Mothra said:

---

In other nuttiness, California, a state that legalized recreational marijuana use, has banned the sale of flavored tobacco products. So California voters and politicians are cool with a recreational drug that lowers the IQ, increases the risk of depression, psychosis and suicide, and generally has an ill effect on mental health, but a product that causes lip cancer is beyond the pale. SMH.

---

Are you really saying that weed is worse for your health than tobacco products? These flavored tobacco products (Juul) were proven to be advertising their products to kids and high schoolers so that they become addicted and will be customers for life.

Booray said:

---

Mothra said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Mothra said:

---

JXL said:

---

whiterock said:

---

EX: Exit polling is clear that Threat To Democracy and Abortion were huge issues with thoe who voted.

Are those key issues with voters at large? Was all the polling about inflation and economy wrong?

no.

Remember what I said many times: a pollster has to poll the people who actually vote.

A majority of voters think inflation and the economy ARE the big issues.
but those voters didn't show up and vote.

A smaller number of voters think abortion and threats to democracy are the big issues.
but those voters are who showed up and voted.


Every election is a base election.
If you do not turn out your own base, the independents don't matter a damned bit.

---

You can't win elections with just your base. Nominating Trump might fire up his base of support, but he would be unlikely to pull enough support from outside of his base to win.

---

Exactly. That's what the Trumpists completely miss. One would have thought the last election would have clued them in that Trump is toxic outside his base. But for some reason, they view his rabid following among a large segment of Republicans as proof that he can win a general election. It makes absolutely no sense, and has no logic to it.

---

It has to it exactly the logic DeSantis used to win his race 60-40. He did not meet anyone in the middle. His acceptance speech was defiant, combative, in-your-face "we fought for our ideas, destroyed yours, and will carry on that good work...." And I loved it.

DeSantis does not prove Trumpism wrong.
DeSantis proves Trumpism is right.

It's just that he might be a more effective spokesman for Trumpism than Trump himself.

---

I agree with you he was combative, which I loved as well, and wished I would see more from Republican candidates.

---

The difference in Trump combativeness and DeSantis combativeness is that DeSantis seems to be fighting for the electorate, Trump seems to be fighting for himself.

I don't agree with many of De Santis' policies, but he is a gifted politician and from what I know of him, an honorable person.

---

Agreed. They are not petty squabbles.

Booray said:

---

Mothra said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Mothra said:

---

JXL said:

---

whiterock said:

---

EX: Exit polling is clear that Threat To Democracy and Abortion were huge issues with thoe who voted.

Are those key issues with voters at large? Was all the polling about inflation and economy wrong?

no.

Remember what I said many times: a pollster has to poll the people who actually vote.

A majority of voters think inflation and the economy ARE the big issues.
but those voters didn't show up and vote.

A smaller number of voters think abortion and threats to democracy are the big issues.
but those voters are who showed up and voted.


Every election is a base election.
If you do not turn out your own base, the independents don't matter a damned bit.

---

You can't win elections with just your base. Nominating Trump might fire up his base of support, but he would be unlikely to pull enough support from outside of his base to win.

---

Exactly. That's what the Trumpists completely miss. One would have thought the last election would have clued them in that Trump is toxic outside his base. But for some reason, they view his rabid following among a large segment of Republicans as proof that he can win a general election. It makes absolutely no sense, and has no logic to it.

---

It has to it exactly the logic DeSantis used to win his race 60-40. He did not meet anyone in the middle. His acceptance speech was defiant, combative, in-your-face "we fought for our ideas, destroyed yours, and will carry on that good work...." And I loved it.

DeSantis does not prove Trumpism wrong.
DeSantis proves Trumpism is right.

It's just that he might be a more effective spokesman for Trumpism than Trump himself.

---

I agree with you he was combative, which I loved as well, and wished I would see more from Republican candidates.

---

The difference in Trump combativeness and DeSantis combativeness is that DeSantis seems to be fighting for the electorate, Trump seems to be fighting for himself.

I don't agree with many of De Santis' policies, but he is a gifted politician and from what I know of him, an honorable person.

---

Which of DeSantis policies will prevent you from voting for him?

Bestweekeverr said:

---

Mothra said:

---

In other nuttiness, California, a state that legalized recreational marijuana use, has banned the sale of flavored tobacco products. So California voters and politicians are cool with a recreational drug that lowers the IQ, increases the risk of depression, psychosis and suicide, and generally has an ill effect on mental health, but a product that causes lip cancer is beyond the pale. SMH.

---

Are you really saying that weed is worse for your health than tobacco products? These flavored tobacco products (Juul) were proven to be advertising their products to kids and high schoolers so that they become addicted and will be customers for life.

---

No. I am saying they both have very bad health implications, and it's ironic that a state would vote in favor of one bad health implication while banning another.

The Republican Party is the party of the married and…

Increasingly unmarried men.

The Democratic Party is the party of unmarried women.

This gender*marriage story will rise in importance as share of unmarrieds climbs. pic.twitter.com/7e4WSs8gaa

— Brad Wilcox (@BradWilcoxIFS) November 9, 2022

Arizona to finish the count by....Thanksgiving??

Mothra said:

---

Bestweekeverr said:

---

Mothra said:

---

In other nuttiness, California, a state that legalized recreational marijuana use, has banned the sale of flavored tobacco products. So California voters and politicians are cool with a recreational drug that lowers the IQ, increases the risk of depression, psychosis and suicide, and generally has an ill effect on mental health, but a product that causes lip cancer is beyond the pale. SMH.

---

Are you really saying that weed is worse for your health than tobacco products? These flavored tobacco products (Juul) were proven to be advertising their products to kids and high schoolers so that they become addicted and will be customers for life.

---

No. I am saying they both have very bad health implications, and it's ironic that a state would vote in favor of one bad health implication while banning another.

---

One has much worse health outcomes than the other, and is targeting kids. How is it ironic that a state would ban that and not the other?

Canada2017 said:

---

Booray said:

---

Mothra said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Mothra said:

---

JXL said:

---

whiterock said:

---

EX: Exit polling is clear that Threat To Democracy and Abortion were huge issues with thoe who voted.

Are those key issues with voters at large? Was all the polling about inflation and economy wrong?

no.

Remember what I said many times: a pollster has to poll the people who actually vote.

A majority of voters think inflation and the economy ARE the big issues.
but those voters didn't show up and vote.

A smaller number of voters think abortion and threats to democracy are the big issues.
but those voters are who showed up and voted.


Every election is a base election.
If you do not turn out your own base, the independents don't matter a damned bit.

---

You can't win elections with just your base. Nominating Trump might fire up his base of support, but he would be unlikely to pull enough support from outside of his base to win.

---

Exactly. That's what the Trumpists completely miss. One would have thought the last election would have clued them in that Trump is toxic outside his base. But for some reason, they view his rabid following among a large segment of Republicans as proof that he can win a general election. It makes absolutely no sense, and has no logic to it.

---

It has to it exactly the logic DeSantis used to win his race 60-40. He did not meet anyone in the middle. His acceptance speech was defiant, combative, in-your-face "we fought for our ideas, destroyed yours, and will carry on that good work...." And I loved it.

DeSantis does not prove Trumpism wrong.
DeSantis proves Trumpism is right.

It's just that he might be a more effective spokesman for Trumpism than Trump himself.

---

I agree with you he was combative, which I loved as well, and wished I would see more from Republican candidates.

---

The difference in Trump combativeness and DeSantis combativeness is that DeSantis seems to be fighting for the electorate, Trump seems to be fighting for himself.

I don't agree with many of De Santis' policies, but he is a gifted politician and from what I know of him, an honorable person.

---

Which of DeSantis policies will prevent you from voting for him?

---

None at this point. He has not done anything that I consider a deal breaker. Does not mean I would vote for him, but I do not see an aging Joe Biden as an attractive candidate.

My prioriites for a President currently are:

1) Climate change
2) Restoring a sense of unity (with a subset of protecting our democratic norms)
3) Deficit reduction
4) Reach some sort of immigration compromise

I do not know enough about his stand on No. 1 to comment. My gut reaction is he is weak on No. 2, but that was probably many people's gut reaction to Reagan and that worked out the opposite. No. 3 he would likely be stronger on than any Democratic candidate. Not sure about No. 4.

Mothra said:

---

Booray said:

---

In the same way, the Democratic Party needed a wake-up call it did not get last night. The results increase the chance that Joe Biden will lead the ticket against Ron Desantis. If that happens you will get your red wave two years late.

---

Perhaps, but I fear that both parties are so entrenched in their ideology, nobody has learned anything from last night. I hope I am wrong, but I fully expect Trump to be the nominee if he runs. It would be great if the Trump sycophants realized they are backing a self aggrandizing narcissist who only cares about himself.

Likewise it would be nice if Democrats realize that woke policies are very bad for the country. But of course the Democrats are calling scoreboard after last night, with the White House declaring it a resounding Democrat victory. I'm sure this will further emboldened Democrats to continue on their woke path.

Hope I'm wrong.

---

I've tried since 2016 to keep Trump from getting the nomination, voting against him in the primaries, but heck I would have never voted Hillary or Biden, I just didn't want Trump to be the nominee. Years later he is still biting Republicans in the ass.

They really need Desantis as the nominee. He would give the R's back a strong national vision, instead of the ramblings of a narcissistic idiot in Trump.

ATL Bear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

JXL said:

---

whiterock said:

---

EX: Exit polling is clear that Threat To Democracy and Abortion were huge issues with thoe who voted.

Are those key issues with voters at large? Was all the polling about inflation and economy wrong?

no.

Remember what I said many times: a pollster has to poll the people who actually vote.

A majority of voters think inflation and the economy ARE the big issues.
but those voters didn't show up and vote.

A smaller number of voters think abortion and threats to democracy are the big issues.
but those voters are who showed up and voted.


Every election is a base election.
If you do not turn out your own base, the independents don't matter a damned bit.

---

You can't win elections with just your base. Nominating Trump might fire up his base of support, but he would be unlikely to pull enough support from outside of his base to win.

---

The results from last night directly refute that conclusion.

SOME elections are choice elections, where wooing independents is the key.
SOME elections are base elections, where there isn't much middle ground and victory lies in turning out your base.

As long as we remain an evenly divided electorate, building a strategy of chasing 3% of the voting public least likely to vote is the road to oblivion. If you cannot fire up your own base to come boiling out to vote, you are not going to inspire independents to come boiling out to vote either.

Democrats campaigned solely within their base. They spoke primarily to the J6 faithful and the abortion on demand faithful....and they got a bigger turnout of their base than Republicans did.

---

You couldn't be more wrong. The Kemp/Walker break is a classic showing of how independents will actually vote multi party, and can be wooed to candidates. It also shows that even semi-partisans will split tickets. Look at the ratio breaks in districts of Republican pick ups in the House. Run better candidates. Don't drag them down with political baggage like Trump.

---

Moderate Republicans are fickle, too. Oso and Sam will throw their vote away 3rd party on principle then blame others when it lets Dems win. But if we attend to their concerns, we lose more votes in our own base than we gain in the middle. That's a dynamic proven over and over again. Oz is an example - the kind of moderate that's supposed to win purple states. Only he didn't. You win purple states like Perry and DeSantis did - by defeating liberal ideas and turning the date RED.

And before we cite "Trump baggage" as responsible for last night, it must be noted that the single best outcome of the night came from a candidate plucked from obscurity by a Trump endorsement, a candidate who by any measure was the most Trump-esque of them all. He's not the "anti-Trump" that your argument implicitly presumes. He's Trump 2.0, an apparently more formidable variant of the original strain.

And while we're on GA, they have almost as bad a "arrogant moderate" dynamic as AZ. It's not like Perdue or Loeffler were great big throbbing MAGA-maniacs. Quite a bit of spin going on to blame deficiencies in the GA GOP on Trump. I spent a number of hours around a campfire with a GA businessman donor in aftermath off the 2020 GA Senate debacle. Wonderful thoughtful fellow who like many of the type think the secret to success is stifling the GOP base. That is not what DeDantis did. Quite the opposite - poking Disney in the eye, reliving woke prosecutors of their duties, etc…..

The argument for Desantis is that he's simply better at Trumpism than Trump.

It's a hard argument to refute.

whiterock said:

---

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

---

J.R. said:

---

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

---

J.R. said:

---

Cobretti said:

---

Your tax dollars paid for this headline https://t.co/N00oVIp9mF

— Sunny McSunnyface (@sunnyright) November 8, 2022

---

That Lake is one crazy biatch.

---

You Sir, don't seem to have a conservative bone in your body.

Were you taken aback at all by your President's shut down the coal industry and no more drilling comments this past week? I would think most oil and gas people would not be happy with them. But not you.

---

I am very conservative on fiscal issues. However, this crazy women is part of the "lunatic fringe" via Trump. How'd that all work out last night? Trumpians and Trump got their ass kicked.

---

I did not ask you about Trump. I asked you your opinion on Biden's war on oil & gas and the coal industry. You need to let Trump go.

---

It's almost like JR thinks the Dems have no lunatic fringe of their own.

---

Hell, yes, the do. I give you Bernie and the Squad. Lunatic fringe is problematic on either side!

Latest House count is:

GOP: 201 (6 net pickups), need 218 for majority
Dems: 182

52 races left to call

ole Carl Rove said they would end up with 5. He started the night at 20. He no clue and he is usually fairly astute on such matters.

Bestweekeverr said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Bestweekeverr said:

---

Mothra said:

---

In other nuttiness, California, a state that legalized recreational marijuana use, has banned the sale of flavored tobacco products. So California voters and politicians are cool with a recreational drug that lowers the IQ, increases the risk of depression, psychosis and suicide, and generally has an ill effect on mental health, but a product that causes lip cancer is beyond the pale. SMH.

---

Are you really saying that weed is worse for your health than tobacco products? These flavored tobacco products (Juul) were proven to be advertising their products to kids and high schoolers so that they become addicted and will be customers for life.

---

No. I am saying they both have very bad health implications, and it's ironic that a state would vote in favor of one bad health implication while banning another.

---

One has much worse health outcomes than the other, and is targeting kids. How is it ironic that a state would ban that and not the other?

---

One doesn't have much worse health outcomes than the other. Marijuana is likewise carcinogenic. Smoke from marijuana combustion has been shown to contain many of the same toxins, irritants and carcinogens as tobacco smoke. Research has also shown smoking marijuana has many of the exact same damaging effects on the lungs as tobacco. It also makes the lungs much more susceptible to respiratory illness and disease. And that of course does not even account for the effect it has on the brain, unlike tobacco use.

As someone with libertarian leanings, legalization of marijuana is something I don't get too worked up about. But let's not pretend that marijuana is much safer than tobacco. The data says its not, which is why CA's banning of chewing tobacco is so ironic.

Forest Bueller_bf said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Booray said:

---

In the same way, the Democratic Party needed a wake-up call it did not get last night. The results increase the chance that Joe Biden will lead the ticket against Ron Desantis. If that happens you will get your red wave two years late.

---

Perhaps, but I fear that both parties are so entrenched in their ideology, nobody has learned anything from last night. I hope I am wrong, but I fully expect Trump to be the nominee if he runs. It would be great if the Trump sycophants realized they are backing a self aggrandizing narcissist who only cares about himself.

Likewise it would be nice if Democrats realize that woke policies are very bad for the country. But of course the Democrats are calling scoreboard after last night, with the White House declaring it a resounding Democrat victory. I'm sure this will further emboldened Democrats to continue on their woke path.

Hope I'm wrong.

---

I've tried since 2016 to keep Trump from getting the nomination, voting against him in the primaries, but heck I would have never voted Hillary or Biden, I just didn't want Trump to be the nominee. Years later he is still biting Republicans in the ass.

They really need Desantis as the nominee. He would give the R's back a strong national vision, instead of the ramblings of a narcissistic idiot in Trump.

---

Same with me. I would still vote for the bozo over the Democrat alternative, but would have to hold my nose.

CNN calling WI Senate for GOP

That puts it at
GOP 49
Dems 48

with AZ, NV and GA left.

I predict GOP wins NV and Dems win AZ and GA and it remains 50-50 in Senate.
That would be 1 pickup each (PA for Dems, NV for GOP)

Katy Perry did the unthinkable....she voted Republican.

Of course a LA Republican is probably left of most Dems in Texas.

Fans are 'outraged'- imagine being personally upset over how a celebrity/athlete votes.

"Man, I can't cheer for Dak anymore. He voted for Beto!!!"

Mothra said:

---

Bestweekeverr said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Bestweekeverr said:

---

Mothra said:

---

In other nuttiness, California, a state that legalized recreational marijuana use, has banned the sale of flavored tobacco products. So California voters and politicians are cool with a recreational drug that lowers the IQ, increases the risk of depression, psychosis and suicide, and generally has an ill effect on mental health, but a product that causes lip cancer is beyond the pale. SMH.

---

Are you really saying that weed is worse for your health than tobacco products? These flavored tobacco products (Juul) were proven to be advertising their products to kids and high schoolers so that they become addicted and will be customers for life.

---

No. I am saying they both have very bad health implications, and it's ironic that a state would vote in favor of one bad health implication while banning another.

---

One has much worse health outcomes than the other, and is targeting kids. How is it ironic that a state would ban that and not the other?

---

One doesn't have much worse health outcomes than the other. Marijuana is likewise carcinogenic. Smoke from marijuana combustion has been shown to contain many of the same toxins, irritants and carcinogens as tobacco smoke. Research has also shown smoking marijuana has many of the exact same damaging effects on the lungs as tobacco. It also makes the lungs much more susceptible to respiratory illness and disease. And that of course does not even account for the effect it has on the brain, unlike tobacco use.

As someone with libertarian leanings, legalization of marijuana is something I don't get too worked up about. But let's not pretend that marijuana is much safer than tobacco. The data says its not, which is why CA's banning of chewing tobacco is so ironic.

---

Yes, smoking anything is going to be bad for you. The difference is that tobacco products contain nicotine that is highly physiologically addictive so when people do tobacco products they do them at a much higher rate, which compounds the negative health effects. Sure weed can be addicting in a lifestyle way like videogames, but it's not a physiological addiction so people are not smoking nearly as much weed as they are cigarettes/vapes. Look at the difference in cancer rates between lifetime cigarette smokers and lifetime weed smokers.

Redbrickbear said:

---

The Republican Party is the party of the married and…

Increasingly unmarried men.

The Democratic Party is the party of unmarried women.

This gender*marriage story will rise in importance as share of unmarrieds climbs. pic.twitter.com/7e4WSs8gaa

— Brad Wilcox (@BradWilcoxIFS) November 9, 2022

---

That is very interesting.

Jack Bauer said:

---

Katy Perry did the unthinkable....she voted Republican.

Of course a LA Republican is probably left of most Dems in Texas.

Fans are 'outraged'- imagine being personally upset over how a celebrity/athlete votes.

"Man, I can't cheer for Dak anymore. He voted for Beto!!!"

---

Ask Greg Popovich about that. He was probably the most admired man in San Antonio before he voiced his opinons about Trump. Not so much now.

Democrats aren't going to say a damn thing about democracy when it comes to this.

County Council member Brian Thorton said: "Hundreds if not thousands of voters left the polls today due to the ineptness of our election bureau." Election Board member Alyssa Fusaro said: "I'm at a loss for words. I am upset. I am angry. It's a disenfranchisement of voters."

— Michael Tracey (@mtracey) November 9, 2022

Booray said:

---

Jack Bauer said:

---

Katy Perry did the unthinkable....she voted Republican.

Of course a LA Republican is probably left of most Dems in Texas.

Fans are 'outraged'- imagine being personally upset over how a celebrity/athlete votes.

"Man, I can't cheer for Dak anymore. He voted for Beto!!!"

---

Ask Greg Popovich about that. He was probably hte most sdmired man in San Antonio before he voiced his opinons about Trump. Not so much now.

---

I never missed a Spurs game before that. Havent watched one since...

The only thing about the Penn election that I dont like is that it may result in more Pennsylvanians moving to my state. Other than that, I kinda think it will be enteraining to have a giant oaf in basketball shorts & hoodies in the senate.

whiterock said:

---

JXL said:

---

whiterock said:

---

EX: Exit polling is clear that Threat To Democracy and Abortion were huge issues with thoe who voted.

Are those key issues with voters at large? Was all the polling about inflation and economy wrong?

no.

Remember what I said many times: a pollster has to poll the people who actually vote.

A majority of voters think inflation and the economy ARE the big issues.
but those voters didn't show up and vote.

A smaller number of voters think abortion and threats to democracy are the big issues.
but those voters are who showed up and voted.


Every election is a base election.
If you do not turn out your own base, the independents don't matter a damned bit.

---

You can't win elections with just your base. Nominating Trump might fire up his base of support, but he would be unlikely to pull enough support from outside of his base to win.

---

The results from last night directly refute that conclusion.

SOME elections are choice elections, where wooing independents is the key.
SOME elections are base elections, where there isn't much middle ground and victory lies in turning out your base.

As long as we remain an evenly divided electorate, building a strategy of chasing 3% of the voting public least likely to vote is the road to oblivion. If you cannot fire up your own base to come boiling out to vote, you are not going to inspire independents to come boiling out to vote either.

Democrats campaigned solely within their base. They spoke primarily to the J6 faithful and the abortion on demand faithful....and they got a bigger turnout of their base than Republicans did.

---

This is incorrect. From National Review:

President Trump's handpicked and endorsed candidates largely underperformed or outright lost their midterm contests on Tuesday, deflating the former president's status as a party kingmaker and likely 2024 GOP presidential nominee.

Trump's influence was felt across the board: his hand-picked Senate candidates, political novices who secured their respective nominations largely on the strength of his endorsement, drastically underperformed expectations. House Republican challengers and incumbents who embraced his election denialism and gubernatorial candidates who did the same faced similar struggles.

In the battleground state of Pennsylvania, the Trump-backed Republican gubernatorial candidate, Doug Mastriano, lost by a bruising 13 percentage points to Pennsylvania attorney general Josh Shapiro after wholeheartedly embracing Trump's stolen election lies.

The state's Republican senate candidate, Dr. Mehmet Oz, was handpicked by Trump, who reportedly appreciated his background as a celebrity television doctor with a penchant for hawking dubious medical and dietary advice. Oz avoided the full-throated endorsements of Trump's "stop the steal" narrative that Mastriano offered up and managed to outperform him, but still lost to Democratic Pennsylvania lieutenant governor John Fetterman by roughly three percentage points. While Oz held Trump at arms of length for much of the closing stretch of the general election, the former president did stump for Oz in Pennsylvania in the days leading up the election.

In Georgia, Trump's handpicked candidate, football legend Herschel Walker, is likely headed to a run off against incumbent Democrat Rafael Warnock, as neither candidate is expected to garner a majority of the vote. Walker, who was plagued throughout the campaign by reports that he paid for multiple abortions, ran well behind incumbent governor Brian Kemp, who coasted to reelection against Stacey Abrams. The victory for Kemp comes after he stood up to Trump's 2020 election denialism, refusing to help the former president interfere in Georgia's counting process.

Things were no better in Arizona, where Trump vocally supported Republican gubernatorial candidate Kari Lake. Lake rose to GOP stardom by proudly campaigning under the "America First" banner and embracing Trump's stolen election lies. Although the race has yet to be called as of Wednesday morning, Lake is trailing the extremely unpopular Democratic secretary of state Katie Hobbs, who focused relentlessly during the campaign on Lake's embrace of Trump.

Lake continued her election integrity fear-mongering right through Election Day, implying that tabulator issues in Maricopa County were the result of partisan interference.

Do you think this is normal guys? My question is, do you think what's happening here in Maricopa County is normal? We have had problems after problems…I hope it's not malice. But we're gonna win. And when we win, there's gonna be a come to Jesus for elections in Arizona," Lake told reporters Tuesday. She went on to say that she voted in a liberal area of the state based on the expectation that election officials would create issues in more heavily red areas.

Arizona's Republican Senate candidate, Blake Masters, performed even worse in his race against incumbent Democrat Mark Kelly, a former astronaut. While the race hasn't yet been called as of Wednesday morning, Masters is trailing Kelly by six percentage points. Shunned by Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, Masters relied on the financial backing of a fervent Trump-ally, Peter Thiel, the co-founder of PayPal. In a rare bright spot for the MAGA wing, fellow Thiel-backed populist Ohio Senate candidate J.D. Vance pulled out a win against Democrat Tim Ryan.

Don Bolduc, the Republican hopeful who bested establishment candidate Don Morse with the help of Trump's endorsement, fell by the wayside to the Democratic incumbent, Maggie Hassan. During the primary, Bolduc, a former high-ranking general, embraced Trump's election denial claims only to back off of them heading into the general election.

Many House races also did not play out the way Trump-endorsed candidates had hoped.

Lauren Boebert, an unabashed Trump loyalist, is struggling to hold onto her GOP +6 Colorado district. Boebert was one of the most outspoken supporters of Trump in Congress in recent years. As of Wednesday morning, Boebert is trailing Democrat Adam Frisch by nearly 1 percentage point.

Over in Grand Rapids, Mich., the district elected its first Democrat to Congress, Hillary Scholten, in nearly fifty years over Republican John Gibbs. Gibbs won the party nomination on the strength of Trump's endorsement over incumbent Peter Meijer, the only freshman House Republican to vote to impeach Trump for his role in the January 6 riot.

Scholten sought to cast Gibbs's allegiance to Trump as a liability throughout the election saying he would be "doing Donald Trump's bidding."

The news of poor performance among Trump-aligned candidates comes at a precarious time for Donald Trump. The former president is widely expected to announce his intentions to run for the 2024 Republican presidential nomination in the coming week.

However, his poor showing in crucial battleground states has unsettled many Republicans. Florida governor Ron DeSantis's strong performance will position him well to challenge Trump if he decides to enter the race.

https://www.nationalreview.com/news/maga-candidates-flounder-in-midterms/?utm_source=email&utm_medium=breaking&utm_campaign=newstrack&utm_term=29644132