The Maine Debacle: A Lot of People Are Fighting to Be the Captain of this Ship

The Democrats fell victim to one of the classic blunders. The most famous of is "Never get involved in a land war in Asia" (like, say, in Iran). But only slightly less well-known is this: "People with 'Graham' in their name invariably make terrible senators." Yesterday, the blue team continued to work through the fallout from the Graham Platner mess.

There is certainly a power struggle going on right now, on various levels. To start with, Platner announced yesterday that he will not formally file the paperwork to withdraw from the race until Monday of next week, which is the deadline. Neither he nor his campaign explained why. Could be fundraising, though there are tricks (like immediately forming an exploratory committee for some future election) to address that problem. Also, we seriously doubt that donors are rushing to give the oysterman money right now.

Whatever the reason might be, it does give the Democrats a little something extra to sweat about. That said, every blue-team pooh-bah and every wannabe U.S. Senator who talked to reporters yesterday expressed confidence that Platner would not change course at the last minute and stay in. And if that confidence proves to be misplaced, there remains the option to mount a write-in campaign, as long as the Democrats' preferred candidate files formal write-in-candidate paperwork 70 or more days before the election. This would not be ideal, as some low-information voters, and some Platner superfans, would still vote for him if his name appeared on the ballot. Further, it would be a situation ripe for rodent reproduction. Still, every time Sen. Angus King (I-ME) runs, there's a Democrat on the ballot, and yet most Democrats figure out that King is the party's "real" candidate. So, it's not impossible for a person without a (D) next to their name to beat an unknown/unpopular person with a (D) AND an (R), if that (R) is unpopular enough.

And speaking of Platner superfans, the story of his candidacy's genesis was already known, but The New York Times ran a long piece yesterday putting all the pieces together in one place. The short version is that a couple of progressive activists named Dan Moraff and Leanne Fan saw video of Platner making a speech about labor issues, and they saw a potential star. So, they recruited him to run for the Senate (something he had not previously been considering). The duo (with some assistance from a third progressive activist named Morris Katz) knew that any candidate needs to be vetted, and they arranged for that to happen, but they cut some corners. Maybe this was because they didn't have the money for a full-blown vetting, maybe because they didn't want to hear any bad news, maybe both. Obviously, and as it turns out, cutting corners on the vetting process proved to be a bad idea.

Needless to say, many people are now directing more than a few slings and arrows in the direction of this trio. Certainly they do deserve the blame for the incomplete vetting. However, let us also suggest some empathy is called for, in three ways. First, there is some truth to the old observation by Bill Clinton that "Democrats fall in love, Republicans fall in line." Platner obviously had skeletons in his closet, but he also has rare gifts. One can understand how Moraff and Fan felt they'd found a real diamond in the rough, and then bent over backwards to make that work.

Second, the weight of the evidence that is now available makes clear that Platner is not a viable candidate. But do keep in mind that when the first several revelations came to light, not all the evidence we have right now was available. The first big scandal, really, was the totenkopf tattoo. It is a BIG deal to end a Senate campaign, especially one with a lot of momentum, and to switch to a new candidate on the fly. If, when the totenkopf story had broken, the question was, "Can the Democrats really stick with a candidate who has a Nazi tattoo, and a history of emotional infidelity, and claims of abuse by ex-girlfriends and a rape allegation?" then that's easy to answer. "Is the totenkopf bad enough that it justifies the damage that will be done by switching gears to a another candidate?" is rather harder.

Third, there are many pieces out there right now that argue, in one form or another, that you just can't pick U.S. Senate candidates with no political background. We mentioned one-such piece yesterday, by Jonathan Martin, though we included that because Martin was highlighting the vetting issue many weeks before it blew up in the Democrats' face. The broader question of politically inexperienced senators is a little trickier than that. We don't have time to address that now, but look for a "Lies Across America" piece on the subject next week.

In short, the folks who made Platner possible proceeded in a manner that was ultimately problematic, but was at least understandable and is, we would say, forgivable. What is considerably less forgivable is the response from some folks on the left who are turning this into Hillary vs. Bernie, Part 827, and insisting that this is a the result of a conspiracy that was always going to bring Platner down, eventually. Here, for example is The Young Turks host Cenk Uygur:

Guess who biggest donors to the Maine Democratic Party are? Israel First and corporate donors. They have been gunning for Graham Platner from day one. They don't care is Susan Collins wins, or whichever party wins, they only care if they win. That's what this has been about.

To take another example, here's independent journalist and podcaster Matt Stoller:

Since lots of gossips are now gunning for me, I'm redoing this thread. It's clear something messed up happened in Platner's relationships, and he hasn't hidden that. But there's a big difference between 'normal people in bad relationships who hate each other' and 'crime.'

So let's be adults. This is a political attack.

Let's be clear, the goal of pushing Platner aside is to destroy the agenda on which he was elected, which is about taming oligarchy and reorienting us from endless war. That is why the Maine Democrats aren't saying 'let's respect Platner voters and transition to someone else,' they are taking a sanctimonious 'he gets NO say in ANYTHING.' Those are not the actions of people who want to win a Senate seat, those are the actions of nasty insiders claiming factional power for themselves.

First, note that "Graham was not nice to some of his ex-girlfriends" might not be a crime (though there WERE allegations of physical assault, so...). But rape most certainly is a crime, and it's one that will not be adjudicated before the election, and will probably not be adjudicated at all. Meanwhile, this talk that both parties are just working for the oligarchs, and THAT is why Platner had to go, is intellectually bankrupt.

We don't know how many Maine voters these two non-Mainers speak for. And we don't know how much this is just sour grapes that will fade once the sting of Platner's fall subsides, and how much of it will linger and possibly cost the new Democratic nominee some votes. But part of the deal with politics is, to borrow a phrase from the Rolling Stones, that you can't always get what you want. If the Cenk Uygurs of the world refuse to put their big boy pants on and accept that is the nature of the beast, then it's hard to take them seriously. How much difference is there, really, between the reaction of Uygur and Stoller here, and the reaction of Donald Trump when HE loses an election? Not much, from where we sit. Either way, it's pout and claim the result was illegitimate and a conspiracy.

We think it is worth pointing out that, for all the scorn and conspiratorial thinking directed at Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY), he knows the rules, and he abided by them. Platner proved to be a bad candidate, but so too did Schumer's pick, Gov. Janet Mills (D-ME). And once it became clear she was a terrible candidate, he backed off and threw his support behind Platner, because that's how these things work. He did not change course again until the rape allegation. And when he did so, it was because Platner was unelectable, and that's how these things work.

Oh, and as long as we are on the subject of finger-pointing, Republicans are indulging in a lot of it right now, and enjoying some schadenfreude at the Democrats' expense. Very well, but that is something the GOP should be careful about. First, because talking about it ultimately serves to highlight that Democrats get rid of candidates who are accused of sexual assault, while Republicans sometimes do not (ahem, Donald Trump).

Second, because once rape enters the conversation, some Republicans see that as an opportunity to share their impolitic views on the subject. For example, Federalist co-founder Sean Davis was on The Megyn Kelly Show yesterday, and he explained that if Platner and his accuser were married, there would be no issue. That is because, in Davis' words, "Within marriage, sex is normal. That's what it's designed for. You can do things, and you don't have to worry about being accused of rape or non-consent." Uh, huh. Recall that this is the same party that brought you, among others, Todd "legitimate rape" Akin and Robert "if rape is inevitable, lie back and enjoy it" Regan.

Meanwhile, the list of would-be Democratic U.S. Senators from Maine has now grown to five. In the piece yesterday, we noted that former state Senate President Troy Jackson, brewer Dan Kleban and social worker Paige Loud had already filed. Yesterday, they were joined by Maine Secretary of State Shenna Bellows and physician and former gubernatorial candidate Nirav Shah.

Bellows is progressive, fairly young (51), and has won elections before, having thrice been elected to the Maine state Senate. However, she has not won statewide, despite holding a state office. In Maine, that position is elected every 2 years by the members of the state legislature. Bellows has twice RUN statewide. The first was in 2014, when she challenged Collins and lost bigly, with the Senator taking 67% of the vote and Bellows taking 31%. The second was this year, when she finished in fourth place in the Democratic gubernatorial primary. This is not a promising track record when it comes to mounting a (second) challenge to Collins.

Shah, who has both an M.D. and a J.D., worked as the Director of the Illinois Department of Public Health from 2015-19 and then as the Principal Deputy Director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention from 2023-25. That is the extent of his political experience; he's never served in elective office, and his tenures in both appointed positions were marked by controversy. Shah did run in this year's Democratic gubernatorial primary, finishing second to the ultimate nominee, Hannah Pingree. He has not yet turned 50, and is the most moderate of the five declared candidates.

Yesterday, we ran a snap poll asking readers who they think the strongest of the potential Platner replacements is, allowing respondents to rank up to three choices. We added up the numbers, awarding 3 points for a first-place vote, 2 points for a second-place vote and 1 point for a third-place vote. Then, we assigned each candidate a percentage, based on how many of the possible points they got. In other words, if a candidate got first-place votes from every single respondent, then they would get 100%. If they got third-place votes from every respondent, they would get 33%.

It was, as you can see, an absolute rout:

Candidate	Pct. of Possible Points
Former state Senate President Troy Jackson	82.2%
Maine Secretary of State Shenna Bellows	25.1%
Rep. Jared Golden	17.0%
Rep. Chellie Pingree	11.8%
Historian Heather Cox Richardson	11.7%
Author Stephen King	8.1%
Brewer Dan Kleban	7.7%
Gov. Janet Mills	6.5%
Social Worker Paige Loud	5.0%
State Rep. Valli Gieger	3.0%
Progressive activist Jordan Wood	3.0%
Former gubernatorial candidate Nirav Shah	1.7%
Environmental policy consultant David Costello	1.3%

Our readership is definitely not a proxy for the general voting public. But it's not a bad proxy for Democratic primary voters (who tend to be older, more educated and higher-information). And the readership is probably an even better proxy for the kind of folks who are likely to be involved with their local party organ and to be chosen as delegates to an impromptu convention.

In any event, the message here couldn't be clearer: Jackson took the lion's share of the first-place votes, and got at least some points from nearly every reader who responded. He's got four key selling points: (1) His biography matches Platner's, in that he's a blue-collar white guy; (2) His politics match Platner's, in that he's a blend of populist and progressive; (3) He has no clear connections to Platner, and so is not going to be tainted by association; (4) He's pretty well vetted, by virtue of already having had a long political career. That said, the vetting that you get when running for the Maine state legislature, even when you do it a dozen times, is child's play compared to the vetting you get when you run for the United States Senate. So, there are going to be Democratic operatives, Republican operatives and journalists—each with their own motivations—looking under rocks for dirt on Jackson this weekend, with particular attention to whether or not his zipper has stayed in the locked and upright position when it should have.

More broadly, the readers clearly feel the replacement candidate needs to check three boxes, and in this order: (1) They need to have some sort of established track record; (2) They can't be within a country mile of Platner, personally; (3) They need to represent "change," on some level. Note that the top four finishers are all people with extensive experience in political office, and the next two after that are very well known public figures. Meanwhile, candidates who are promising, but who do not have a well-established public profile, like Shah, need not apply. That's #1.

Valli Geiger checks box #1, having three times been elected to the Maine state House. However, of all the people on this list, she is the one most closely tied to Platner, with both Platner and Geiger noting their support for each other this week. That was... unwise timing, when it comes to Geiger's senatorial aspirations (if she has them). It is not probable that she's going to turn out to be guilty of sexual assault, but Platner is so radioactive right now that anyone in his orbit is going to absorb more than a few gamma rays. That's #2.

Meanwhile, being "old school" and "establishment" is clearly a problem, too. There are many circumstances where Janet Mills would be an ideal candidate. This is not one of them, not according to our readers, not according to polls, not according to Maine voters. That said, at least some readers think "change" isn't as important as the other two factors, hence the somewhat strong performance of Jared Golden. Picking him, which we continue to see as unlikely, would certainly be a very different strategic approach than nominating Platner was (or than nominating Jackson would be). Anyhow, that's #3.

We have comments from readers advocating for each of the frontrunner candidates. However, this piece is already quite long, and over the weekend, the field should be relatively set, and there will probably be some polls. So, we'll run an item with those comments and with other updates next week. (Z)

Political Bytes: The Data Isn't Looking Good for the Republicans

We have not done a Political Bytes for a couple of weeks, and things are really getting backed up. We'll probably have a long one next week, or maybe two entries next week. For now, since we're not yet to the point of doing daily polling updates, we thought we'd do a polling-themed Political Bytes:

U.S. Senate, North Carolina: This is the state where the Democrats must be jumping for joy. There have been two polls of the race in the last month; the one from The New York Times/Siena has former governor Roy Cooper (D) leading former RNC Chair Michael Whatley (R) by 7 points, 50% to 43%. And the one from YouGov/Catawba College has Cooper up by a staggering 14 points, 48% to 34%.

Our Take: Because North Carolina is populous and because it has several expensive media markets, it is famously expensive to mount a Senate campaign there. In fact, this race is projected to be the most expensive Senate race in U.S. history, with $600 to $800 million expended. If correct, that would easily shatter the current record, the $472 million spent in Georgia in 2022. At a certain point, and that point may soon arrive, the people who run the GOP should seriously think about abandoning Whatley and directing that money elsewhere, because they have so many tough races this year.

---

U.S. Senate, Texas: There have been two nonpartisan polls in the last month here, and they both make clear that this race is going to be competitive. A2 Insights says that state Rep. James Talarico (D) leads Texas AG Ken Paxton (R), 48% to 46%. The recent NYT/Siena poll says it's tied at 47%. So, both are statistical dead heats. Meanwhile, three of the four aggregators (with RealClearPolling the exception) have Talarico with a slight lead, between 0.4% and 0.9%. RCP, which favors a Republican-leaning poll sample, has Paxton up by 0.6%.

Our Take: We don't know what will be decisive here, but we do know that: (1) The Texas GOP has been giving Talarico all it's got, with slurs on his religiosity, gender identity, etc., and his numbers are not being affected and (2) Talarico still has the war chest he built up while Paxton was spending every dime to defeat Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX) in the GOP primary.

---

U.S. Senate, Ohio: Another burgeoning barnburner. There were two nonpartisan polls in June; NYT/Siena says that Sen. Jon Husted (R-OH) has a 3-point lead over former Sen. Sherrod Brown (D), 50% to 47%. And Fabrizio Ward/Impact Research/AARP have a mirror image, with Brown up 3, 48% to 45%. The four main aggregators all have Brown leading, from 0.6% (RCP) to 2.6% (270toWin).

Our Take: The Republicans should think about redirecting some of that NC money to Texas and Ohio. That said, those are also very expensive states in which to mount a campaign (as is Florida, which could be another problem state for the GOP if Alex Vindman gets the nomination).

---

Governor, Ohio: The same pollsters that checked in on the Senate race also took a look at Ohio's gubernatorial race. NYT/Siena has Vivek Ramaswamy (R) and Amy Acton (D) tied at 47%. Fabrizio Ward/Impact Research/AARP has Acton up 47%-44%. The aggregators all have Acton leading, by anywhere from 1% (RCP) to 3% (Decision Desk HQ).

Our Take: We take note of this race, in particular, because there's a good chance the outcome here will correlate with the outcome in the state's U.S. Senate race.

---

Declaration of Independents: The percentage of Americans who identify as independent has been growing in recent years and, according to a poll from CNN, independents are now close to half of the voting public (47%, to be precise). The majority of the increase to 47% is due to people leaving the Republican Party.

Our Take: Independents, at least the ones who aren't R/D masquerading as I, tend to vote against the party in power, especially when the president is unpopular, as the current one certainly is. Also, people who are pointedly leaving the Republican Party are certainly not sure things for the GOP

---

Cambié de Opinión (I Changed My Mind): A very clear trendline this year has been Latino voters (mostly men) jumping ship on the S.S. Trump. A recent UnidosUS poll affirms that. According to that pollster's numbers, 25% of Latino Trump voters say they would not vote for him again if given the chance. On the generic House ballot, nationwide, 54% of Latino voters favor the Democrats, 27% favor the Republicans, and 19% are undecided.

Our Take: The state where this really matters is Texas, because the gerrymandering there was built on 2024 numbers. The generic House ballot there is nearly identical the national one; 54% Democrats, 28% Republicans, 18% undecided. Trump's disapproval there, among Latinos, is 67%. At this point, Gov. Greg Abbott (R-TX) has to be at least a little nervous that his huge gerrymander will turn into a huge dummymander.

That clears the decks of the interesting polling news we've put aside. We looked to see if we could find any good polling news for the Republicans, and there really isn't any, other than "In states where Republicans should win in a walk, like Alabama and West Virginia, the Republican candidate looks to be safe." Although even then, there was a partisan poll of Mississippi that put Scott Colom (D) within three points of Sen. Cindy Hyde-Smith (R). We very seriously doubt that's correct, but if Mississippi somehow really is in play, then every GOP seat is in play. (Z)

Democratic Presidential Candidate of the Week, #23: Rep. Ro Khanna (D-CA)

We just did not have time and space for a candidate profile last week. And if we don't do one today, that would make it 2 weeks. Not acceptable, and so while we prefer to run the profiles earlier in the week, this week it will have to be today.

Here are the candidates we've profiled so far:

Runner-up: Sen. Tammy Baldwin (D-WI)
Runner-up: Gov. Katie Hobbs (D-AZ)
Runner-up: Sen. Tim Kaine (D-VA)
Runner-up: Al Franken
Runner-up: Mitch Landrieu
Runner-up: Sen. Chris Murphy (D-CT)
Runner-up: Gov. Phil Murphy (D-NJ)
Runner-up: Sen. Jon Ossoff (D-GA)
Runner-up: Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT)
Runner-up: Jon Stewart
Runner-up: Jon Tester
Runner-up: Sen. Mark Warner (D-VA)
#25: Sen. Tammy Duckworth (D-IL)
#24: Gov. Tony Evers (D-WI)

And now, Rep. Ro Khanna (D-CA):

• Full Name: Rohit Khanna
  
  
• Age on January 20, 2029: 52
  
  
• Background: Born in Philadelphia, Khanna is the child of immigrants from India, which means he is—wait for it—a birthright citizen. He grew up in Pennsylvania, but made regular trips to India to connect with his heritage. He also spent time there with his grandfather, Amarnath Vidyalankar, who was a politician and activist of some prominence in the Khannas' home state of Punjab.
  
  Khanna was graduated as valedictorian of Council Rock High School, in Newtown, PA, and then enrolled at the University of Chicago, where he earned a B.A. in Economics in 1998. He followed that with law school at Yale, taking his J.D. in 2001. Over the next 15 years, he clerked for Judge Morris S. Arnold in Little Rock, AR; worked for several law firms, generally on intellectual property cases; taught as a lecturer at Stanford and several other Bay Area universities and served in several appointed political positions. He's also written two books: Entrepreneurial Nation: Why Manufacturing is Still Key to America's Future (2012) and Progressive Capitalism: How to Make Tech Work for All of Us (2023).
  
  
• Political Experience: Khanna's first foray into the world of politics came when he was an undergrad, and volunteered for the campaign of an obscure wannabe state Senator named Barack Obama. Thereafter, the future Representative also served as an intern for Al Gore.
  
  Khanna first tried to win office in his own right in 2004, in what was then CA-12, and got crushed in the primary by 53 points. A few years later, his old friend Obama appointed Khanna to a post in the United States Department of Commerce. After 2 years' service, he returned to California and served on several appointed boards, including the California Workforce Investment Board and Planned Parenthood Mar Monte.
  
  In 2012, Khanna mounted a campaign to represent CA-15, and raised well over $1 million, but decided not to challenge incumbent Democrat Pete Stark. Stark instead lost the seat to Eric Swalwell, who turned out to be a real peach of a fellow. In 2014, Khanna used that $1 million he'd banked, plus a bunch more money he raised, to very nearly knock off Democratic incumbent Mike Honda in CA-17, losing 51.75% to 48.25%. In 2016, Khanna had a rematch with Honda and rocked the Representative's world, winning by 22 points, 61% to 39%. Khanna has represented CA-17 in the House ever since.
  
  
• Signature Issue(s): Because he spent much of his career living in and around the Silicon Valley, and because his district includes much of the Valley, Khanna is one of Congress' best-known "tech" guys, and played a key role in the passage of the CHIPS Act. He is also one of Congress' best-known environmentalists. An issue that is clearly very salient right now, and that brings together Khanna's two specialties, is AI data centers. So, that seems a natural plank for him to base his campaign around.
  
  
• What Would His Pitch Be?: "I work well with everyone." Khanna is a leader of the House Progressive Caucus, so nobody doubts that he's a lefty. However, he is also a capitalist who has worked with centrist Democrats—for example, with Joe Manchin (then D?-WV, now I) on the Inflation Reduction Act. And Khanna sometimes finds common ground with right-wing populists, such as working with Marge Greene to force the passage of the Epstein Files Transparency Act.
  
  
• Instructive Quote: "Peter Thiel and I disagree on 99 percent of things."
  
  
• Completely Trivial Fact: The first blurb on the dust jacket of Khanna's 2012 book Entrepreneurial Nation reads: "I have always believed that America remains the greatest superpower of innovation. Khanna is a leading thinker on how to make U.S. manufacturing more competitive across this country, whether it comes to making high-technology planes, cars, steel bars, fire suits, or even blenders. The unconventional ideas in this book chart the path America can take to lead the world for years to come."
  
  The author of that blurb is one Elon Musk. Probably both men wish they could have a do-over on that one.
  
  
• Recent News: Khanna was one of Graham Platner's biggest and most outspoken supporters. So, Khanna's week has been spent trying to clean that up.
  
  
• Strengths for the Democratic Primaries: (1) He's one of the most media-savvy members of the House, and averages something like three TV/podcast appearances a week; (2) He's best known as a progressive, and there is certainly going to be at least one candidate who finds (some? a lot of?) success in the progressive lane in 2028; (3) He has a pretty long list of legislative accomplishments, like the CHIPS Act, that he can point to.
  
  
• Weaknesses for the Democratic Primaries: (1) Khanna's from California, and even many Democrats dislike Californians; (2) Although he doesn't take PAC/corporate money, and he's not in the pocket of Silicon Valley firms, he's nonetheless probably too close to Big Tech for comfort for a lot of Democratic voters; (3) In a year where there is going to be a lot of sentiment in favor of an "electable" candidates, a brown, Hindu, progressive intellectual may be a bridge too far for many primary voters.
  
  
• Polls: YouGov does a thing where they ask respondents how they feel about various politicians. At the moment, Khanna has the approval of only 24% of respondents, which seems bad. However, YouGov does not count people who respond with "Who?" Only 10% of respondents disapprove, while 13% say they are neutral. So, you could say that Khanna's approval rating is poor, or you could say that among people who know him, he's +14 points. Neither would be completely right, or completely wrong.
  
  
• Rank, Initial Poll: Unranked
  
  
• Rank, Readers' Preferred Candidates: #27
  
  
• How Does the Readership Feel?: We asked readers for their thoughts on Khanna running for president; here are some of those responses:
  
  
  • A.G. in Scranton, PA: So, Ro Khanna wants to be President of the United States, does he? Let's see how he stacks up as a candidate. Ro Khanna wants to be President of the United States. Rohit Khanna wants to be President of the United States. Rohit Khanna, the brown-skinned man wants to be President of the United States. Rohit Khanna, the brown-skinned Punjabi Indian-American man wants to be President of the United States. Rohit Khanna, the brown-skinned Punjabi Indian-American man with a name that sounds suspiciously like the name of a Muslim man according to most Americans wants to be President of the United States. Rohit Khanna, the brown-skinned Punjabi Indian-American man with a name that sounds suspiciously like the name of a Muslim man according to most Americans who is an ultra-liberal from California, who doesn't pray to Jesus, and who takes strong positions against the kinds of corporate special interests that every single presidential candidate needs to swear fealty to in order to afford to run a winning presidential campaign wants to be President of the United States.
    
    Hmm. What will the typical American voter think of Rohit Khanna? Gosh. That's a real head-scratcher, isn't it? I mean, just having a name like Rohit makes the guy practically bulletproof. Why, if we nominate him, conservative Republicans and the Evangelical Christian community won't have a single thing to work with when trying to come up with negative ads that play on their people's ignorance, racial prejudices, and the stereotypes of non-white, non-Christians they believe as truths, will they? He's the perfect candidate!
    
    Even among normal people, the kinds of Americans nothing like my professional victim family, 90% might get as far as Rohit Khanna's full name before deciding they can't support him. This is the United States of America, the place that forgot just how stupid and evil Donald Trump is because eggs are expensive. I have nothing against Ro Khanna. I like Ro Khanna. I like Ro Khanna's positions, a lot. But Ro Khanna's name is Ro Khanna. Because Ro Khanna's name is Ro Khanna, Ro Khanna could promise every white man in America fellatio from the girl of his choice and guarantee every Evangelical Christian a steamy night in a prison shower with Donald Trump and he'd still lose in a landslide. He's not white enough for America, he's too liberal for America, he prays to not Jesus too much for America, and his name is too Rohit Khanna for America.
    
    But, hey, we're Democrats, right? We live to lose easily won elections. We can't help ourselves but make statements about how small-minded most Americans are by nominating candidates that make us feel morally superior. Who needs all of those women's rights and voting rights anyway, when we can shove a candidate most Americans won't vote for right down their small-town, small-minded throats and then sigh at how ignorant and prejudiced they are for not just shutting up, being comfortable with people we say they should be comfortable with, and voting for who we tell them to vote for? Hell, he should really goose his numbers with liberal primary voters by double downing by promising to find a very loud trans person as his pick for VP.
    
    That is how this very liberal veteran from Scranton sees most other liberals, so I honestly think ol' Rohit probably actually has a pretty decent shot at earning himself a place on the ticket as our next, "fu** you for not being as open-minded as we are, America", very losing candidate.
    
    
  • W.H. in San Jose, CA: Although his policies are a lot leftier than I would like, there is one, nigh-irrational reason why I have given my vote to Ro Khanna in every election since he started running for U.S. House: He stood on my front porch and asked for it. The average congressperson represents 770,000 constituents; I can't believe that it would be practical for a candidate to be knocking on doors one at a time and asking for votes, but he did in my case and I felt that was good enough to earn him a vote for life.
    
    
  • E.K.M. in Delaware, OH: A strange thing happened to me the other day. I turned on my TV and I didn't see Ro Khanna. Actually, I give him a lot of credit for being visible and, well, being everywhere in TV news land. Is he a viable presidential candidate? Too hard to tell. But this question reminds me that Dems need to get out there early and raise some hell—and their name recognition.
    
    
  • M.M. in San Jose, CA: I think highly of Ro Khanna. I've attended several of his town halls and he does well fielding complaints, though he only allows dissident groups one question each (pick a leader and I'll call on them) instead of letting them take over the agenda. He does a good job of explaining his choice on controversial votes. And he doesn't take the easy excuse of being in the minority. However I was unimpressed when his WIFE scored big on an insider trade involving the Silicon Valley Bank failure. Bottom line? I would vote for him over Gov. Gavin Newsom (D-CA), but let's see who else is running.
    
    
  • M.M. in San Diego, CA: I predict Ro Khanna will be the running mate of the Democrats' 2028 presidential nominee.
    
    Uber-progressive but not wild-eyed or unreasonable, has the backing of the liberal wing of the NorCal tech industry, managed Bernie's last presidential campaign, the right age, polished, sincere (take note Gen Z, "sincere" is what you actually mean when you say "authentic"), cool ethnic name (which moronic Republicans will mock and sneer at, thereby raising his national profile). What's not to like?
    
    
  • B.W. in Los Angeles, CA: Khanna styles himself as a "progressive capitalist," probably as close to an FDR Democrat as anyone else the blue team has on offer.
    
    If the Democratic Socialist movement gathers enough momentum to put an honest scare into party leadership, I could imagine Khanna emerging as a sort of compromise attempt; a bone thrown by the aristocracy to the grassroots.
    
    But that pathway seems narrow (and might not work anyway). As things currently stand, he is probably too progressive for the corporatists and too cozy with Silicon Valley for real populist enthusiasm.
    
    
  • N.M. in West Chester, PA: I wouldn't trust him as far as I could throw him. Anyone pro-crypto and harping on the Epstein files the way he does is only hunting for the next thing to bolster his national profile. No, thanks.
  
  
• The Bottom Line: 2028 could be his year to be the VP candidate, maybe. Some future year could be his year to be the presidential candidate, maybe. But we see no way that 2028 could be his year to be the presidential candidate.

Next week, it's #22, Sen Elissa Slotkin (D-MI). If readers have comments about Slotkin running for president in 2028, please send them to comments@electoral-vote.com.

I Read the News Today, Oh Boy: Go West (and Be Ready to Walk Many Miles)

Even games like Oregon Trail don't really do justice to how tough it was to follow the famous advice to "Go West" in the 1850s and 1860s, before the transcontinental railroad made things a lot easier. Covered wagons are famous, but they were also bulky and prone to breaking down, and the heavier they were, the slower the horses or oxen moved, and the more animal feed that was needed. The upshot is that if you were not very young or very old or very sick, you needed to be ready to hoof it for a fair part of the journey. That's 1,000+ miles of walking, without modern shoes, and without much in the way of roadways or sidewalks. The pioneers were indeed a hardy folk. They were also apparently quite woke, if you believe the reboot of Little House on the Prairie that just debuted on Netflix.

We had two headline theme hints last week. First: "[W]e'll suggest you re-read the note at the very top of the page today." Second: "[I]f you're still wrestling with this week's headline theme, we'll tell you 'there's no need to feel down' and you should 'pick yourself off the ground.' And that applies even if you're not a young man." And here is the solution, courtesy of reader M.C. in Newton, MA:

This week's headlines all contain the titles of Village People songs:

• "Macho Man" Hegseth Doing Everything He Can to Create a Christian Nationalist Military... [title track from their 1978 album Macho Man]
• ...While Many Republicans Want to Do the Same with America... [from their 1983 album In The Street]
• ...But Some Democrats Are Pushing Back Against That Sort of Sodom and Gomorrah Thinking [a 1978 single]
• Never Forget: Dave Lara and "The Group," in the Navy from the 1979 album Go West]
• I Read the News Today, Oh Boy: Did the Women in Uniform Make Victoria Cross? [from the 1978 album Cruisin']
• This Week in Schadenfreude: The Onion Has Achieved Complete Success in Its (Info)Wars against Alex Jones [also from In The Street]
• This Week in Freudenfreude: For Many Marchers, It's the Happiest Day of the Year [from their 2019 album Magical Christmas]

My condolences to the family and friends of Victor Willis, the group's lead singer, who passed away last week. Can't Stop the Music.

Last week's posting was tricky (so was this week's posting, actually), so we didn't even notice we forgot to put the first part of the first three headlines. Oops. Anyhow, the passing of Willis and the pride-themed post made this doubly appropriate. Oh, and "Go West" from this headline obviously fits the theme.

Here are the first 60 readers to get it right:

N.H. in London, England, UK M.H. in Nepean, ON, Canada J.T. in Philadelphia, PA T.K. in Half Moon Bay, St. Kitts B.J.M. in Steep Falls, ME M.B. in Menlo Park, CA K.G.W. in Lafayette IN T.K. in Manchester, MO A.S. in Fairfax, VA Z.K. in Albany, NY E.P. in Windham, CT J.S. in Huntington Station, NY R.S. in Landing, NJ M.M. in Dunellen, NJ B.R. in Arlington, MA A.F. in Minneapolis, MN P.S. in Chicago, IL M.S. in Canton, NY D.D. in Bucks County, PA S.I. in Minneapolis, MN S.K. in Ardmore, PA G.H. in Acton, ME M.W. in Altea, Spain G.W. in Avon, CT M.T. in Wheat Ridge, CO E.S. in Providence, RI D.B. in Pittsboro, NC E.S. in Cincinnati, OH A.J. in Baltimore, MD M.Z. in Sharon, MA

B.D. in Hood River, OR K.R. in Austin, TX M.K. in Long Branch, NJ M.S. in New York City, NY A.C. in Kingston, MA R.D. in Cheshire, CT P.J.J. in Quakertown, PA P.A. in Redwood City, CA D.S. in Fort Collins, CO K.J. in Toronto, ON, Canada B.S. in Hastings, NE J.H. in Lake Forest, CA G.K. in Blue Island, IL J.W. in Victoria, BC, Canada P.R. in Havertown, PA R.S. in Milan, OH D.M. in Oakland, CA J.N. in Zionsville, IN D.D. in Portland, OR L.A.J. in Bourbonnais, IL D.F. in Norcross, GA M.K. in Seattle, WA R.C. in Winter Haven, FL M.R. in San Diego, CA M.B. in Albany, NY P.W. in Tulalip, WA D.B. in Glendale, CA G.M. in Arlington, VA R.M. in Summerville, SC J.F. in Fayetteville, NC

The 60th correct response was received at 5:27 p.m. PT on Friday.

For this week's theme, it relies on one word per headline, and it's in the category Television. For a hint, we'll say that it all starts with the fact that were stuck with "Rep. Ro Khanna (D-CA)" as one of the headlines we had to work with. There aren't TOO many things you can do with that.

If you have a guess, send it to comments@electoral-vote.com with subject line July 10 Headlines. (Z)

This Week in Schadenfreude: As They Say in Wales, "Chwarae Troi Chwerw, Wrth Chwarae Gyda Thân"

We thought we'd use a headline with a little local flavor. That's a Welsh saying that works out to, "Play with fire, and you may get burned." Certainly appropriate here, as you are about to see.

This is not common, but today's "Schadenfreude" is by a guest contributor—one of our regular U.K. correspondents, G.S. in Basingstoke, England, UK, with assists from A.B. in Amman, Jordan, and S.T. in Worcestershire, England, UK:

While it is true that America has its share of hypocritical and unlikable politicians, it by no means has a monopoly in this regard, and so this week's Schadenfreude comes to you from across the pond in the U.K. Regular readers may be familiar with the right-wing politician and noted GB News Presenter/Cameo video-maker/gold bullion huckster Nigel Farage. Farage is our (slightly) more moderate and milquetoast version of your current president, and was until very recently an MP, elected to Parliament in 2024 after feeding British voters a steady diet of anti-immigration rhetoric. He was the figurehead for the (successful) Brexit campaign back in 2016, and served as a member of the European Parliament for some years, regaling its members with bon mots such as "I want you all fired," "the EU will cause insurgency and violence" and "virtually none of you have done a proper job in your lives." As readers will recall, his current party Reform UK have ridden a wave of political discontent to be either leading or very close to leading in opinion polls, to the extent where Farage could become PM in the hypothetical event that a general election were held today.

However, recent political events seem to have reversed the trend of the past few months. Journalists (and now the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards) have been homing in on Farage's multiple questionable sources of income, including a £5 million "personal donation" from crypto-baron Chris Harborne, and alleged support for accommodation, staffing and security from aristocrat and convicted fraudster George Cottrell, who served 8 months in a U..S prison. The journalistic scrutiny—and ongoing investigations in Parliament— irritated Farage to the point that on Tuesday, after dangling an "important video statement on my future at 2pm", he protested complete innocence, launched a full broadside against "the establishment" and pledged to resign as an MP and stand in the resultant by-election, thus allowing the good people of his Clacton-On-Sea constituency to pass their judgment on his actions. Regrettably for Farage, this plan for electoral affirmation seems to have backfired spectacularly.

The major national parties—Conservatives, Labour, Liberal Democrats and Greens—swiftly dismissed the by-election as a stunt and stated they would not field candidates, reasoning that the Parliamentary investigation into Farage (which is suspended while Farage is no longer an MP, but will resume if he is re-elected) could result in Farage being kicked out of Parliament if he is found guilty. Even Farage seems to realize that he's in deep trouble on this front, and so he has started trying to deploy the populist playbook of claiming in advance that the Commons Standards Committee is biased against him, supposedly on the basis that at least one member has previously reported him for Islamophobia (a claim for which, operating in Trump mode, he's produced no evidence).

Readers of this site will additionally be familiar with the dark humor and sense of the absurd that characterizes U.K. political discourse, such as the head of lettuce that outlasted former PM Liz Truss, It is with this in mind that we bring you the delightful news that perennial candidate and intergalactic space warrior Count Binface has entered the ring as Farage's principle by-election challenger. Binface, the creation of U.K. comedian Jonathan Harvey, comes from the planet Sigma IX and promises his followers a mixture of policies from the readily achievable ("I will build at least one affordable house"), populist ("I will cap the price of ice creams at 99 pence") and surreal ("I will nationalise Adele and make rule-breaking cyclists ride unicycles instead.") Perhaps his most sensible policy proposal, one Americans will certainly agree with after the events of the last week or so, is to get rid of the Video Assistant Referee in association football.

With the major parties out of the equation, Binface has been all over the news over the past 24 hours, with appearances on the flagship Today program, BBC Breakfast and London's LBC, where he touts his policies and needles Farage's hypocrisy with a mixture of candor and surrealism. The star of his campaign has risen massively, with a groundswell of support in media attention, donations and offers of volunteering, to the point where, in the absence of major-party candidates, it is just about possible that he unifies most of the 56% of Clacton voters that did not vote for Farage in 2024 and emerges victorious in the by-election (likely in August). Odds on his victory shortened from 6-1 to 3-1 just on Wednesday. The following, which may jog the memory of a few, in one of myriad items doing the rounds on social media:



To conclude, a quirk of British democracy. It is a peculiarity that Members of Parliament may not actually resign; the process for leaving the Commons involves being appointed to a historical office of the Crown that is legally incompatible with being an MP. (That means either the Steward and Bailiff of the Three Hundreds of Chiltern, or the Steward and Bailiff of the Manor of Northstead. No, I am not making this up.) Our Chancellor, Rachel Reeves, who is not exactly known for her sense of humor, captured the mood somewhat, stating on Wednesday "I will accept Nigel Farage's request to be appointed Steward and Bailiff of the Manor of Northstead. It is a farce and a desperate distraction, and the people of Clacton deserve better. But if he wants to spend the summer arguing with a bin, I won't stop him."

Thank you, Ms. Reeves! As for me, I'm off to Sigma IX, outer space.

Thanks, gents! (Z)

This Week in Freudenfreude: Rob Reiner Will End His Career on a Very Appropriate Note

Famed actor-director Rob Reiner is gone before his time, the victim of what is currently alleged to be murder by his son.

Because of this, Reiner did not get to choose the terms of his retirement, or to make a decision about what is final project would be. Still, as it turns out, his final performance is pretty much the perfect send-off, given who he was, and what he believed in. Reiner was friends with Larry David, of Seinfeld and Curb Your Enthusiasm fame. And David has a new sketch show, called Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Unhappiness that features send-ups of various moments in U.S. history. For example, in the first trailer released for the show, David's character is present at the moment when the famous sailor-kissing-nurse picture at Times Square was taken. He decides to do the same with a different nurse, and ends up surrounded by a mob that accuses him of both being a sexual predator and hating servicemen.

Anyhow, Reiner (and Jimmy Kimmel) agreed to make cameo appearances, and so filmed a sketch in which Reiner plays George Washington and David and Kimmel both play inquiring citizens. HBO hasn't posted the bit to YouTube, and the only version we can find was recorded by someone pointing their iPhone at their TV, so it's not very good. However, here is the key dialogue:

Reiner (Washington): I believe that no man should serve more than two terms as president. And I hope that future presidents will follow my lead."

David (colonist): What if some future president doesn't follow your lead and runs for a third term?... What if there's some a**hole in office, some narcissistic p**ck, who doesn't follow the Constitution? He could use the presidency to enrich himself and his family. He could send troops into American cities to terrorize and even kill American citizens, all to distract from the fact that he's friends with a pedophile. He can attack universities, even the rest silencing anyone who dares to criticize him...

Reiner (Washington): Ah, come on, that could never happen.

David (colonist): That's what you think.

Kimmel (colonist): Are you suggesting that the president would taketh the time to challenge anyone who dare make fun of him as if he were a big baby?

You get the bit.

Although Donald Trump is not mentioned by name, the sketch is unsubtle enough that even, well, Donald Trump could figure out who is being referenced. Again, Reiner didn't know this would be his last project, but he would surely be happy to know that his last words, as a performer, were him getting the last word with Trump, who took many a cheap shot at Reiner's expense. And if that's not enough, the executive producer on the series is... Barack Obama.

Have a good weekend, all! (Z)

---

Previous report         Next report

---

If you wish to contact us, please use one of these addresses. For the first two, please include your initials and city.

• questions@electoral-vote.com    For questions about politics, civics, history, etc. to be answered on a Saturday
• comments@electoral-vote.com   For "letters to the editor" for possible publication on a Sunday
• corrections@electoral-vote.com To tell us about typos or factual errors we should fix
• items@electoral-vote.com            For general suggestions, ideas, etc.

To download a poster about the site to hang up, please click here.

---

Email a link to a friend.

---The Votemaster and Zenger