Loading summary
Transcript106 lines
- [00:00]
A
Hey there, listeners. I wanted to remind everyone before we get started about our live show on election eve. That's Monday, November 3rd at the Comedy Cellar in New York City. It's with Nate Silver and Claire Malone, FiveThirtyEight greats. And we'll have final thoughts on the contests in New Jersey, Virginia, California, and of course, New York City. It's sure to be rowdy. And we've still got some tickets left. You can snag them@gdpolitics.com I'll also drop a link in the show notes. Looking forward to seeing you there. All right, here's the show. I forgot a really important topic. George Santos, AKA Kataro, Revach or Revache.
- [00:41]
B
Is he out?
- [00:42]
A
Yeah, he's out. He got pardoned. Right.
- [00:44]
B
But is he like. He's out. Like, it's immediate. He's out in the world. Okay.
- [00:47]
A
Are we running for Congress again?
- [00:49]
B
Talk show, talk show, talk show. What else is. It's gotta be talk show.
- [00:55]
A
Which network?
- [00:58]
B
I don't want to say because I'm afraid you're going to use this.
- [01:13]
A
Hello and welcome to the GD Politics Podcast. I'm Galen Druke and we have a lot to discuss. Maine Democrats have themselves a primary contest between the current governor, Janet Mills and a former Marine and oysterman, Graham Platner in their bid to oust Senator Susan Collins next year. On its face, it looks like a battle for the soul of the party, though Platner's resurfaced comments on Reddit could disrupt his momentum. We're also going to take a look at what's at stake in the Voting Rights act case the Supreme Court heard last week. Nate Cohn at the New York Times is calling it the case that could hand the House to Republicans. And we'll get some updates on the 2025 elections. Just two weeks away. It's debate season. We've now had gubernatorial debates in Virginia and New Jersey and a meme generating mayoral debate in New York City. Think parade politics, bodega orders, and New Yorker's favorite kind of virtue signaling subway ridership. Here with me to discuss it all is reporter at the Associated Press, Leah Scarna. When of the podcast.
- [02:12]
B
Leah, hello.
- [02:14]
A
Thank you so much for being here. It's great to. It's great to have you.
- [02:16]
B
It's so great to be here with. With both of you.
- [02:19]
A
Yes. And both referring to chief elections analyst at decision desk hq, Jeffrey Skelly. Welcome to the podcast, Jeffrey.
- [02:27]
C
Hey, Galen. Thanks for having me on.
- [02:29]
A
It's a pleasure. Are you guys ready for this Elections bonanza we have today. There's so much going on.
- [02:33]
C
You know, it's an off year, but it's not really, you know, there's never an off year. That's a lot.
- [02:39]
A
It never stops. It never stops. Okay, let's begin with Maine. It's the only state that Harris won in which Republicans are defending a Senate seat in 2026 and Democrats are eager to oust Susan Collins. Graham Platner, the oysterman and former Marine that I mentioned, has gotten plenty of attention online and he's raised more than $4 million. He's also been endorsed by Bernie Sanders and has the support of progressives generally. Janet Mills is a two term governor who has a long history as a politician in the state. And establishment Democrats have been working to recruit her into the race. She formally got in last week. So we'll talk about some of the drama that unfolded towards the end of last week. But let's set aside who runs against Susan Collins for a second. In a more abstract sense, how vulnerable is Collins in 2026?
- [03:29]
B
She, she's vulnerable. Two things can be true. She's vulnerable and never count out Susan Collins. It's a tough time to be running as a Republican statewide in Maine. In her last election, she won by like almost 9 points but had 51% of the vote in a ranked choice contest. So that 50% mark is huge. Once you get over that 50% mark, ranked choice voting is no longer applied. And so that does, you know, a nine point margin nearly over the next Democrat, but you know, closer to 1% over the ranked choice voting threshold in a state that the Democrats have carried on the presidential ticket for years. But also it's Susan Collins. We had a very similar conversation in 2020 and she went on to win pretty comfortably. So it's definitely going to be one that like we're watching until the very end, you know, like I don't this, I, I would be surprised if this race fizzles out before November of 2026.
- [04:34]
C
Yeah, I think Collins is definitely endangered. There's been polling on her approval rating or favorability rating that has shown her in negative territory among voters in Maine. And I think it's important to note that, you know, in 2024 we did see some, a handful of split ticket results for Senate and President. You know, for example, Ruben Gallego, Democrat, won in Arizona Senate race even as Donald Trump was carrying the the state and the presidential race. Alyssa Slotkin, a Democrat in Michigan did that as well while Trump was winning Michigan. But I think just Generally speaking, all those were very close states where it was possible to get a split ticket outcome. I think if you're thinking about Maine, a state that was more Democratic leaning than by. By some distance than in those states I was just talking about, Kamala Harris won it by about 7 percentage points. And that, that historically is definitely in the territory of a seat that the opposition party in a midterm can target and successfully flip. In fact. So going back to 1994, there have been 23 cases where the president's party was defending a Senate seat that leaned at least five points toward the opposition party. So Maine would qualify as one of those. And 14 of the 23 cases, so a little less than two out of three, the presidential party lost the seat. So that's to say that like, Collins could definitely be one of those that survives in that category. But I think it speaks to the fact that for the opposition party, this is the kind of seat that they kind of have to win in a midterm environment. Because if they don't, well, for one thing, Democrats have to have Maine or they're not gonna have any path to, even if they have a slim path as it is, to winning a Senate majority. So you can expect tons of money, tons of attention on that race. And I think for Democrats, at the end of the day, getting a two term governor who has won statewide is a pretty good recruit. That's Janet Mills. There are questions though, because of her age and what's going on with the Democratic primary, but it's clearly one of the top tier races in the 2026 cycle.
- [06:50]
A
Yeah. So Janet Mills would be 79 upon being sworn in. That would make her the oldest freshman senator in American history. But Democrats have been working very hard to recruit her. You mentioned, I mean, Chuck Schumer most of all. And so I'm curious why national Democrats have been lobbying so hard to get Janet Mills in the race in an electoral cycle that is already a bit about generational change and this idea that the Democratic Party is too old and perhaps maybe even too establishment.
- [07:22]
B
It's a good question. And actually a lot of I've been getting this question over the last couple weeks, especially cause of the main Senate race. Just like, what is it about somebody like Janet Mills that's so appealing to D.C. democrats who are looking for a strong recruit? And it's hard to kind of put your finger on one specific factor. But I think we'll get more into this, I'm sure, in a moment. But she's one statewide like Jeff, just mentioned. And with somebody who's been around this long in public office, I think there's just less room for major surprises. Candidates flaws are usually pretty well known. So people who are looking at comparing a Janet Mills at this point to a potential Graham Platner as of a couple weeks ago, had just way more information about Janet Mills, including the negative. And we've seen Democrats get burnt by that before. I'm thinking of the North Carolina senate race in 2020.
- [08:29]
C
Cal Cunningham yeah.
- [08:31]
B
Yep. That last minute, which again, you know, it's debatable whether that would have changed the outcome. Trump still won North Carolina. I think it would have been really hard for a Democrat. All that's to say, I think it's if Democrats are banking on the national environment to carry them, opposition to Trump or whatever's happening with the economy and all that, the safer option is somebody who they know well, but you end up making sacrifices with that kind of thing. And like you said, would be the oldest senator ever. Is that right?
- [09:05]
C
Oldest first term senator. Yeah, yeah, yeah.
- [09:09]
B
And we don't know how much age is going to be a factor in this election. And I don't think we have anything to compare it to nationally because we are in the aftermath of Joe Biden's presidency and the aftermath of Joe Biden withdrawing from the race and aftermath of that debate that made people question his ability to be in office at his age. Something that opened doors, I think, to arguments that maybe had been kind of like back of mind for some members or. Yeah. Like voters think that, you know, they'd like Congress to be younger, but not my congressman. Right. Like I like my congressman. And is that going to continue after the Biden presidency and that Trump Biden debate specifically? And I have no idea. I'm just throwing it out there.
- [10:00]
C
So I think for Democrats in Maine, the most obvious name to pop up for this race would have been Democratic Representative Jared Goldin, who represents the 2nd congressional district in northern Maine.
- [10:13]
B
Great point.
- [10:14]
C
But a couple reasons why golden didn't end up being that candidate. For one thing, he has a past relationship with Susan Collins. He was once a staffer for her.
- [10:24]
A
For a second I was like, oh, like a romantic relationship?
- [10:27]
C
No, no, no. In the sense that they, I don't.
- [10:29]
A
Think he had a romantic relationship with Susan Collins.
- [10:31]
C
No, no. This is more like, you know, he had a professional relationship, has said lots of nice things about Susan Collins over the years. And so golden would have made a lot of sense. He's, he's won in a, he's won since 2018, in a district that Donald Trump has continued to carry routinely, not overwhelmingly, but it's the most Republican leaning seat that Democrats now hold in the House based on the 2024 presidential vote. I think he won. I think Trump won it by like nine in 2024. So golden is one on tough turf. And now Maine is as a whole is more Democratic leaning than golden seat, which actually would make it better, potentially a little attractive to him because he might not have to work quite as hard to win it, plus six year terms instead of every two years. But I think with that, that past connection with Collins and then the fact that he also might have had issues in a primary, because he's actually got a primary challenge now in his House race because some Democrats are unhappy with him and think he's been too conservative or too moderate. And so it's not like he wouldn't have potentially had his own issues in a, in a primary. But I do think he would have been a very strong statewide candidate, but he's not running. So for Democrats looking around in Maine, Maine doesn't have a lot of statewide elected officers. In fact, I think they just have governor, if I'm not mistaken. I mean, I mean, at the state level, because their Secretary of State is appointed, their Attorney General's appointed. That's Janet Mills was Attorney General appointed by the legislature. That means that in the realm of people who've really proven themselves in a statewide election, you've got governor really to work with. And so Janet Mills sitting there is an obvious choice, having won twice now and rather comfortably in 2022. So she stands out. And, you know, you could have looked at someone like Shelley Pingree, who's the congresswoman from the First District. She's been there a long time, probably doesn't want to. She's got a safe seat. Probably didn't want to risk it. The flip side of this is that Democrats actually have a number of candidates running for governor in the open seat race to succeed Mills. And some of those candidates might have made perfectly fine Senate candidates, including Shelley Pingree's daughter, Hannah Pingree, who's a former state speaker of the House, but all those. Or Shana Bellows, who runs the voting stuff in Maine, but these. Yeah, Secretary of State. So there are all these, these candidates who are running for governor who could have conceivably run for Senate, but running as Collins is tough, whereas you got an open seat race for governor. So all these things kind of come together to put Maine Democrats in a position where they get Some, they get a few candidates kind of out of left field who no one's going to be immediately familiar with. And then there's Mills looming over it as this much better known option. So I can see why they, they turned to her and really wanted her to run because she was kind of their best option remaining.
- [13:28]
B
And just one more point on the recruitment thing. The Shelley Pingree point, I think is also so interesting because she's tried this 2002, she lost to Susan Collins. Yep. So, like, I think it's really hard to recruit somebody to run against her considering she basically won like every single one of her reelection races up until this most recent one by double digits. Like, she has been formidable in a way that I think is really hard to compare to any other. Honestly, incumbent senator. I was about to say Republican incumbent, but I think just incumbent in general at this point.
- [14:02]
C
Yeah, I mean, I think it is worth mentioning that she has never had to run in a bad midterm environment for her party.
- [14:08]
B
Yep.
- [14:08]
C
You know, she was first elected in 1996, so she's seeking her sixth term, but she'd be the longest serving senator in Maine's history if she wins. She won in 1996 in a close race. She won re election in 2002. But that was an unusually good midterm for the President's party. You know, George W. Bush's approval rating was in like the mid-60s. And then she, she did win. Now when I say that she won in 2008 and 2020 while Democrats were winning president at the presidential level. So in presidential races, she has managed to win with a lot of split ticket voters. But in 2014, she, you know, it was a Republican mid, you know, favorable midterm because Barack Obama was the White House. So this is the first midterm she's had to run in with a Republican president who's not terribly popular. So that will be, I think, an interesting test for her.
- [14:54]
A
Graham Platner serves as something of a foil then to both Susan Collins and Janet Mills. In this instance, he's very much a political neophyte. He is a populist. Whereas Janet Mills and Susan Collins may be more sort of like staid and steady, moderate institutionalists, former Marine, current oysterman. And up until the end of last week, and maybe still is the case, this appeared to be headed towards a sort of battle for the soul of the Democratic Party, where you have two very different visions. And you know, Graham Platner, as I said, endorsed by Bernie Sanders and other progressives, whereas Janet Mills pursued by Chuck Schumer and the likes. At the end of last week, there was reporting first from CNN about past comments that he's made on Reddit. Graham Platner, that is. And it's a range of comments that are enough to upset kind of the full range of the political spectrum, starting with racially and sexually insensitive things. Like he said, like, why don't black people tip and said, you know, that the, the victims of sexual assault should take some responsibility for themselves and not get so effed up that they wind up having sex with somebody they don't mean to. Then he went on to say other things like calling all cops bastards. And in 2018 that he wrote that if people, quote, expect to fight fascism without a good semiautomatic rifle, they ought to do some reading of history. A lot of comments on Reddit when he was about 30, I believe about.
- [16:27]
C
30, or at least, sorry, the 2013 stuff. He was in like his late 20s, early 30s.
- [16:32]
A
So he responded saying, I was just back from tours in Iraq and Afghanistan. I had ptsd, I was depressed. I felt disconnected from social life and community and was upset with a country that had sent me to fight battles that I was decreasingly sure had any merit, and so on and so forth. And he tells a story about how he got right. He moved home to his hometown where he started his business and met his wife and that he is a. Those are not things that he believes anymore. And so I don't think it's resolved yet by any stretch what the consequences of these coming to light will be. But I don't know. Do you think you can still sort of frame this as a, as a fight for the soul of the Democratic Party, given these two different options? Or do you think people say, okay, screw it, like, we'll go with the safe option then?
- [17:26]
C
I mean, I think Mills was going to be tough to beat from the get go. I mean, think about the people who vote in a primary. They tend to be older. They tend to look more like Janet Mills. Older women are going to make up, you know, a majority of primary electorate on the Democratic side. And, you know, for that, you know, that to me.
- [17:47]
A
And Maine is the oldest state in the country, by the way.
- [17:49]
C
Yes, Maine has the oldest average age in the country. So what I'm saying is if there were a place to, you know, set a new record for oldest senator, Maine would make a lot of sense. I also think Mills has already maybe taken a little bit, potentially at least taken the age thing down a notch because she Says, look, I'm not running for another term after this. That's not like a hard and fast promise, it seems like, but she's basically just like, I can't imagine running again.
- [18:16]
A
If I had a nickel every time I heard that, I'd have two. Which is not a lot of money, but kind of weird.
- [18:21]
C
But, you know, for what it's worth, Joe Biden never explicitly said it that explicitly when he talked about, oh, I'll be a bridge or whatever. She didn't say that. She didn't. She was just like, I can't imagine running for another term after this.
- [18:33]
A
A bridge to nowhere. Let's take it back to 2008. Okay, so game change. So you seem skeptical from the outset, Leah. Do you think this race is over now?
- [18:45]
B
Oh, I don't think we can know that. There's no way to know that. He's still a strong fundraiser. He still, you know, has an endorsement from, like, Bernie Sanders. I don't think we've seen. I think it's like we start seeing high profile endorsers start walking away from him. That's usually a sign of a dwindling campaign. So that's something to keep an eye out for if his backers stay with him. You know, I think he's running, he has money. Like, that's what it takes to run in a competitive race. And I agree with what Jeff said about how it was already going to be really tough to take out Mills in a primary. Just considering her, the demographics of the state and the fact that she's, you.
- [19:28]
C
Know, the governor at the moment, like, reasonably popular. You know, she's not like, yeah, this is not like an unpopular governor.
- [19:35]
A
Right.
- [19:35]
B
And I do wonder if Democrats are going into this, Democratic primary voters, are they going into this strategically? As in, like, who do we think Mainers will more likely vote for? Platner or Collins. Right. Or Mills or Collins. If they're thinking about it that way, then these kinds of missteps from a challenger aren't going to help make the case that he's, you know, the, the candidate more likely to defeat Colin. So I think, like, these things kind of add up. We've seen, you know, kind of one report, he'd seen multiple comments, but one report at this point, it's worth watching the fallout. But also, let's not inflate his strength before this incident because I'm not saying he wasn't strong. He still clearly was a formidable fundraiser. And like I said, this year, I don't know if people are going to want to vote for, you know, the oldest senator ever. But Shannon Mills is still the governor. I think she always had a real advantage.
- [20:41]
A
Yeah. To your point about that and the question of, are Democrats still in this electability mindset where they're like, we just want to out of the primary, pick whoever is likeliest to defeat the Republican, and we don't care that much about ideology or message or what have you. I mean, I think that's a big question. It seems like according to the polling, Democrats have become more interested in, you know, let's support the person whose policies we support, electability be damned. But this will be a test of that. In some sense. There is limited polling on how Mills compares to Collins vs. Platner compares to Collins, and it was conducted before the reports that I mentioned on his Reddit comments. So take this all with a grain of salt, but I this gets us to a mini good data, bad data or not data. So Zenith Research conducted a poll where they asked Mainers who they would support in the general. So in the matchup between Graham Platner and Susan Collins, it's a tie at 38% support for each Janet Mills versus Susan Collins. Mills leads Collins by five points. So 42% to 37%. However, they take this a step further and this is where the good data, bad data or not data question comes in. And, and they read biographies of Graham Platner and Janet Mills to the respondents and then ask them again and they're calling this an informed response. And I should say what I know about the organization is that Zenith Research is more progressively aligned. This was conducted alongside more Perfect Union, which is also more progressively aligned. But nonetheless, these are the biographies that they read. They said Graham Platner is a Marine and army veteran, oyster farmer and working class Mainer running to take on the political establishment and the oligarchy. Raised in a blue collar family, he's seen how career politicians and corporate elites rig the system against ordinary people. Platner is fighting to give working Mainers a real voice, take power back from billionaires, and rebuild an economy that puts people before profit. Okay, so I read that one first and I was like, oh, are they going to be like, oh, Graham Platner is amazing. And like Janet Mills is awful. They give Janet Mills kind of a fair shake here. So like, I guess we shouldn't smirk too much, you know, off the bat. But they say Janet Mills, Maine's first female governor and former attorney general, is known for her steady results, driven leadership and deep commitment to the state. She Calls home. She's strengthened Maine's economy, expanded affordable health care, protected reproductive rights, and invested in education, infrastructure, and clean energy. Always putting practical solutions and Mainers first. Okay, so then they ask again, who do you support, Collins or Platner? Collins or Mills? In this case, Platner leads Collins by 14 points and Mills leads Collins by eight points and more. Perfect Union concludes after this that Platner is better prepared to take on Susan Collins in 2026. Is this good data, bad data, or not data?
- [23:37]
B
I mean, I think we're gonna have the same answer.
- [23:39]
A
Go for it, Leah, you go first.
- [23:42]
B
The informed ballot, for our purposes, bad data. If you are running a campaign and you are trying to figure out your messaging, that's a great question to ask. You know, like, do people, are they more likely to support Platner when they use people over politics? Like, is that like a, is that a strong alliterative message to get out there? And does it, you know, help? Does anyone care that, you know, Janet Mills is the first female governor? But also, an informed ballot on Janet Mills is kind of like, you can't really compare those two. Like, people know who Janet Mills is in Maine according to their own data in that same poll. So people have already kind of know what they think about Janet Mills. They are going into this question with Platner maybe not knowing as much and basically knowing exclusively what's on the informed ballots. So I think it could be a helpful question for strategy, but not for like, like, don't use this as like a head to head. Like, oh, and this is what's going to happen. Like, don't, don't use this as a crystal ball, obviously.
- [24:50]
A
Yeah, My issue, similar to you, Leah, in terms of if we're gonna call it an informed ballot, I think we also have to take it from the other side. So we've only informed respondents here about the positives, but Susan Collins has like $12 million. She's going to be able to, quote, unquote, inform the public about the negatives of both of these candidates as well. And so if you want a realistic picture of, you know, what Maynard's opinions will look like after a campaign has been waged. And Platner has been able to say his piece, Mills has been able to say his piece, and Collins has been able to say her piece. You need the negatives as well. You can't just give the positives. And so this is like a semi informed ballot. I mean, I think, like, I think it's interesting, but I do think it's somewhat motivated by the ideology of the folks, perhaps. I mean, whatever. I don't think that was like a totally lopsided, unfair biography where it wasn't saying like, Graham Platner's Superman and Janet Mills, like, killed somebody. I mean, you know, whatever, like. But neither of those things are true. Just for the record, Jeffrey, do you have anything, anything to add here? Would you go so far as to say it's not data?
- [25:53]
C
Well, I think it is data in the sense that to Leah's point, it is potentially helpful information for the Platner campaign, like the kind of message that they want to push when talking about his candidacy. But I don't think it's particularly meaningful at all when it comes to thinking about the actual general election result in November 2026. So again, I think it has. This is the kind of thing that campaigns, as Leah was saying, pull for. They want to test messaging. They want to test like, what issues people care about the most, test how wording and phrasing of those messages affect people's responses. But that's not the same thing as finding out who's actually a stronger candidate in, you know, especially in what, October of the year before the election. I just don't think it's, you know, that's, that would be bad data to use that as evidence.
- [26:49]
B
It would be hard to use like take any poll that's a head to head of this race over a year out and call it good data. Just like to be clear, like, this is a lot of this is also timing.
- [27:01]
A
Yeah.
- [27:01]
C
Cause like, what if Trump's approval rating is like 40% or 38% or something come fall 2026, it may not matter which of these two candidates is the nominee for the Democrats. And Collins may have actually decided in like March, right before the filing deadline to retire pull like kind of an Olympia Snow did in 2012 when she unexpectedly retired instead of seeking reelection, the seat that Angus King now holds. So, you know, there's still room for like, things to, to change and affect how political actors behave. And so, yeah, I mean, there's a.
- [27:36]
B
Lot of time I'm having a little deja vu here. I believe there was a podcast where I was, I think it was me and Jeff where we were discussing the likelihood of a Biden Trump general election ballot. And we were like, we don't find that, don't look that up. Like put that, that's gone.
- [27:58]
C
But like we probably said, yeah, it's obviously the most likely thing to happen because it was the most likely thing.
- [28:04]
B
It was. It was.
- [28:06]
C
And then something unlikely happened.
- [28:07]
B
And then something happens. It's just this is like beyond political analysis. Isn't just like human being, you know, universe vibes.
- [28:16]
A
Like, you know, this is the happens segment of the Genie Politics podcast where we talk about unknown unknowns. We used to play that a little bit where we talk about, like, what are the known unknowns? What are the known knowns. We'll, we'll save that for another time. I was also hoping we might get to the primary race in Texas for Cornyn's seat, but I don't think we have time if we want to get to everything else we want to do. But I do just want to mention, like, you feel like it's, well, it is an off year in the election cycle, but the Texas primary is just five months away. Uh, so less than five months away. So get ready folks, cause we got more elections coming. But let's turn to the VRA case at the Supreme Court right after this break. Today's podcast is brought to you by you, the listeners. Without paid subscribers, GD Politics wouldn't be possible. Your support means we can continue making an independent podcast guided by curiosity, rigor, and a sense of humor. We're quickly approaching the first election day since 2011, when I was a senior in college. The that I haven't covered from the cocoon of a mainstream newsroom. And I couldn't be more thrilled about it. So thank you for making that possible. And to anyone considering subscribing, head over to GDPolitics.com and join the community. Today you get about twice the number of episodes. You can join the paid subscriber chat and ask questions that we'll discuss on the show. And you can connect your personal feed to your favorite podcast player. So you get every episode paid and unpaid with wherever you listen to podcasts. That's@gdpolitics.com See you there. Section 2 of the Voting Rights act appears to be up for review at the Supreme Court this term, and justices heard oral arguments last week. So Section two has been interpreted to mean that in places where there is racially polarized voting and minority voters are numerous enough to create a majority minority district, states are compelled to do so. That means across the south, there are districts specifically drawn to help black voters elect their candidates of choice. Without that interpretation of Section two, those districts could cease to exist in many states, with significant consequences for black representation in the House and also for Democrats in general. So there's a bit of a saga in terms of how this case arrived before The Supreme Court in this term, specifically, because it was before the court last term to begin with. Jeffrey, can we do a real sort of like Spark notes version of the backstory of this Louisiana case?
- [30:44]
C
The Louisiana case came up actually right after Louisiana installed this map ahead of the 2022 elections. There was a lawsuit about it because they drew one majority minority district, which is what they would. They had had for about two decades in Louisiana, two and a half decades. And so they. The. The challenge was pushed beyond the 2022 midterms into the. The sort of period before the 2024 election. And eventually federal court ruled Louisiana is about one third black in its population. And that means, yes, the state needs a second majority minority district or a second district that gives black voters the opportunity to elect a candidate of their choice. Because currently, or at the time, Louisiana had one majority black seat, and the state has six districts, so that was less than one third of the seats. So they now have two majority black districts. And the second one was drawn, though, in a way that that's not really that compact. It stretches from down kind of west of, well, Baton Rouge, basically all the way diagonally across the state up to Shreveport in the northwest corner of the state. And the way that the district was drawn is actually similar to a district that was thrown out in the 1990s in Louisiana for being a racial gerrymander. And so this court case has arisen. I should note that they could have drawn a more compact majority minority district, but it would have threatened Republicans. Could have, but it would have threatened Julia Letlow instead of Garrett Graves. And they liked Julia Letlow and they wanted her to keep her seat. So they targeted Graves seat instead, which is how you end up with this diagonal seat instead of a more compact majority black seat in Louisiana. But the end result was that some voters in that district sued, saying, hey, this is like a racial gerrymander. And essentially what is. What the Supreme Court is now discussing is whether the Constitution actually whether. Whether the Voting Rights act is sort of Section 2 is out of date. You know, should there be a time limit on how long this. Something like this lasts? And if so, maybe it, you know, should no longer have application. And if Section two no longer had application. To your point, Galen, a number of states that have majority black districts or have very plurality black districts where black voters are in a position to elect a candidate of their choice in the south, the Deep south, particularly, those districts would almost certainly be destroyed basically in redraws, because those are Democratic leaning seats and Republicans control redistricting. In those states and just for basic partisan reasons. And we know the Supreme Court has ruled that partisan gerrymandering is not justiciable or is not unconstitutional, that they could get rid of those seats and Louisiana would, would go from having 2 to 0 probably, if, if Republicans were pretty aggressive in how they drew a map there, for instance.
- [33:45]
A
So I want to say that the analysis of the Voting Rights act is kind of complicated, right? We, we've been saying it was interpreted to say, which is to say that in the 1960s Voting Rights act, it was not written by Congress, that in a place where there is racially polarized voting and there are enough minority voters to create a majority minority district, that you must do so. That's sort of how the court took what lawmakers wrote and applied it. This is what section two of the Voting Rights act says. So. Well, actually, let's start with section one, because you sort of need that. But section one says no voting qualification or prerequisite to voting or standard practice or procedure shall be imposed or applied by any state or political subdivision in a manner which results in a denial or abridgment of the right of any citizen of the United States to vote on account of race or color or in contravention of the guarantees set forth in section blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, as provided in subsection B. So this is the part of the Voting Rights act that says you cannot do literacy tests, you know, poll taxes, do any of the things that were very common across the south that, you know, abridged black voters right to vote. So then they go on to section 2. A violation of subsection A is established if, based on the totality of circumstances, it is shown that the political processes leading to nomination or election in the state or political subdivision are not equally open to participation by members of a class of citizens protected by subsection A in that its members have less opportunity than other members of the electorate to participate in the political process and to elect representatives of their choice. The extent to which members of a protected class have been elected to office in the state or political subdivision is one circumstance which may be considered provided that nothing in this section establishes a right to have members of a protected class elected in numbers equal to their proportion in the population. Okay, so this is a complicated way of saying, yes, it is a problem. Say if 1/3 of Louisiana is black and there are no black lawmakers. However, you can't also claim proportional representation in the sense that if one third of Louisianans are black, two of the six congressional districts should be Black majority districts or elect black candidates.
- [36:02]
C
So, yeah, really, really. It's important to note that that second district came about because you can draw a district that is not, you know, outrageously drawn. Like, it's relatively. You could draw a relatively compact second majority minority district in Louisiana. You don't have to, you know, stretch it out crazily or anything. So in that sense, it's like that. That's like an important aspect of this where you're not. It's not proportional. It's just considering, like, where do people live? Well, there's a large enough population of minority voters who are affected by this. If we don't draw this in a particular area, that there should be a second district, basically.
- [36:43]
A
There's been a ton of debate over how to interpret this, what this means. When we are back at FiveThirtyEight did a whole series on gerrymandering, where we did episodes dedicated to the Voting Rights Act. So that's what it says. I think a lot of court watchers in this moment are saying that the Supreme Court is seriously considering doing away with it, whittling it down significantly, creating some sort of sunset date. I'm curious, Leah, why it is that the sort of court watchers seem confident that the court has it out for Section two.
- [37:18]
B
If you actually listen to the hearings themselves, the tone from the justices generally considered conservative does seem to be questioning, you know, whether or not this is something that needs to be in place in this year, in 2025. You know, is this a problem that was in the 1960s and has since been resolved? Is this a question of intentionality? Like, is it. Does it matter if somebody intentionally drew the districts to favor a particular subgroup?
- [37:55]
A
And just because what Louisiana is saying is like, oh, the reason we drew it so strangely is for political reasons.
- [38:02]
B
Right. And so which is allowed, Right. You can draw it that way for political reasons. You can't draw it that way because of race. And it does seem like the justices who have been, you know, appointed by Democratic presidents are defending kind of why this existed and why it's still necessary. I can imagine listening to the core arguments that that is where you expect this to go. But again, I'm not, you know, I don't have any particular insight beyond that.
- [38:31]
A
This is also something that gets tricky because race and partisanship are closely intertwined here. And so, on one hand, doing away with Section 2 of the Voting Rights act means something quite significant for black representation in the House and in state legislatures around the country, by the way. But you'll also Hear from a lot of Democrats who are concerned about winning majorities in the House who also talk about this, as you know, well, this is going to do away with Democratically held House seats and make it harder for Democrats to win a majority. Whereas also at the same time Republicans would say, okay, well you know, we shouldn't have a law that guarantees a certain number of Democratic seats. That's also not fair. Anyway, I want to read what Nate Cohn wrote in the New York Times as the court was hearing this case and see what you think. He writes, without Section two, Republicans could eliminate upward of a dozen Democratic held districts across the South. With those new seats added to the ones Republicans already seem poised to gain, the House would not be competitive in most election years. He goes on to say Republicans wouldn't need to flip so many districts to deal an enormous blow to Democratic chances. Even in the seven to eight seat scenario, Democrats might need to win the popular vote by 5 percentage points to merely have a 50, 50 shot to win the House. Jeff, do you agree with that analysis?
- [39:58]
C
Yeah, I think, I think Nate was, was pretty spot on in the sense that the, the end of section 2 in redistricting would allow states like Louisiana, where there are currently two majority black seats. Mississippi, Tennessee, there's one in each of those. There are two in Alabama and there are five in Georgia. And the situation would be or either majority black or black opportunity. Those are two slightly different things, but they are related obviously. And states like South Carolina, there's one. A lot of those states without Section two could ax that the seats that Democrats hold. So the analysis that they could lose like 12 seats in the south seems pretty spot on. It might even be more depending on how aggressive Republicans got in a place like Florida. But you know, it's, it's essentially like Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, Tennessee, South Carolina would almost certainly wipe out every, every Democratic seat and it would not be difficult to do that whatsoever. You do not have to get too creative with line drawing. Maybe a little in Louisiana because of New Orleans being so blue, but you know, maybe you crack it in half between two seats or three seats and voila, there you go. Georgia because it's got a larger population. Florida because it has a larger population. It would be, it would be difficult to entirely take out or North Carolina for that matter, every Democratic leaning seat. But they could certainly just pack more Democrats in like around Atlanta if you're Georgia and get rid of Sanford Bishop's seat. And Georgia second, which is like more rural but, but close to 50% black and so, like, all of this together would eliminate, you know, roughly a dozen seats or could eliminate a dozen seats. And I think I was going to just do some quick math where I looked at, okay, right now, the median seat in the House. And this does not account for like California changing yet or Missouri because it's, it's just sort of up in the air. But Texas has changed its lines, is basically if, if I, if I've got this right, which I think I do, is David Schweikart's seat, who just retired or is running for governor in Arizona. It's a seat that Donald Trump carried by 3 percentage points. So that's like number 218, right smack dab in the middle of 4 and 35. And so that's a seat that's about 1 1/2 points to the right of the country because Trump won by about 1 1/2 percentage points nationally. If you had all those changes just, you know, not. And this is, this is very ballpark because, you know, we don't know exactly how it might play out, but you could end up with a situation where the median seat is actually one that Trump won by like seven percentage points instead of three and a half or three, and, you know, therefore was like five and a half points to the right of the country. And that obvious depends on things like if that Utah map does take effect, which seems likely, but it's basically just like. And Democrats right now currently hold a handful of seats that will be tough to hold because of redistricting in places like Ohio, Texas, and then also Maine. Jared golden has a primary challenge that's a seat that maybe Republicans could flip even in a Democratic leaning midterm year, especially if golden isn't on the ballot. So all this adds up to, yes, certainly making Democrats lives more difficult, I think, and requiring them to win the popular vote by a much more substantial margin than they might currently have to in order to win the bare minimum for a majority.
- [43:41]
A
Yeah. And I think, to be clear, it's unclear when the Supreme Court would issue a ruling on this. And regardless of when they issue a ruling, sort of when that ruling would say changes could be made or had to be made or whatnot, and when states would be able to even logistically make them happen, because primaries start in the spring and oftentimes the Supreme Court waits until June to release opinions on cases like this. However, if they wanted to move really quickly and try to enshrine changes earlier, they potentially could. We will come back to this when the Supreme Court makes its ruling. I want to get to some 2025 elections updates before we close out the podcast for today. And I think we've each been watching slightly different things. And Leah, you've been watching something that listeners may not actually even be all that familiar with yet, which is what is it? Texas's 18th congressional district.
- [44:37]
B
How in the world could you not be up to date on Texas's 18th congressional district special? My goodness. Yeah. No, it's not exactly top of the top of the list of national interest, especially considering these districts are all going to get carved up.
- [44:54]
A
Already have been carved up.
- [44:56]
B
Right.
- [44:56]
C
Like all change in the next Congress.
- [44:58]
B
Yeah, right. It's all going to be different. So. But there is a special election. This is for the late Congressman Sylvester Turner's seat. It is a top two election. Top two vote getters progress to a special general election unless somebody receives more than 50% of the vote. There are, I believe, about 16 candidates running. So it's going to be tough for anyone to get over 50% of the vote, but not impossible. Whoever is elected could be an interesting case study in kind of the next generation of Democrats in Congress. And like Harris carried it easily. This is like a Houston district. The question is more kind of what kind of Democrat will eventually win this and whether that will happen in a runoff or in a general election.
- [45:49]
A
Okay, Jeffrey, you have been watching the New Jersey governor's race, which we've talked about before on this podcast, is I don't know if it's necessarily a surprise that it's a mid single digit race, but it is a mid single digit race nonetheless. How are our buddies Jack Cittarelli and Mikey Sherrill doing in that race? Right.
- [46:11]
C
So you know, Mikey Sherrill, the Democratic nominee, she's a member of the U.S. house. She is the favorite to win. She's up by around 5 percentage points in the decision desk H2 polling average. I think some other polling averages have her up by a similar margin, 5, 6 points. But that is not the, you know, that's not absolutely the most comfortable lead. We actually one of our in 2023,538 had an analysis about, you know, average error in polls in gubernatorial races. And from 1998 to 2022, the average arrow was just shy of five and a half percentage points. So maybe Sheryl wins by five, six. And it's not that close. But at the same time it also could be closer than it looks. And I think the thought is that Cheryl has had various, just various bits that have caused Democrats to be like oh no, she might actually blow this thing essentially because I think for Democrats, with Donald Trump in the White House, New Jersey moves sharply to the right in 2024, but it still voted for Kamala Harris by about 6 percentage points. So, you know, this is a state that Democrats in theory should be winning with a Republican president in the White House and sort of there being a reaction to that kind of thing. But Chitarelli came very close to winning as the Republican nominee in 2021 and now he's running again with perhaps more firm Republican support this time around than he had even in 2021. So I think, and I think in the wake of Trump's better performance for the gop, there's hope that there's there there that it's possible for, for Cittarelli to sort of stitch together a winning coalition. He only lost by three in 2021. So actually we just published a newsletter, Decision Desk HQ. Decision Desk HQ.subsect.com, let's, let's give the promo. Right? Yeah, our newsletter I talked about basically if Cittarelli could combine where he did best in 2021, sort of those margins with where Trump did best because they had two sort of somewhat different looking coalitions. Where Trump did best in 2024, Trump did a lot better in some denser, more ethnically and racially diverse parts of the state, whereas Citorelli did better in some more affluent, whiter parts. Chitorelli could sort of combine that, winning over some of those Trump voters who turned out and get them to turn out in an off year election. He would have a path to a narrow victory. So that's, that's sort of the situation. It's sort of Cheryl's race to lose, but it is far from a done deal for her. And Chitterelli has a path and that's basically the situation here with about two weeks to go.
- [48:48]
A
Yeah. Certainly an interesting race that I'm looking forward to tracking on election day. I'll say. For my part, I have been paying attention to surprise the New York City mayoral race where we recently had a debate between Curtis Sliwa, Andrew Cuomo and Zoran Mamdani. I don't know that it served to clarify people's choices any more than they already were. Clarified the Decision Desk HQ polling average currently Hazmani at 47% support. He's ticked up a tiny bit. Cuomo down a tick 31% and SLIWA, if anything, people have been encouraging to get out of the race. He's ticked up in his support, he's now at 15% support. And if you take him at his word, there's no way he's getting out of the race at this point. And he was. He was just as happy to do battle with Andrew Cuomo during the debate as he was with Zoran Mandani at certain points. Zoran Mandani saying that he agreed with Curtis Lewa. NBC hosted the debate. I don't know how you guys feel. Your theory of debates, does it all need to be sort of hard policy questions, or are we down for the questions that are like, here's. Here's a mix of some of the things that they ask. What's your bodega order? How much are you paying in rent on a monthly basis? They asked, if you can't take the subway for some reason, what are you going to do? I guess you can walk, bike, take a cab. All of those things. They asked about all kinds of different, like, quirky New York things. Our gifted and talented program in the schools, which is genuine policy, not a bodega order. We heard about the Guardian Angels from Curtis Lewa, what it's like to ride down in the subway, what it's like to be shot five times. You know, it was a very. It was a very New York spectacle. I kind of loved it. Did you guys learn anything from that spectacle?
- [50:40]
B
I get a little stressed out when they ask how much stuff costs. When they're like, how much do you spend on groceries? I'm like, if I had to answer that.
- [50:48]
A
They asked that as well.
- [50:49]
B
Yeah, I saw that one. And I was like, oh, I should really be budgeted. I should write that down. I should know that answer. And I think that's probably a sign that I should not be, you know, a mayoral candidate. But interesting.
- [51:01]
A
So in that situation, do you lie on the spot and make up a number, or do you.
- [51:05]
B
No, there's no way I'd lie. I would never lie. I would just, like. I feel like I would say the wrong thing. I'd be like, oh, I spend, like. I don't know. I'm thinking about how much I spend at one grocery store. And then someone's like, but you're forgetting your entire, like, energy bar, you know, budget. And then I'm like, oh, forgot the energy bars. Now everyone thinks I'm lying. And it just sounds very stressful. But I do kind of like questions that they're not expecting. You know, I. I didn't sign up for that. I'm not running for mayor. But if you're running for mayor. Like, sure. You should be able to answer those questions.
- [51:36]
A
Oh, parades. That was another one. And Curtis Leroy was like, it is important that the mayor of New York shows up to every parade. And Doramani was like, I'm not going to every parade.
- [51:45]
B
Millennial energy there. I'm staying home.
- [51:49]
A
Jeffrey, final word on New York's spectacle of a debate.
- [51:53]
C
Just that I think it's interesting that Sliwa has been very resistant to the idea of dropping out. I also think that, for what it's worth, not all Sliwa's support would go to Andrew Cuomo, who most of Sliwa's voters probably detest nearly as much, if not as much as they would detest Mandani. They just don't know Mandani as well as they know Cuomo. I mean, Republicans, Andrew Cuomo not. Not the most obvious match made in heaven.
- [52:19]
A
Right. Like, to be clear, what New York Republicans know about Andrew Cuomo, that has been reiterated for many years is. And again, this is. I'm saying what they know, not what is necessarily the truth. I'm not wading into this debate sending people with COVID back to nursing homes, resulting in increased nursing home deaths during COVID They know that he had some of the strictest measures in the country in terms of COVID lockdowns and not being able to, like, do anything. We had in New York City, we had something called Cuomo hot dogs, because you weren't allowed to just go to a bar. You had to buy food if you were gonna go to a bar. So for, I don't know, however long it was, every time you ordered a drink, you had to pay an extra dollar for a hot dog, even if you didn't intend to eat it. And, yeah, they know that he was, like, a liberal icon during those early days. And, like, what is there not to hate if you're a Republican in New York, but, like, somebody who liberals are excited about and then, like, sexual harassment claims? So that is. That is what Republicans have been told about for the past five years.
- [53:26]
B
And.
- [53:26]
C
And now they're like, I don't know.
- [53:27]
A
The Republicans might vote for Cuomo and get him passed Mamdani.
- [53:30]
C
No. I mean, look, would he get some of Sliwa's vote if Sliwa dropped out?
- [53:35]
A
Yeah.
- [53:35]
C
Would he get all of it? I seriously doubt it. And Mamdani would win 55, 45, which.
- [53:41]
A
He'S a margin to not vote. That's. Yeah, exactly.
- [53:44]
C
People don't have to vote.
- [53:45]
A
Yeah.
- [53:47]
C
I mean, imagine that if it were actually about the same margin as the primary. That'd be funny, actually, but I don't think that's going to happen. And Mom Donnie is in pretty comfortable shape to win.
- [53:58]
A
Okay, well, we're going to leave things there for today. Thank you, Leah and Jeffrey so much for joining me.
- [54:03]
C
Hey, thanks, Galen.
- [54:05]
B
Thank you.
- [54:06]
A
My name is Galen Droock. Remember to become a subscriber to this podcast@gdpolitics.com and wherever you get your podcasts. Paid subscribers get about twice the number of episodes and access to the video for the podcast. You can also join our paid subscriber chat and pass along questions for us to discuss on the show. Most importantly, you ensure that we can keep making this podcast. Thanks for listening and we'll see you soon.