agracer said:

---

K2-HMFIC said:

---

Halperin has been calling POTUS one of the greatest politicians of the last century…this is not some "TDS" Stu Smith type.

Maybe Susan Collins, Roger Marshall, Ashley Hinson, Mike Rogers, Dan Sullivan, John Sununu, Jon Husted, Michelle Tafoya, and even Ken Paxton will all win. I know serious people who think each of those outcomes is possible.

Maybe Republican House losses will be at a minimum.…

— Mark Halperin (@MarkHalperin) September 25, 2026

The interesting thing about this moment is the twin engine of poll skepticism and national attitudes about the war and costs (diesel) cratering POTUS' support.

I have no idea how this plays out, but the Blue Tsunami is possible.

---

Trump has gone from making most GOP voters satisfied to flat out pissing them off. The Iran War, prices of almost everything, Diesel prices (lots of blue collar workers that would not vote for Kamala will go back to DEM straight ticket voting).

If the GOP retains control of either the senate or house it will be a huge win. Lots of older folks who traditionally vote GOP hate Trump b/c he's so polarizing with how he does things. They may not vote at all this year and that will make it really tough for the GOP to stay in control.

This is going to hit a lot of local races as well. I can see lots of RED states losing local seats (Texas, KS, MO, OK). Not losing control, but losing seats and not getting them back.

Expect 2027 to have tons of impeachment, investigations and the MSM will be all in on getting Trump.

---

What do we call a blue wave with a "red undertow"?

Red undertow being GOP voters staying home.

Quote:

---

In any case, Roger Marshall might be in trouble this November.

• It's a poorly kept secret that he doesn't even live in Kansas anymore.
• The crowd ripped him a new one at the last debate between him and Adam Hamilton (it was at the state fair)
• He actually didn't qualify for a second round of debates because less than 25% of his campaign funding came from within Kansas
• His opponent Adam Hamilton is a 5th generation Kansan and long time pastor in Leawood, KS. He's matching up pretty well against him so far.

---

I appreciate the details on the race in Kansas.

I am familiar with Adam Hamilton. Before the separation that the Methodist Church went through, I read a couple of his books. I found them liberal in a church sense but not terribly so.

But during the separation, Hamilton became an outspoken and bitter opponent of those of us who were sick of the extreme liberal positions of the national church.

He really outed himself as an SOB and I wouldn't trust him with my vote for anything.

Agreed. He almost led the schism.

We did a series of his on the prodigal son which I thought was outstanding.

Now you have major dems saying there is no blue wave and hoping that gop apathy gives them the win. Amazing how the tables turn. https://t.co/vWmW62f3WI

— unseen1 (@unseen1_unseen) September 25, 2026

He's not really wrong.

nortex97 said:

---

Now you have major dems saying there is no blue wave and hoping that gop apathy gives them the win. Amazing how the tables turn. https://t.co/vWmW62f3WI

— unseen1 (@unseen1_unseen) September 25, 2026

He's not really wrong.

---

Iran, Tariffs, Cost of Living, and his stance on AI/Data Centers…

GMaster0 said:

---

I do really think it's gonna be a blue wave, and perhaps a tsunami, but outsiders will have to interpret it not as Democrats are suddenly super popular, but an anti-incumbency movement is projectile vomiting out Republicans this time. Since the Republicans are uniquely associated with the failings of the Trump administration, I absolutely expect a dramatic evening in Washington if all this is conducted fairly.

Folks be mad!

---

I heard the guy that does the Cook Report earlier in the week.

He said it's probably less of a blue wave, and more of a red undertow...

Here is the thing that baffles me about this administration, if they just focused on affordability and domestic projects to make the country better, the midterms would have been a no-brainer and they would have carried it easily. The AI boom and monies being invested around the country would have been reminiscent of what Clinton had when he was in office; budget surpluses, lots of investment in the economy and an overall happy country. He may not have gotten the accolades he craves when he was alive, but I think the general sentiment when remembering his second term would have been positive.

Instead Trump and with enabling of the Republican party have done everything to countermand affordability and drive up prices. No one has counseled Trump for what actually makes sense to get this problem under control and keep inflation at bay. He broke and smashed promises for no foreign wars, drove inflation through the roof, increased the cost of life in the country (name your poison), and put people in charge that made a general mess of things in the country. These were all his direct actions as well, not something that he didn't have control over.

This will be remembered as one of the least effective and problematic administrations in American history, period end of story and guess what ….he has two more years left. I have faith the American populace will systemically reject him and the Republicans this next election cycle. They certainly earned it.

GMaster0 said:

---

Here is the thing that baffles me about this administration, if they just focused on affordability and domestic projects to make the country better, the midterms would have been a no-brainer and they would have carried it easily. The AI boom and monies being invested around the country would have been reminiscent of what Clinton had when he was in office; budget surpluses, lots of investment in the economy and an overall happy country. He may not have gotten the accolades he craves when he was alive, but I think the general sentiment when remembering his second term would have been positive.

Instead Trump and with enabling of the Republican party have done everything to countermand affordability and drive up prices. No one has counseled Trump for what actually makes sense to get this problem under control and keep inflation at bay. He broke and smashed promises for no foreign wars, drove inflation through the roof, increased the cost of life in the country (name your poison), and put people in charge that made a general mess of things in the country. These were all his direct actions as well, not something that he didn't have control over.

This will be remembered as one of the least effective and problematic administrations in American history, period end of story and guess what ….he has two more years left. I have faith the American populace will systemically reject him and the Republicans this next election cycle. They certainly earned it.

---

The affordability crisis was started in the last administration...9.1% inflation raised prices, and those increased prices are NEVER GOING DOWN. That's how inflation works.

Unfortunately, the average person doesn't understand that.

But, I agree. He has done dumb things that have raised prices - the tariffs are the largest part.

However - inflation is not "through the roof".

Here's the inflation by month from Biden's first month through now...bolded are the months that inflation was higher than it is right now. Italicized are months that it was lower than at the end of Biden's term.

2021
1.4 1.7 2.6 4.2 5.0 5.4 5.4 5.3 5.4 6.2 6.8 7.0 4.7

2022
7.5 7.9 8.5 8.3 8.6 9.1 8.5 8.3 8.2 7.7 7.1 6.5 8.0

2023
6.4 6.0 5.0 4.9 4.0 3.0 3.2 3.7 3.7 3.2 3.1 3.4 4.1

2024
3.1 3.2 3.5 3.4 3.3 3.0 2.9 2.5 2.4 2.6 2.7 2.9 2.9

2025
3.0 2.8 2.4 2.3 2.4 2.7 2.7 2.9 3.0 (*) 2.7 2.7 2.6

2026
2.4 2.4 3.3 3.8 4.2 3.5 3.4 3.4

This is exactly what they will do.

After that, America will become a one-party state. https://t.co/c6BmYmnaTJ

— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) September 26, 2026

Guess the Republicans better stop being useless, then.

Their inaction is driving them into the ground.

For the first time in 25+ years, a Republican party rep stopped by our house in Williamson County as a part of a get out the vote effort. Asked me if I voted Republican and I told him yes. Asked me if I planned to vote for Paxton and I said no. He didn't try to convince me other wise. Instead he said there were "other good Republicans" on the ballot.

I know - cool story bro. But two things are clear to me:

• The Republican party knows they are in a fight this election
• They know Ken Paxton is candidate that turns people off and they hope he doesn't torpedo turnout.

Edit: Posted here because it looks like the Paxton vs Talarico thread got locked.

So you prefer to see one Texas senator voting Schumer's agenda.

BQ78 said:

---

So you prefer to see one Texas senator voting Schumer's agenda.

---

Why do you people insist on doing this? Just because someone says they won't vote for a terrible flawed candidate you assume they prefer the other side? I said I generally vote Republican but won't vote for Paxton. How do you make the leap that I prefer Talarico?

I don't; he a loser and a terrible candidate. Dude ran away when he was in the Texas legislature and appears to be proud of it. He's not a serious person. I don't like Paxton; he too is a loser and a terrible candidate. And a terrible person.

Looks like I'll be voting for the Libertarian in this particular race.

dmart90 said:

---

BQ78 said:

---

So you prefer to see one Texas senator voting Schumer's agenda.

---

Why do you people insist on doing this? Just because someone says they won't vote for a terrible flawed candidate you assume they prefer the other side? I said I generally vote Republican but won't vote for Paxton. How do you make the leap that I prefer Talarico?

I don't; he a loser and a terrible candidate. Dude ran away when he was in the Texas legislature and appears to be proud of it. He's not a serious person. I don't like Paxton; he too is a loser and a terrible candidate. And a terrible person.

Looks like I'll be voting for the Libertarian in this particular race.

---

There's some overly aggressive borderline scary way of thinking on this board where they tell people that if you hate a particular candidate, but are a republican that you are " just supporting the radical left" even by not voting in that race at all or voting third party. As if only Dem voters should have the luxury of gauging someone's candidate quality.

My opinion has always been you have your right to vote and you can vote for whoever you want. Anyone who tells you otherwise is crazy or takes things way too seriously.

It is logical thinking, does the Libertarian candidate even have a ghost of a chance at winning? No way! So it is a completely wasted vote. Staying home makes more sense to me than that.

So it comes down to two despicable people. Therefore you must vote based on the policies they will vote for. There is no doubt how Talarico and Paxton will vote on the major issues, choose wisely for the future of America.

What do you like about the Libertarian or are you voting for him because he is not Paxton or Talarico?

BQ78 said:

---

It is logical thinking, does the Libertarian candidate even have a ghost of a chance at winning? No way! So it is a completely wasted vote. Staying home makes more sense to me than that.

So it comes down to two despicable people. Therefore you must vote based on the policies they will vote for. There is no doubt how Talarico and Paxton will vote on the major issues, choose wisely for the future of America.

---

Nah, vote for who you want. If we continue to think like that, we'll never have a third party worth supporting. It's unfortunate because another party could help our process.

WTAF?

“Paid for by the U.S. Government”: The Trump administration is airing a taxpayer-funded, pro-Trump ad on Fox News and Newsmax featuring Trump declaring: “America will never be a communist country,” while on-screen text touts the “largest tax cuts in history.”

The White House… pic.twitter.com/jEh12XrHch

— Republicans against Trump (@RpsAgainstTrump) September 26, 2026

BQ78 said:

---

It is logical thinking, does the Libertarian candidate even have a ghost of a chance at winning? No way! So it is a completely wasted vote. Staying home makes more sense to me than that.

So it comes down to two despicable people. Therefore you must vote based on the policies they will vote for. There is no doubt how Talarico and Paxton will vote on the major issues, choose wisely for the future of America.

---

Some people may not like it, but protest votes are a thing. I simply view voting third party as a way to voice your displeasure with both viable candidates.

dmart90 said:

---

For the first time in 25+ years, a Republican party rep stopped by our house in Williamson County as a part of a get out the vote effort. Asked me if I voted Republican and I told him yes. Asked me if I planned to vote for Paxton and I said no. He didn't try to convince me other wise. Instead he said there were "other good Republicans" on the ballot.

I know - cool story bro. But two things are clear to me:

• The Republican party knows they are in a fight this election
• They know Ken Paxton is candidate that turns people off and they hope he doesn't torpedo turnout.

Edit: Posted here because it looks like the Paxton vs Talarico thread got locked.

---

I get that position. I do.

However, how will you feel about the TX Senator POSITION if Talarico is there for a MINIMUM of 6 years?

BQ78 said:

---

What do you like about the Libertarian or are you voting for him because he is not Paxton or Talarico?

---

I'll reply to both your posts here.

First, thanks for sharing your opinion. We disagree. I would love to see more people stand up and say "these are two terrible candidates - I'm voting for someone else." Probably won't happen, but that's not going to stop me.

Second, mostly voting against the other two. Generally, Ted Brown's positions are acceptable:

• I agree with his position in digital privacy and freedom.
• His position on taxes is silly; we will never repeal the income tax and abolish the IRS.
• I don't love his position on immigration. This has always been a week point for the Libertarian Party. They need to find a middle ground.
• His dovish foreign policy position is naive.
• I agree with his free trade positions,
• I like his pro 2nd amendment position.
• I agree with ending the war on drugs. I don't approve of and won't partake of narcotics, but you do you.
• I approve of his message on justice reform; we are currently broken.
• His position on killing the Department of Education is silly. Generally, I'm ok with school choice.
• Agree with his position of police demilitarization.
• And free market health care is the way to go - keep the gov out of it.

Ag with kids said:

---

dmart90 said:

---

For the first time in 25+ years, a Republican party rep stopped by our house in Williamson County as a part of a get out the vote effort. Asked me if I voted Republican and I told him yes. Asked me if I planned to vote for Paxton and I said no. He didn't try to convince me other wise. Instead he said there were "other good Republicans" on the ballot.

I know - cool story bro. But two things are clear to me:

• The Republican party knows they are in a fight this election
• They know Ken Paxton is candidate that turns people off and they hope he doesn't torpedo turnout.

Edit: Posted here because it looks like the Paxton vs Talarico thread got locked.

---

I get that position. I do.

However, how will you feel about the TX Senator POSITION if Talarico is there for a MINIMUM of 6 years?

---

He serves one term, at best. Hell, if he wins; I fully expect there will be a recall vote movement. Maybe the Republicans can put up someone decent if that happens.

I could respect your stance if the stakes were not so high with Talarico.

In 2016 I took such a stance with Trump and Clinton but if it were as close as this senate race is, I would have voted for Trump because Clinton was just that bad of a choice.

Just saw my first anti Gina ad by Abbott.

BQ78 said:

---

I could respect your stance if the stakes were not so high with Talarico.

In 2016 I took such a stance with Trump and Clinton but if it were as close as this senate race is, I would have voted for Trump because Clinton was just that bad of a choice.

---

Clinton was FAR MORE dangerous then than Talarico is now. My .02.

BQ78 said:

---

I could respect your stance if the stakes were not so high with Talarico.

In 2016 I took such a stance with Trump and Clinton but if it were as close as this senate race is, I would have voted for Trump because Clinton was just that bad of a choice.

---

What election was there when there was a consensus that there wasn't too much at stake?

Dole vs Clinton 1996

dmart90 said:

---

Ag with kids said:

---

dmart90 said:

---

For the first time in 25+ years, a Republican party rep stopped by our house in Williamson County as a part of a get out the vote effort. Asked me if I voted Republican and I told him yes. Asked me if I planned to vote for Paxton and I said no. He didn't try to convince me other wise. Instead he said there were "other good Republicans" on the ballot.

I know - cool story bro. But two things are clear to me:

• The Republican party knows they are in a fight this election
• They know Ken Paxton is candidate that turns people off and they hope he doesn't torpedo turnout.

Edit: Posted here because it looks like the Paxton vs Talarico thread got locked.

---

I get that position. I do.

However, how will you feel about the TX Senator POSITION if Talarico is there for a MINIMUM of 6 years?

---

He serves one term, at best. Hell, if he wins; I fully expect there will be a recall vote movement. Maybe the Republicans can put up someone decent if that happens.

---

Texas state law does not allow a recall of a Senator currently.

So, if he wins, he is there for SIX years, voting in lockstep with the Democrats.

dmart90 said:

---

BQ78 said:

---

I could respect your stance if the stakes were not so high with Talarico.

In 2016 I took such a stance with Trump and Clinton but if it were as close as this senate race is, I would have voted for Trump because Clinton was just that bad of a choice.

---

Clinton was FAR MORE dangerous then than Talarico is now. My .02.

---

Incumbent Senators don't lose very often.

Look at Georgia.

It's still a light red state, but it's got two FAR LEFT Democrat Senators that probably will be there for several more terms...

Voting in lockstep with the far left Democrats in the Senate.

Ag with kids said:

---

dmart90 said:

---

BQ78 said:

---

I could respect your stance if the stakes were not so high with Talarico.

In 2016 I took such a stance with Trump and Clinton but if it were as close as this senate race is, I would have voted for Trump because Clinton was just that bad of a choice.

---

Clinton was FAR MORE dangerous then than Talarico is now. My .02.

---

Incumbent Senators don't lose very often.

Look at Georgia.

It's still a light red state, but it's got two FAR LEFT Democrat Senators that probably will be there for several more terms...

Voting in lockstep with the far left Democrats in the Senate.

---

That is 100% Trump's fault. He depressed the turnout in the 2020 runoffs and endorsed Herschel Walker in the 2022 election.

Aggie97 said:

---

Ag with kids said:

---

dmart90 said:

---

BQ78 said:

---

I could respect your stance if the stakes were not so high with Talarico.

In 2016 I took such a stance with Trump and Clinton but if it were as close as this senate race is, I would have voted for Trump because Clinton was just that bad of a choice.

---

Clinton was FAR MORE dangerous then than Talarico is now. My .02.

---

Incumbent Senators don't lose very often.

Look at Georgia.

It's still a light red state, but it's got two FAR LEFT Democrat Senators that probably will be there for several more terms...

Voting in lockstep with the far left Democrats in the Senate.

---

That is 100% Trump's fault. He depressed the turnout in the 2020 runoffs and endorsed Herschel Walker in the 2022 election.

---

I'm not disagreeing with the fact that the GOP (Trump) shot itself in the dick numerous times, but my point still stands. Incumbent Senators rarely lose.

Here are all 43 of the incumbents that have lost the general election in the last 30 years (Approx 450 elections):

2024/2025: Jon Tester (D-MT)

2020: Doug Jones (D-AL), Martha McSally (R-AZ), Cory Gardner (R-CO), Kelly Loeffler (R-GA), and David Perdue (R-GA)

2018: Dean Heller (R-NV), Claire McCaskill (D-MO), Joe Donnelly (D-IN), Heidi Heitkamp (D-ND), and Bill Nelson (D-FL)

2016: Mark Kirk (R-IL) and Kelly Ayotte (R-NH)

2014: Kay Hagan (D-NC), Mark Pryor (D-AR), Mary Landrieu (D-LA), and Mark Begich (D-AK)

2012: Scott Brown (R-MA)

2010: Russ Feingold (D-WI) and Blanche Lincoln (D-AR)

2008: Elizabeth Dole (R-NC), John Sununu (R-NH), and Ted Stevens (R-AK)

2006: George Allen (R-VA), Jim Talent (R-MO), Rick Santorum (R-PA), Mike DeWine (R-OH), and Lincoln Chafee (R-RI)

2002: Max Cleland (D-GA), Jean Carnahan (D-MO), and Tim Hutchinson (R-AR)

2000: Spencer Abraham (R-MI), John Ashcroft (R-MO), Rod Grams (R-MN), and William Roth (R-DE)

1998: Carol Moseley Braun (D-IL) and Al D'Amato (R-NY)

1996: Larry Pressler (R-SD) and Sheila Frahm (R-KS)

That's about 10% of incumbents losing the general election...and many of those that lost in that period were due to the state's electorate changing from blue->red or red->blue.

Texas is still pretty damn red.

Montgomery county is the most extreme case I’ve seen in Ohio so far of black precincts checking out of the election. The Blackest precincts show near collapse in election participation in EV.

Very worrisome if you’re a Democrat and no real reason to expect it to change https://t.co/vJq2k02y9N pic.twitter.com/qyZHm7k1Eb

— Latinx Adjacent Doctor PhD (@TonerousHyus) September 27, 2026

A very positive sign.

Me realizing we are already back to the “Harris voters will surge Election Day” post hoc talking points https://t.co/fstyeCOxk5 pic.twitter.com/5aNKjpt4cq

— Latinx Adjacent Doctor PhD (@TonerousHyus) September 28, 2026

LOL.

nortex97 said:

---

Montgomery county is the most extreme case I’ve seen in Ohio so far of black precincts checking out of the election. The Blackest precincts show near collapse in election participation in EV.

Very worrisome if you’re a Democrat and no real reason to expect it to change https://t.co/vJq2k02y9N pic.twitter.com/qyZHm7k1Eb

— Latinx Adjacent Doctor PhD (@TonerousHyus) September 27, 2026

A very positive sign.

Me realizing we are already back to the “Harris voters will surge Election Day” post hoc talking points https://t.co/fstyeCOxk5 pic.twitter.com/5aNKjpt4cq

— Latinx Adjacent Doctor PhD (@TonerousHyus) September 28, 2026

LOL.

---

Maybe…but how is Republican turnout? R Voter apathy is the biggest threat.

I would concede your point in some blue states such as Virginia (not sure they have any US Rep seats that are real battlegrounds on the old maps there), but not in the real battleground ones that matter imho.

Hard to argue the polls are wrong when the early vote data confirms GOP turnout has cratered. The enthusiasm gap here is just astonishing.

Is it going to be this bad across the entire country? Possibly not. Virginia is now substantially to the Left of America as a whole, so a…

— Christian Heiens 🏛 (@ChristianHeiens) September 26, 2026

For an election that I consider pretty darn important, I think turnout is likely not going to be net as high as expected, tbf. This is why the rallies/spend etc. matter. JD Vance going to Harlingen as such makes sense, for example.

Bull Meachem said:

---

BQ78 said:

---

It is logical thinking, does the Libertarian candidate even have a ghost of a chance at winning? No way! So it is a completely wasted vote. Staying home makes more sense to me than that.

So it comes down to two despicable people. Therefore you must vote based on the policies they will vote for. There is no doubt how Talarico and Paxton will vote on the major issues, choose wisely for the future of America.

---

Nah, vote for who you want. If we continue to think like that, we'll never have a third party worth supporting. It's unfortunate because another party could help our process.

---

I get you libertarians don't want to hear the truth but our First Past the Post system and strategic Voting already mathematically make a third party completely unviable in our system. It's literally a waste of your vote and deluding yourself into thinking enough Republicans are willing to lose to Dems for 5 or 6 election cycles before a Libertarian candidate might finally be competitive simply isn't happening.

The reality is Talarico or Paxton will be Senator and you know how they will vote. Please live in reality and vote like it