether individual candidates can still overcome their party’s political fortunes. From Republican Brian Fitzpatrick’s durability in Pennsylvania to Democrat Jamie Ager’s campaign in western North Carolina, local reputations and issues offer a more complicated picture than national polling alone can provide.

Erin and Jacob also dive into the differences between expert race ratings and statistical forecasts, the campaign messages dominating the airwaves, and the lasting consequences of gerrymandering. And they consider what the size of a Democratic majority would mean for Hakeem Jeffries and governance during the final two years of Trump’s presidency.

Share

Read more

Heads up: The GD POLITICS merch store is back for election season! We’ve got super comfy “Good Data, Bad Data, Not Data” T-shirts, baseball caps, and totes. Paid subscribers can find a discount code in the paid-subscriber chat!

The full episode is available to paid subscribers. Once you become a paid subscriber, you can connect your account to your preferred podcast player here.

Subscribe now

Democrats need to gain just three seats to take control of the House. But with a favorable national environment opening up opportunities in Republican territory, the bigger question is probably how far they can go and what might limit their gains.

On today’s episode, Cook Political Report’s Erin Covey and Inside Elections’ Jacob Rubashkin join me to tour the House battlefield. They explain what district-level polling reveals about the election, why some traditionally Republican areas are seeing particularly large shifts toward Democrats, and how campaign spending is keeping vulnerable Republicans competitive.

We also debate whether individual candidates can still overcome their party’s political fortunes. From Republican Brian Fitzpatrick’s durability in Pennsylvania to Democrat Jamie Ager’s campaign in western North Carolina, local reputations and issues offer a more complicated picture than national polling alone can provide.

Erin and Jacob also dive into the differences between expert race ratings and statistical forecasts, the campaign messages dominating the airwaves, and the lasting consequences of gerrymandering. And they consider what the size of a Democratic majority would mean for Hakeem Jeffries and governance during the final two years of Trump’s presidency.

Share

Read more

Alex Bores is a Democratic New York State assemblyman and the sponsor of the RAISE Act, which requires major AI developers to publish safety plans and report certain critical incidents. He’s also the co-founder of Who Decides, an organization working to shape Democrats’ AI agenda ahead of 2028.

Subscribe now

On today’s podcast, we discuss what taking these risks seriously actually means. Should the government have to approve AI models before they’re released to the public? Should we pause the development of more powerful AI altogether? And what happens if slowing down rattles the economy or gives China a leg up?

I also press him on why New York Governor Kathy Hochul moved to water down his AI legislation, and what that experience tells us about the obstacles to regulating AI more broadly.

And we get into partisan politics. If Democratic and Republican voters share many concerns about AI, could making it a partisan issue be counterproductive? And either way, how might AI reshape the politics of 2028?

Alex Bores is a Democratic New York State assemblyman and the sponsor of the RAISE Act, which requires major AI developers to publish safety plans and report certain critical incidents. He’s also the co-founder of Who Decides, an organization working to shape Democrats’ AI agenda ahead of 2028.

Subscribe now

On today’s podcast, we discuss what taking these risks seriously actually means. Should the government have to approve AI models before they’re released to the public? Should we pause the development of more powerful AI altogether? And what happens if slowing down rattles the economy or gives China a leg up?

I also press him on why New York Governor Kathy Hochul moved to water down his AI legislation, and what that experience tells us about the obstacles to regulating AI more broadly.

And we get into partisan politics. If Democratic and Republican voters share many concerns about AI, could making it a partisan issue be counterproductive? And either way, how might AI reshape the politics of 2028?

Heads up: The GD POLITICS merch store is back for election season! We’ve got super comfy “Good Data, Bad Data, Not Data” T-shirts, baseball caps, and totes. Paid subscribers can find a discount code in the paid-subscriber chat!

The full episode is available to paid subscribers. Once you become a paid subscriber, you can connect your account to your preferred podcast player here.

Subscribe now

Fights between the Left and the Democratic establishment have been front and center this election cycle, but it’d be a mistake to conclude that it’s mainly Democrats whose looks like a question mark.

Trump has kept an often discordant coalition together through force of personality, but time is running out on that dynamic. He’s term-limited and 20 points underwater with the American public. And his decisions on everything from Iran and the Epstein files to tariffs and AI have created cracks that threaten to break wide open.

JD Vance is the heir apparent, but without Trump, will he be able to keep it all together? And beyond a personal brand, is there a worldview that can unite Republicans?

Before Trump, there was the three-legged stool of free markets, traditional values, and national security hawkishness. In the Trump era, philosophies like America First, national conservatism, and common good conservatism have been bandied about under the umbrella of the “New Right.”

Amid it all, it seems like there’s no going back to the principles that guided the GOP during the second half of the 20th century. But if not those principles, then what? And how fierce will the fight be?

That’s what I’m talking about today with Stephanie Slade, a senior editor at the libertarian magazine Reason and the author of the new book Fusionism: Liberty, Virtue, and the Future of the American Right.

Share

Read more

Heads up: The GD POLITICS merch store is back for election season! We’ve got super comfy “Good Data, Bad Data, Not Data” T-shirts, baseball caps, and totes. Paid subscribers can find a discount code in the paid-subscriber chat!

The full episode is available to paid subscribers. Once you become a paid subscriber, you can connect your account to your preferred podcast player here.

Subscribe now

Fights between the Left and the Democratic establishment have been front and center this election cycle, but it’d be a mistake to conclude that it’s mainly Democrats whose looks like a question mark.

Trump has kept an often discordant coalition together through force of personality, but time is running out on that dynamic. He’s term-limited and 20 points underwater with the American public. And his decisions on everything from Iran and the Epstein files to tariffs and AI have created cracks that threaten to break wide open.

JD Vance is the heir apparent, but without Trump, will he be able to keep it all together? And beyond a personal brand, is there a worldview that can unite Republicans?

Before Trump, there was the three-legged stool of free markets, traditional values, and national security hawkishness. In the Trump era, philosophies like America First, national conservatism, and common good conservatism have been bandied about under the umbrella of the “New Right.”

Amid it all, it seems like there’s no going back to the principles that guided the GOP during the second half of the 20th century. But if not those principles, then what? And how fierce will the fight be?

That’s what I’m talking about today with Stephanie Slade, a senior editor at the libertarian magazine Reason and the author of the new book Fusionism: Liberty, Virtue, and the Future of the American Right.

Share

Read more

Subscribe now

What’s the next swing state: Texas, Kansas or Minnesota? And how much should we trust the polls pointing toward a big blue wave this November?

and joined me for our first GD POLITICS paid-subscriber happy hour to debate the changing electoral map and answer your questions about the midterms. We covered everything from the Senate battlegrounds, to whether campaign ads can backfire, and when we might know who controls Congress.

We also took a few detours into bourbon spreadsheets, Brené Brown, politician crushes and life after FiveThirtyEight. It was a lot of fun catching up with friends and spending the evening with you all!

Share

Read more

Tonight is the night! Mary Radcliffe, Nathaniel Rakich and I will be live on Substack starting at 8pm ET, adult beverages in hand and ready to answer your questions.

There are just four weeks left until Election Day, and we’ve got lots to dish about —from the latest New York Times/Siena College polling and the races we’re watching most closely to feuding election analysts and much more.

So grab a drink and your questions, and join us for a special paid subscriber happy hour at gdpolitics.com at 8pm ET. See you there!

Subscribe now

Heads up: We’re hosting our first-ever virtual happy hour for paid subscribers on Tuesday, October 6, at 8 p.m. ET at gdpolitics.com. Special guests Mary Radcliffe and Nathaniel Rakich will join me to answer your questions live while we sip an adult beverage or two. To join the fun, become a paid subscriber here. I look forward to seeing you there!

Subscribe now

The audio-only version of this episode is here and wherever you listen to podcasts.

Today, we’re talking about socialism. Democrats are heading into the 2026 midterms after a “hot socialist summer,” in which Democratic Socialists and DSA-aligned candidates had their best primary season since Bernie Sanders popularized the organization in 2016.

There are two DSA members in the House today: Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Rashida Tlaib. At the start of the next Congress, there could be seven.

They’ve also won state and local primaries. And there are roughly a dozen other candidates — including Abdul El-Sayed in Michigan, Troy Jackson in Maine, and Brad Lander in New York — who are not Democratic Socialists in name but are strongly aligned with the movement.

It’s not quite the 45 Tea Party-backed congressional candidates who won in the 2010 midterms, but the dynamic isn’t so different: An insurgent ideological movement, fed up with the status quo, is challenging the powers that be in one of America’s two major parties.

So where did the movement come from? What does it want? And can it coexist with the rest of the Democratic Party, or is it seeking a MAGA-style takeover?

In this episode, I dig into these questions and more with Charles Homans, a national politics reporter for The New York Times Magazine. He recently reported the article “Moderates See Socialists as a Threat to the Democratic Party. Socialists Agree,” for which he spoke with DSA candidates, organizers, and members in New York, Chicago, Michigan, and Wisconsin.

Heads up: We’re hosting our first-ever virtual happy hour for paid subscribers on Tuesday, October 6, at 8 p.m. ET at gdpolitics.com. Special guests Mary Radcliffe and Nathaniel Rakich will join me to answer your questions live while we sip an adult beverage or two. To join the fun, become a paid subscriber here. I look forward to seeing you there!

Subscribe now

Today, we’re talking about socialism. Democrats are heading into the 2026 midterms after a “hot socialist summer,” in which Democratic Socialists and DSA-aligned candidates had their best primary season since Bernie Sanders popularized the organization in 2016.

There are two DSA members in the House today: Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Rashida Tlaib. At the start of the next Congress, there could be seven.

They’ve also won state and local primaries. And there are roughly a dozen other candidates — including Abdul El-Sayed in Michigan, Troy Jackson in Maine, and Brad Lander in New York — who are not Democratic Socialists in name but are strongly aligned with the movement.

It’s not quite the 45 Tea Party-backed congressional candidates who won in the 2010 midterms, but the dynamic isn’t so different: An insurgent ideological movement, fed up with the status quo, is challenging the powers that be in one of America’s two major parties.

So where did the movement come from? What does it want? And can it coexist with the rest of the Democratic Party, or is it seeking a MAGA-style takeover?

In this episode, I dig into these questions and more with Charles Homans, a national politics reporter for The New York Times Magazine. He recently reported the article “Moderates See Socialists as a Threat to the Democratic Party. Socialists Agree,” for which he spoke with DSA candidates, organizers, and members in New York, Chicago, Michigan, and Wisconsin.

Heads up: We’re hosting our first-ever virtual happy hour for paid subscribers on Tuesday, October 6, at 8 p.m. ET at gdpolitics.com. Special guests Mary Radcliffe and Nathaniel Rakich will join me to answer your questions live while we sip an adult beverage or two. To join the fun, become a paid subscriber here.

Make sure to mark your calendar. I look forward to seeing you there!

The full episode is available to paid subscribers. Once you become a paid subscriber, you can connect your account to your preferred podcast player here.

Subscribe now

Today we’re zooming in on another 2026 battleground state, and this time, fittingly, it’s Alaska. There’s a lot more to this fall’s elections than Mary Peltola’s profanity!

Donald Trump won Alaska by 13 points in 2024. But two years later, Democrats are mounting serious challenges at the top of the ticket.

In the Senate race, Peltola leads Republican incumbent Dan Sullivan by 2.5 points in the polling averages, and Silver Bulletin gives her a 55 percent chance of winning. Their contest is unfolding amid sky-high energy costs, dissatisfaction with the Trump administration, and a fierce debate over Alaska’s fisheries.

The governor’s race is particularly unusual. Candidates are competing to replace term-limited Republican Gov. Mike Dunleavy, and while sparse polling and ranked-choice voting make the race difficult to measure, Silver Bulletin gives Democrat Jonathan Kreiss-Tomkins an 86 percent chance of winning. It would be the first time since 1998 that Alaska elected a Democratic governor. Kreiss-Tomkins is aided by a fractured Republican field and a ranked-choice voting system that voters may repeal this fall.

Meanwhile, Republican Nick Begich has a 90 percent chance of holding Alaska’s lone House seat, suggesting very divergent preferences across three statewide races.

But we’re not just talking about the horse race. Alaska’s political culture doesn’t map neatly onto the usual red-versus-blue divide. More than 60 percent of its voters are not registered with a political party, rural Alaska often votes Democratic, and moderate Republicans regularly govern alongside Democrats. It is the only state where bipartisan coalitions control both chambers of the legislature.

Joining me from Juneau to talk about it all is James Brooks, statehouse and politics reporter for the Alaska Beacon.

Share

Read more

Heads up: We’re hosting our first-ever virtual happy hour for paid subscribers on Tuesday, October 6, at 8 p.m. ET at gdpolitics.com. Special guests Mary Radcliffe and Nathaniel Rakich will join me to answer your questions live while we sip an adult beverage or two. To join the fun, become a paid subscriber here.

Make sure to mark your calendar. I look forward to seeing you there!

The full episode is available to paid subscribers. Once you become a paid subscriber, you can connect your account to your preferred podcast player here.

Subscribe now

Today we’re zooming in on another 2026 battleground state, and this time, fittingly, it’s Alaska. There’s a lot more to this fall’s elections than Mary Peltola’s profanity!

Donald Trump won Alaska by 13 points in 2024. But two years later, Democrats are mounting serious challenges at the top of the ticket.

In the Senate race, Peltola leads Republican incumbent Dan Sullivan by 2.5 points in the polling averages, and Silver Bulletin gives her a 55 percent chance of winning. Their contest is unfolding amid sky-high energy costs, dissatisfaction with the Trump administration, and a fierce debate over Alaska’s fisheries.

The governor’s race is particularly unusual. Candidates are competing to replace term-limited Republican Gov. Mike Dunleavy, and while sparse polling and ranked-choice voting make the race difficult to measure, Silver Bulletin gives Democrat Jonathan Kreiss-Tomkins an 86 percent chance of winning. It would be the first time since 1998 that Alaska elected a Democratic governor. Kreiss-Tomkins is aided by a fractured Republican field and a ranked-choice voting system that voters may repeal this fall.

Meanwhile, Republican Nick Begich has a 90 percent chance of holding Alaska’s lone House seat, suggesting very divergent preferences across three statewide races.

But we’re not just talking about the horse race. Alaska’s political culture doesn’t map neatly onto the usual red-versus-blue divide. More than 60 percent of its voters are not registered with a political party, rural Alaska often votes Democratic, and moderate Republicans regularly govern alongside Democrats. It is the only state where bipartisan coalitions control both chambers of the legislature.

Joining me from Juneau to talk about it all is James Brooks, statehouse and politics reporter for the Alaska Beacon.

Share

Read more

Heads up: We’re hosting our first-ever virtual happy hour for paid subscribers on Tuesday, October 6, at 8 p.m. ET at gdpolitics.com. Special guests and will join me to answer your questions live while we sip an adult beverage or two. To join the fun, become a paid subscriber here.

Make sure to mark your calendar. I look forward to seeing you there!

Subscribe now

The audio-only version of this episode is here and wherever you listen to podcasts.

Today we have a sneak preview for you all. Dear listeners, you are the first to hear the results of friend of the pod Lakshya Jain’s latest polling for .

Democrats lead by 6 points among registered voters and 9 points among likely voters. That advantage is broadly in line with the polling averages and, if accurate, would amount to a wave on par with the 2006 election.

Lakshya estimates that roughly 70 percent of Democrats’ gains come from voters switching their support between 2024 and 2026, while 30 percent come from turnout — Trump voters staying home as Harris voters continue to show up.

That raises the question nagging pollsters and election watchers alike: If the polls are wrong this cycle, where are they going astray?

Lakshya’s biggest concern is that Trump voters who answer polls may be more willing to defect than otherwise similar Trump voters who don’t respond. That kind of nonresponse bias can’t necessarily be corrected by weighting a poll to reflect the right demographic or partisan mix. It could be particularly consequential in states with large populations of white voters without college degrees, such as Iowa and Ohio.

We also dig into the issues shaping the election. The economy remains voters’ top concern, but corruption now slightly outranks immigration. And The Argument’s foreign policy polling finds an electorate deeply skeptical of military intervention, with the war in Iran even less popular than the war in Iraq.

Joining me to talk about all that and much more is , head of political data at The Argument and founder of Split Ticket.

Heads up: We’re hosting our first-ever virtual happy hour for paid subscribers on Tuesday, October 6, at 8 p.m. ET at gdpolitics.com. Special guests and will join me to answer your questions live while we sip an adult beverage or two. To join the fun, become a paid subscriber here.

Make sure to mark your calendar. I look forward to seeing you there!

Subscribe now

Today we have a sneak preview for you all. Dear listeners, you are the first to hear the results of friend of the pod Lakshya Jain’s latest polling for .

Democrats lead by 6 points among registered voters and 9 points among likely voters. That advantage is broadly in line with the polling averages and, if accurate, would amount to a wave on par with the 2006 election.

Lakshya estimates that roughly 70 percent of Democrats’ gains come from voters switching their support between 2024 and 2026, while 30 percent come from turnout — Trump voters staying home as Harris voters continue to show up.

That raises the question nagging pollsters and election watchers alike: If the polls are wrong this cycle, where are they going astray?

Lakshya’s biggest concern is that Trump voters who answer polls may be more willing to defect than otherwise similar Trump voters who don’t respond. That kind of nonresponse bias can’t necessarily be corrected by weighting a poll to reflect the right demographic or partisan mix. It could be particularly consequential in states with large populations of white voters without college degrees, such as Iowa and Ohio.

We also dig into the issues shaping the election. The economy remains voters’ top concern, but corruption now slightly outranks immigration. And The Argument’s foreign policy polling finds an electorate deeply skeptical of military intervention, with the war in Iran even less popular than the war in Iraq.

Joining me to talk about all that and much more is , head of political data at The Argument and founder of Split Ticket.

Subscribe now

We have so much to get to on today’s episode!

We are long overdue to answer your burning electoral questions. You wanted to know about the state of the Senate race in South Carolina, whether President Trump’s approval rating has reached its floor, whether candidates are debating less, and much more.

We’re also going to do something we haven’t done in a minute: rank the competitive Senate seats by how likely they are to flip in November. To help with that endeavor, we just got new statewide polling from The New York Times in Maine, Michigan, and New Hampshire. We’ll size up the polls showing Susan Collins ahead in Maine and Abdul El-Sayed ahead in Michigan.

That probably would have been enough for one episode, but on Wednesday night, The New York Times published a report about Mary Peltola’s alleged behind-the-scenes behavior on the campaign trail and in her congressional office. TL;DR: The report says she makes really bitchy comments in private despite her affable public persona. The more serious allegation is that she shoved a staffer, which her campaign disputes.

Joining me to discuss it all are Mary Radcliffe, head of research at FiftyPlusOne, and Lenny Bronner, head of the data outfit Broome Street Labs.

For those who want a visual aid during our Senate-seat flippability ranking segment, I’m dropping Mary and Lenny’s rankings below the paywall:

Read more

Subscribe now

We have so much to get to on today’s episode!

We are long overdue to answer your burning electoral questions. You wanted to know about the state of the Senate race in South Carolina, whether President Trump’s approval rating has reached its floor, whether candidates are debating less, and much more.

We’re also going to do something we haven’t done in a minute: rank the competitive Senate seats by how likely they are to flip in November. To help with that endeavor, we just got new statewide polling from The New York Times in Maine, Michigan, and New Hampshire. We’ll size up the polls showing Susan Collins ahead in Maine and Abdul El-Sayed ahead in Michigan.

That probably would have been enough for one episode, but on Wednesday night, The New York Times published a report about Mary Peltola’s alleged behind-the-scenes behavior on the campaign trail and in her congressional office. TL;DR: The report says she makes really bitchy comments in private despite her affable public persona. The more serious allegation is that she shoved a staffer, which her campaign disputes.

Joining me to discuss it all are , head of research at FiftyPlusOne, and , head of the data outfit Broome Street Labs.

For those who want a visual aid during our Senate-seat flippability ranking segment, I’m dropping Mary and Lenny’s rankings below the paywall:

Read more