Category Archives: President

Kentucky Gov. Beshear’s Comments on Potential Run for the Presidency

By Jim Ellis — Tuesday, June 10, 2025

President

Kentucky Gov. Andy Beshear (D) / U.S. Air National Guard photo by Dale Greer

Kentucky Gov. Andy Beshear (D) made some comments during an exclusive interview with a Louisville television reporter that put forth some of his thoughts about running for President. The interview also revealed that he is not currently considering a bid for his state’s open Senate seat.

Gov. Beshear said, in an answer to Louisville television news reporter Isaiah Kim-Martinez’s question about running for President, that “What matters to me is that I don’t leave a broken country to my kids. And if I’m somebody who can bring people together and heal this country, then it’s something I’ll consider.”

The Democratic leadership would certainly like to see Gov. Beshear run for the Senate because he, realistically, is the only Democrat who would have a chance at converting retiring Sen. Mitch McConnell’s seat away from the Republicans.

The Governor’s recent actions, however, suggest that a Senate campaign isn’t on his political radar. Beshear is conducting many national interviews, traveling the country to appear at fundraising events for state parties and individual candidates, hosting a podcast concentrating on national politics, and in January will become chairman of the Democratic Governors Association. These activities clearly suggest a politician with national rather than statewide ambitions.

Gov. Beshear’s current actions are good news for Republicans, particularly Senate candidates Daniel Cameron, the former state Attorney General who lost the 2023 Governor’s campaign to Beshear, and Rep. Andy Barr (R-Lexington). Without the Governor in the Senate race, the GOP primary winner next May will automatically become the prohibitive favorite to win the 2026 general election.

A potential Beshear presidential candidacy, however, sets up an interesting intra-party dynamic. Another now-former southern Democratic Governor, North Carolina’s Roy Cooper who was ineligible to seek a third term in 2024, is also considering a presidential run and is another Governor or ex-Governor that the Democratic leadership would like to see run for the Senate.

Thinking about a lone Democratic presidential candidate hailing from the southern region makes that person a legitimate contender for the party nomination, assuming he can sweep the block of the Deep South and border state bound delegate votes. Therefore, either Gov. Beshear or former Gov. Cooper would be considered a credible national candidate so long as only one runs for President. Otherwise, the regional votes would be split, thus likely dooming them both.

The open 2028 presidential election will feature a huge number of Democratic candidates, many of whom are Governors or former Governors – Beshear, Cooper, 2024 Vice Presidential candidate Tim Walz (MN), Wes Moore (MD), Gavin Newsom (CA), J.B. Pritzker (IL), Josh Shapiro (PA), and Gretchen Whitmer (MI) are all potential candidates – along with many others who are not state chief executives.

Geography is a key point that brings into central focus the Democratic National Committee members’ decision in scheduling the nomination calendar. The order in which the states vote will be a major intangible factor directly relating to who wins the next Democratic presidential nomination. Yet, it remains to be seen which states are sanctioned to vote before the eventual Super Tuesday date.

Remember, in the 2024 nomination campaign, the Democrats ditched Iowa and New Hampshire as the traditional first voting states. This left only the South Carolina, Michigan, and Nevada electorates to cast the initial nomination votes prior to the Super Tuesday bonanza which featured 16 voting entities (15 states and one territory). Under the 2024 schedule, Gov. Whitmer would be in prime position because her large state, Michigan (117 delegates), is the only pre-Super Tuesday domain from where a prospective national candidate hails.

Also, under current party rules, the Super Delegates, those party leaders and elected officials who have elite status, are ironically not allowed to vote for President on the first ballot. The DNC members will also decide whether this practice will continue.

Thus, future DNC meetings where the presidential primary schedule and the Super Delegate issues will be brought before the members will create major discussion points to say the least.

Therefore, certain key decisions about the party’s nomination structure will soon be answered and long before the first primary votes are cast in whatever states are ultimately slotted before Super Tuesday.

The “What Happened In 2024” Report

WHAT HAPPENED IN 2024

By Jim Ellis — Monday, June 9, 2025

2024 Election

The Catalist research organization released their exhaustive report on the 2024 election and provided some detailed conclusions about the electorate’s voting behavior from the most recent presidential election.

Some of their conclusions, such as President Donald Trump performing better with minority – particularly young non-white males – non-college, and younger voters have already been brought forth through various media reports. Catalist confirms some of those conclusions but goes much further in explaining how the electorate is performing, which could lead to potential future vote pattern changes.

As the Catalist principals point out, the 2024 election came close to reaching the record 64 percent eligible voter participation factor marked in 2020. In the battleground states, defined as Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin, the participation rate reached 70 percent of the eligible population. This means among registered voters in the battleground states, turnout reached or exceeded 80 percent.

While much attention has been given to President Trump’s stronger performance among blacks, and especially young male blacks, which is the historical best of any modern day Republican presidential candidate, it is the Hispanic numbers that were particularly noteworthy and may give future Republican candidates in down ballot races a new persuasion universe … assuming they can find the right messaging.

Catalist claims that since President Barack Obama was first elected in 2008, the size of the Hispanic CVAP (Citizen Voting Age Population) has grown by a factor of 80 percent to 34.7 million people. The Hispanic portion in relation to the whole voting universe has risen from seven percent in 2012 to 10 percent in 2024. In two battleground states, Arizona and Nevada, Hispanics account for 18 and 17 percent of the respective state electorates.

The Catalist 2024 report methodology tracked the decline in Democratic performance as opposed to the increase in the Republican support figures. Therefore, among Hispanics nationally, the Democratic support factor dropped from a high of 70 percent in 2016 (for Hillary Clinton) to just 54 percent for Kamala Harris.

Among Latino men, Harris’s support total dropped below the majority mark to 47 percent. In the battleground states, the Hispanic male Democratic support figure fell to 48 percent from a high of 62 percent for President Obama in 2012.

Comparing Harris’s performance among Hispanic males to President Joe Biden’s total, her number within this same cell group receded a full 10 percentage points.

Additionally, the Catalist report finds that the overall race percentages have significantly changed since 2012.

From the report:

“Over the past several election cycles, Democrats have retained their multiracial coalition while Republicans have significantly diversified their own coalition. In 2012, when former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney was the GOP [presidential] nominee, roughly one in 10 Republican presidential voters was a person of color; by 2024 that figure rose to 1 in 5 Republican voters.

“Latino voters comprised 9% of Trump’s 2024 coalition, up from 5% of Romney 2012 voters. AAPI (American Asian Pacific Islander) voters comprised 4% of Trump 2024 voters, up from 2% of Romney voters. Finally, Black voters comprised 3% of Trump 2024 voters, up from 1% of Romney voters.”

Another curious portion of the report, among many, is that President Trump performed better with his minority coalition in non-battleground states than those widely considered as the most competitive. This suggests that the trend, if it transfers to other future GOP candidates, could potentially become transformational.

A further interesting point was the Catalist report’s study of what was termed “rotating voters.” The project compared individuals who regularly vote with those who pick and choose the elections in which they participate.

Again, from the report:

“In 2012, there were more than 103 million repeat voters (from 2008), and President Obama’s support levels shrank among this group, from 52.4% to 50.9%. At the same time, groups of Democrats rotated in and out of the electorate: 27 million voters dropped off from 2008, who supported Obama at 61%; but they were replaced by 24 million voters who supported him at 58%, still a wide margin. Altogether, this resulted in lower turnout from 2012 overall and a smaller [Obama] margin of victory.”

In 2024, the report indicates that 126 million voters returned from the 2020 election, the highest repeat figure recorded since the Catalist monitoring began. Harris, however, lost a projected two percentage points from President Biden’s support total within this voter universe. A total of 26 million new voters came into the 2024 electorate, but less than 50 percent of the group backed the Democratic nominee: hence, one of the key underlying reasons for the final result.

There is much more in the comprehensive Catalist report. A link at the top of this post is included to provide access to the full document.

Early House Vulnerables

By Jim Ellis — Friday, May 30, 2025

House

The Trump influence / Photo by Gage Skidmore

There will be a considerable number of contested US House seats in the 2026 election cycle, and the watch list begins with the members who won either election or re-election in a district where the electorate voted for the opposite party’s presidential candidate.

There are 16 such districts; 13 that President Trump carried while a Democrat won the House race, and three opposites; that is, districts where Kamala Harris proved victorious, but a Republican clinched the House campaign.

Today, we take a glimpse at the early races in the ticket-splitting seats where a clear general election campaign is already developing.

In terms of the Trump performance, the President carried 230 of the 435 US House districts in the 2024 election cycle. It is not until we reach Trump’s 197th-strongest seat do we see a Democrat win in a CD where the President prevailed.

• Though Trump scored a 53-44 percent victory in Maine’s 2nd District, Rep. Jared Golden (D-Lewiston) survived a close re-election battle with then-state Representative and former NASCAR driver Austin Theriault (R) with 50.3 percent of the vote.

In 2026, it appears that Golden will face former two-term Gov. Paul LePage (R) in what promises to be a national congressional campaign. Rep. Golden has won four consecutive elections in the 2nd CD, but Gov. LePage has also carried the seat in all three of his gubernatorial runs.

• Turning to northern California’s 13th District, Republican incumbent John Duarte fell to Democrat Adam Gray by just 187 votes even with President Trump recording a victory margin of almost six percentage points. In 2026, Republicans are coalescing around Ceres Mayor Javier Lopez, who earned an endorsement from former Rep. Duarte when the defeated member announced that he would not return for a re-match.

• North Carolina’s 1st District was significantly changed in the 2023 redistricting plan and therefore will again be competitive in 2026. GOP candidate Laurie Buckhout, who held Rep. Don Davis (D-Snow Hill/Rocky Mount) to a 49.5 – 47.8 percent re-election victory, accepted a Trump Administration appointment and will not run for Congress next year.

The Buckhout decision sets the stage for Rocky Mount Mayor Sandy Roberson (R) to make a return appearance and become an early consensus candidate. Roberson ran for the seat in 2022 but lost the Republican primary.

• Texas veteran Rep. Henry Cuellar (D-Laredo) survived his re-election campaign against a weak Republican candidate even with a federal indictment hanging over his head and President Trump scoring a 53.2 – 45.9 percent victory within the district confines.

Former Congresswoman Mayra Flores (R), who twice lost to Rep. Vicente Gonzalez (D-McAllen) in the neighboring 34th District, announced that she will switch districts next year to challenge Rep. Cuellar. With a changing district and Flores as the GOP nominee (though she faces a Republican primary with, so far, only minor opponents), this district will attract more national attention in 2026.

• The most pro-Kamala Harris seat to elect a Republican Congressman is found in Omaha, Nebraska. While Harris clinched the 2nd District with a 51.6 – 47.0 percent victory margin, Rep. Don Bacon (R-Papillion) was able to secure a fifth term with a 50.9 percent win. Bacon says he is undecided about whether to seek re-election in 2026.

Democrats are looking for another candidate to replace twice-defeated former state Sen. Tony Vargas, so we could see much change coming here in preparation for next year’s election. Regardless of who becomes the eventual party nominees, NE-2 will host a hotly contested race and is most likely the top Democratic national conversion opportunity.

• New York Rep. Mike Lawler (R-Pearl River) is contemplating a gubernatorial run, and a crowd of Democrats are lining up for what promises to be a bruising nomination battle. Six Democrats, two of whom are local elected officials, have already announced their candidacies. The Republican leadership and President Trump are encouraging Rep. Lawler to remain in the 17th District campaign.

• Moving southward from New York to Pennsylvania, Democratic leaders want to replace twice-defeated 1st District nominee Ashley Ehasz who lost to Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick (R-Levittown) 56-44% last November even though Kamala Harris was carrying the seat with a slight 49.7 to 49.4 percent margin. Look for Bucks County Commissioner Bob Harvie to become a consensus Democratic candidate.

The other races in this category are still developing. The remaining Democratic incumbents who won Trump districts and can expect tough re-election campaigns are:

Josh Harder (CA-9)
Kristen McDonald Rivet (MI-8)
Susie Lee (NV-3)
Nellie Pou (NJ-9)
Gabe Vasquez (NM-2)
Tom Suozzi (NY-3)
Marcy Kaptur (OH-9)
Vicente Gonzalez (TX-34)
Marie Gluesenkamp Perez (WA-3)

Upcoming Reapportionment A Harbinger of Potential Major Political Shift

By Jim Ellis — Wednesday, Jan. 8, 2025

President

President-Elect Donald Trump / Photo by Gage Skidmore

The current mid-decade population calculations for the coming 2030 census and national reapportionment not only mean a potential major political shift in congressional district locations, but significant change may also come to the next decade’s presidential elections.

Yesterday, we covered the Brennan Center for Justice’s recently released 2030 census reapportionment projection that showed what could become a major partisan flip in the Republicans’ favor. The changes would also alter the presidential campaign strategies for the national elections coming in the ‘30s.

The big changes would include affecting in a major way the electoral vote counts within the Democrats’ two largest voting states of California and New York. The Brennan Center calculations, and those from the American Redistricting Project which released similar but not identical projections in October, see the Democrats losing six electoral votes from the two entities (four down in California; minus two in New York).

Looking at the estimated congressional district gains in the two large Republican strongholds of Texas and Florida (each state would gain four seats according to the BC calculations) adds an even more significant electoral vote increase presumably for a Republican presidential nominee as soon as the 2032 national election.

If the Brennan Center calculations were in effect for the 2024 election, for example, President-Elect Donald Trump’s 312-226 electoral vote victory would have been even larger.

Adding the changes in California, Florida, New York, and Texas along with other states that are projected to gain or lose single seats, the Trump EV victory total would have ballooned to a 322-216 margin. This means the net swing would have been a huge 20 electoral votes just from the population shifts projected for the next census and reapportionment.

To put in perspective just how large a margin is seen in this projected swing, the 2020 census saw only seven congressional districts change states. The result added a net three electoral votes to the Republican total, boosting a starting base of what became a Trump nomination to 235 from his actual 2020 total of 232 EVs.

Looking at the projected 2030 list of 14 states that will gain or lose representation from one to four seats apiece helps illustrate the evolving trends. Among Arizona, California, Florida, Idaho, Illinois, Minnesota, New York, North Carolina, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Texas, Utah, and Wisconsin, only two of the places, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin (both losing one seat), adversely affects the Republican vote count when overlayed with the 2024 Trump election.

At this point, we can mention that the American Redistricting Project found a slightly different calculation.

This organization projected both Georgia and Tennessee, the electorates from each of which voted for Trump, gaining one congressional seat apiece, while Wisconsin holds firm with an eight-district delegation. ARP then finds New York losing three seats and Florida gaining three. The Brennan Center found New York losing two and Florida gaining four. ARP also projected Illinois losing two seats as compared to the BC calculation suggesting that the Land of Lincoln would lose one.

Obviously, much will change in terms of population shift in the latter part of the current decade to alter the final outcome of the coming 2030 census reapportionment, so the differences between the BC and ARP calculations at this point are negligible.

The core population patterns, however, of great swings shifting away from the Northeast, Midwest, and Pacific Coast to the South and interior West look to significantly favor Republicans, and that trend is unlikely to change.

Taking the ultimate geographical shifts into account, we will see heightened political activity designed to enhance political persuasion in the affected states. Therefore, partisan messaging in the 2026 and ’28 election cycles will become another significant factor in determining whether the 2024 election, as some political observers believe, has launched a national political realignment that may culminate in the next census reapportionment.

Improvement Everywhere

By Jim Ellis — Tuesday, Dec. 3, 2024

2024 Election

President-Elect Donald Trump / Photo by Gage Skidmore

With more 2024 election numbers becoming final and certified, we can begin to see that interesting patterns are developing, some of which were pervasive.

We have already seen many articles based upon exit polls showing that minority voters in the African-American, Hispanic, and Asian communities as well as younger citizens produced greater support for President-Elect Donald Trump than what past Republican candidates drew. He also gained more support from voters on the lower end of the economic scale and those without a college degree. The individual state totals, however, suggest his win was even more significant.

Whether the 2024 election proves to be the beginning of an American political realignment remains to be seen, but it does appear the Republicans now have an opportunity to create a more long-lasting, upward support trend with groups that, heretofore, comprised the Democratic Party’s strongest base vote.

Realignments typically have occurred in 40-50 year increments. Thus, the timing may be consistent with another realignment forming. Going back to the 1976 presidential election between Jimmy Carter and then-President Gerald Ford, we see the country has almost flipped. Of the 23 states that Carter carried in ’76, Kamala Harris won in only seven 48 years later. Conversely, Harris took a dozen states that Ford won. On the other hand, Trump won 16 states that Carter won, and 15 that Ford claimed.

The most sweeping change, however, comes in comparing Trump’s 2024 performance to his previous presidential runs.

When looking at his 2020 totals in comparison to 2024, we see that Trump improved his support percentage in all 51 voting entities. Calculating his percentage totals, we see that his support jumped to a mean average increase of 2.3 percentage points with a median of 1.9 percent. His high gain was in New York where he posted 5.7 percentage points over his 2020 total. His low was gaining only 0.2 percent in Washington.

Conversely, Kamala Harris performed badly in comparison to Joe Biden’s winning 2020 campaign. She underperformed Biden’s totals in 50 of the 51 voting entities, scoring a positive gain of just 0.2 percent over the president’s total in Utah. Even in her home state of California where the electorate three times elected her to statewide office, she finished 4.9 percent below Biden’s total even though she carried the state with 58.6 percent of the vote. It was her sixth-best performing state in the country. (District of Columbia, Vermont, Maryland, Massachusetts, and Hawaii were better Harris performers than California.)

Comparing the Trump and Harris increase/decrease totals, we see that the largest net swing (subtracting Harris decrease vis-a-vis Biden from Trump’s 2020 to 2024 increase total) occurred in New York where Trump gained 5.7 points over his 2020 performance and Harris dropped 5.7 from Biden’s 2020 total. Therefore, the net swing in Trump’s favor was 11 percentage points. The next two largest swings occurred in New Jersey (10 percentage points), and Florida (9.8 percent).

Looking at Trump’s 2016 performance in comparison to 2024, we see his former total beat his current total in only one state, Georgia, and by only .1 percent. His 2024 percentage of 43.2 equaled his 2016 performance in Colorado.

Interestingly, while Trump recaptured Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin in 2024 after winning them in 2016 but losing all five in 2020, his support percentage was actually higher in losing (2020) than in winning (2016) in four of the five states. Only in Georgia was his winning 2016 percentage higher than his 2020 losing percentage.

Harris, on the other hand, did outperform Hillary Clinton’s 2016 total in 36 states with her largest increase margin being 10.3 percentage points in Utah.

Though this is not the “greatest landslide in Republican history,” as Trump claims (both of Ronald Reagan’s wins in 1980 and 1984 were bigger victories), the 2024 election is proving to be a very significant Republican win and one that could set the trend for future election cycles.

Polling Accuracy

By Jim Ellis — Tuesday, Nov. 19, 2024

Polling

President-Elect Donald Trump / Photo by Gage Skidmore

There has been a great deal of controversial discussion about the 2024 political polling. Many continue to raise questions about the major polling firms’ cumulative accuracy rating, but is the criticism fair?

The perception that the polling industry missed President-Elect Donald Trump’s “landslide” win is not particularly accurate. Though Trump swept the battleground states, the margins were close, and virtually all of the 2024 presidential pollsters forecast close races in the critical states, which is the end result.

A typical polling margin of error is three percentage points. Using this as the accuracy scale, the Real Clear Politics polling average suggests that across the battleground board, the average survey fell within such a range.

In national polling, the ending Real Clear Politics average found Kamala Harris cumulatively leading by the smallest of margins, at 0.1 percent. These numbers include 24 polls from 14 different polling organizations.

While they did miss the projection of which candidate was leading, the cumulative margin was well within the margin of error. Since Trump is winning the national popular vote by 1.8 percentage points, the polling community average of 0.1 point separating the two candidate was a miss of 1.9 percentage points, but well within the margin of error.

In the battleground states, the least accurate polling came in Arizona. There, the Real Clear Politics average suggested a 2.8 percent lead for Trump, but he carried the state by a 5.5 percent margin. This was a 2.7 point miss.

The other states where the polling mark was two points off or more came in North Carolina and Nevada. The NC polling average suggested a Trump win margin of 1.2 percentage points. In actuality, the president-elect carried the state by 3.2 percent. In Nevada, the miss was a bit worse.

Pollsters pegged Trump with a lead of 0.6 percent, but he carried the Silver State with a 3.1 percent margin, thus the cumulative miss was 2.5 points.

The most accurate of the state presidential polling came in Georgia. The average projection suggested a Trump lead of 1.3 percent, but he won the state with a 2.2-point margin. Thus, the average poll figure missed the actual result by 0.9 points, again well within the polling margin of error.

In the seven battleground states, the polling community correctly projected five of the seven Trump wins. The two misses were Michigan and Wisconsin, but both fell only a half-point or less off the pace.

The one consistent error point in all of the battleground states, and nationally, was underestimating the Republican vote strength. This has been a consistent pattern during the Trump era, and it happened again in 2024 but to a lesser degree.

The numbers in the 11 competitive Senate races were not as accurate as the presidential projections.

The least accurately polled state was Florida where Sen. Rick Scott (R) recorded almost a 13-point victory, yet the polling average for his race against former Congresswoman Debbie Mucarsel-Powell (D) suggested a much closer outcome. The two were separated by an average of 4.6 points in Sen. Scott’s favor.

A similar pattern, but to a lesser degree, occurred in Texas. For most of the race, the polling average showed a close race between Sen. Ted Cruz (R) and Rep. Colin Allred (D-Dallas), but the end result proved different. While polling found Cruz extending his small lead within the race’s final stage to an average of 4.4 points, the end result yielded the two-term senator an 8.6 percent win, meaning a polling miss of 4.2 points, well outside the polling margin of error and far beyond the early race pattern.

The most accurately polled Senate race was Arizona, where the cumulative average found Rep. Ruben Gallego (D-Phoenix) leading former news anchor Kari Lake (R) by an average of 2.6 points in the later stages of the race, after he posted larger early advantages. Gallego would win the statewide race by 2.4 percentage points meaning a polling miss of only 0.2 percent.

As in the presidential race, the consistent polling flaw was under-counting the Republican support. In 10 of the 11 monitored races, the Republican candidate exceeded the suggested polling support figure. The only contest where the Republican candidate failed to top the polling average came in Montana where challenger Tim Sheehy (R) defeated Sen. Jon Tester (D) by 7.1 percentage points. The polling average in the race’s latter stage was 7.6 percent.

The polling community correctly projected the Senate winner in 10 of the 11 monitored races. The only contender to defy the polling projections was Pennsylvania Republican David McCormick (R) who many media outlets have projected as a winner opposite Sen. Bob Casey Jr. (D). The race is in a recount where McCormick maintains a lead of better than 25,000 votes.

For the most part, the repeated polling criticism is exaggerated. Overall, the pollsters had a relatively good year, and did correctly see the Trump polling trend in that he won the battleground states and the national popular vote by largely predicted close margins. The consistent underestimating of Republican support, however, does indicate future methodology correction is warranted.

Final States Called for 2024; Gallego Wins Arizona; Five California Races Called; NE-2, OR-5 Winners

2024 Final Election Results / Click here for interactive map: CNN.com

By Jim Ellis — Monday, Nov. 11, 2024

National Vote

Final States Called: Presidential Map Complete — The final presidential map appears to be in the books with projections recorded for all 50 states and the District of Columbia. President-Elect Donald Trump clinched 312 electoral votes versus Vice President Kamala Harris’s 266 tally.

Trump won all seven battleground states, with North Carolina voting for him in all three of his elections. Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin again voted for Trump after doing so in 2016 but choosing President Joe Biden in 2020. Nevada, which voted Democratic in both 2016 and 2020, switched to Trump in this election year.

In the two previous elections, the winning candidate, Donald Trump in 2016 and Joe Biden in 2020, received 306 electoral votes. For the first time, it appears Trump will also win the national popular vote. Though he won the 2016 election, Hillary Clinton scored a popular vote victory.

Senate

Arizona: Rep. Gallego Wins — In what was predicted to be an easier road for Rep. Ruben Gallego (D-Phoenix) to replace retiring Arizona Sen. Kyrsten Sinema (I), the Grand Canyon State Senate race was finally projected over the weekend in the Democratic representative’s favor. With 89 percent of the Arizona vote tallied, Rep. Gallego tallies 49.7 percent support while his opponent, Republican former news anchor and 2022 gubernatorial nominee Kari Lake recorded a better than expected 48.2 percent. The raw number difference at this point in the counting is 44,882 votes.

With Republican victories over Senate Democratic incumbents in Montana, Ohio, and Pennsylvania, and winning the open Democratic seat in West Virginia, the Republicans will lead the new Senate with a 53-47 majority.

House

California: Five CA Races Called, Seven More Outstanding — As we will remember, California is the state that requires the longest period to count their votes. Over the weekend, five Golden State congressional races were called. Included in the list of official winners are Reps. Ami Bera (D-Elk Grove/Sacramento), David Valadao (R-Hanford), Julia Brownley (D-Westlake Village/Ventura), Jay Takano (D-Riverside), and Mike Levin (D-San Juan Capistrano).

The California seats will go a long way toward determining a House majority. Still uncalled are the races for Reps. Josh Harder (D-Truckee/Stockton), John Duarte (R-Modesto), Jim Costa (D-Fresno), Mike Garcia (R-Santa Clarita), Ken Calvert (R-Corona), and Michelle Steel (R-Orange County). Also uncalled is Orange County’s open 47th District. All of these incumbents with the exception of Rep. Garcia lead in the counting process. The outstanding vote percentage range stretches from 14-38 percent.

A total of 10 races remain uncalled and they will determine the House majority. Of the 10, the Republican candidate leads in six races. To claim a bare 218-217 majority, the Republicans need win only two of the 10 uncalled contests.

NE-2: Rep. Bacon Declared a Winner — While the election night counting trended against veteran Rep. Don Bacon (R-Papillion/Omaha), the political overtime tally yielded the opposite result and the congressman has unofficially been re-elected to a fifth term. With 95 percent of the vote now counted, Bacon clinched victory with 51.2 percent support as compared to state Sen. Tony Vargas’ (D-Omaha) 48.8 percent. The percentages reveal a Bacon margin of 7,150 votes from the 307,342 counted ballots.

OR-5: Rep. Chavez-DeRemer (R) Unseated — Though just a few incumbents were defeated in the 2024 election, another loss was projected over the weekend. Oregon freshman Republican Rep. Lori Chavez-DeRemer (R-Happy Valley) failed in her campaign against state Rep. Janelle Bynum (D-Clackamas) who won a plurality vote victory. With 90 percent of the vote counted, Bynum clinched the election with a 47.8 to 45.0 percent margin, or a vote spread of 10,454 votes from the 372,162 counted ballots.

In addition to Rep. Chavez-DeRemer, the losing incumbents were New York Reps. Anthony D’Esposito (R-Island Park), Mark Molinaro (R-Red Hook), and Brandon Williams (R-Syracuse), along with Pennsylvanians Susan Wild (D-Allentown) and Matt Cartwright (D-Moosic/Scranton).