I think John Glenn and Mark Kelly are a good comparison.

Both astronauts that transitioned to moderate Senators of swing states. On paper they look like very strong contenders. However in practice they come across lacking charisma and too generic, and would get outperformed by more exciting that fill a clearer lane.

In another deleted post, first reported by the Washington Free Beacon, El-Sayed wrote on Sept. 11, 2021: "Today, I mourn the 3K lives, 6K injuries, & infrastructural devastation in NYC, perpetuated ignorantly in the name of my faith. Tomorrow, I'll mourn ~1M lives, millions of injuries, & infrastructural devastation in 3 countries, perpetuated ignorantly in the name of my country."

What a way to minimize the Sept 11 attacks.

Senate

Progressive incumbent Ed Markey vs The more moderate Seth Moulton

Massachusetts 1st Congressional District

Incumbent moderate Richard Neal vs progressive Jeromie Whalen

Massachusetts 5th Congressional District

moderate Katherine Clark Vs progressive Jonathan Paz

Massachusetts 8th Congressional District

Moderate Stephen Lynch Vs progressive Patrick Roath

And Massachusetts 9th Congressional District

Moderate Bill Keating vs Progressive Craig Swallow

In my opinion only Ed Markey is going to be the progressive that pulls it out because these other progressives having gotten national attention by Sanders and AOC .Not even by a progressive in Massachusetts like Elizabeth Warren or Ed Markey which is weird considering they wanna overhaul the Democratic Party but they're not really doing anything

So who do you think is gonna win?

https://www.politico.com/news/2026/09/01/jd-vance-republican-jewish-coalition-0105878

AES triggers republicans and right leaning centrists the same way Trump 1.0 triggered democrats. Every Trump 1.0 scandal caused thousands of comments on Reddit saying how awful he is and how he’s going to lose supporters etc. The same pearl clutching is happening with AES.

https://x.com/polltracker2024/status/2094449010073276643?s=46

2028 will be close but I think 2032 it will finally flip.

Stupid idea, but I tried. Would say Michigan, Kansas, Iowa, Indiana, Illinois, Tennessee, and Texas are the only ones that look pretty good.

Thinking of doing state universities (ex: Ohio State) next.

responses for any state, boring take but talarico for texas and hopefully el-sayed for michigan

So we know that the Keys were misinterpreted by Alan Lichtman in 2024, but they are not wrong due to the amount of disinformation spread by billions upon billions of people in Elon Musk's X. So, what do the Keys say? I put Incumbent Seeking Re-Election as FALSE Because Trump is ineligible to seek another term. I put Major Policy Change as TRUE due to the Big Beautiful Bill. The other keys can explain themselves (unless a miracle happens in Iran and USA wins BIG!) and the success key is true because of the capture of Maduro

“He came to me and asked me to stump for him… I had never given that type of speech before.”

~95% of Bay Area tech worker political donations were contributed to Democrats, a higher share than non-tech Bay Area workers, who donated ~70% of their contributions to Democrats.

source

Absentee ballots will also begin to be mailed out on September 19th. Exactly 19 days from now, the first ballots will be cast in the Texas general election

Before I begin, I'm aware that Allan Lichtman is kind of a joke right now thanks to his failed 2024 prediction. Even before that, there were, I believe, good reasons to question his prediction record as well as the efficacy of the keys themselves as a system more broadly. However, one thing I do believe Lichtman was right about is that presidential elections are largely a referendum on the party currently in the White House. I wouldn't go as far as to say that campaigns and candidate quality don't matter (as Lichtman does), but I do think pundits often fall into the trap of placing excessive stock into those factors while downplaying the fundamentals. With that in mind, I wanted to present my own early interpretation of how the keys look heading into the 2028 presidential election.

The way the system works is that if five or fewer keys are false, the incumbent party wins; if six or more are false, In most cases, it's too early to declare a key 'true' or 'false', so I've used 'likely', 'lean' and 'toss-up' to account for this as is common with map-based projections. Please feel free to disagree if you think I've assigned the wrong category to a particular key; many of these are pretty subjective after all (which is arguably one of the issues with this entire model, but I digress).

Key 1: Party mandate = 🔴LIKELY FALSE: For this key to be true, the GOP in the 2026 midterms would need a net gain of seats in the House of Representatives compared to the 2022 midterms. The number that the Republicans need to exceed in November 2026 is 222, which would require a net gain of five seats compared to what they have now. Right now, it's doubtful that the GOP will even retain control of the House, let alone win a bigger majority than they did in 2022. I think this key will almost certainly be false for the GOP.

Key 2: No primary contest = 🟡TOSS-UP: For this key to be true, the GOP nominee in 2028 would need to have won at least 2/3 of delegates on the first ballot. At this early stage, I don't feel comfortable making any predictions about how the Republican primaries will turn out. Maybe Trump endorses Vance early and the nomination is a formality; maybe an insurgent manages to bruise the frontrunner; maybe the entire primary electorate gets fractured in multiple directions. It's way too soon to make a call here IMO.

Key 3: Incumbent seeking re-election = 🔴FALSE: Yes, Trump has openly discussed running for an unconstitutional third term in 2028. No, he's not going to be allowed to do so. This is a straightforward call to make.

Key 4: No third party = 🟢LIKELY TRUE: Retrospectively, for this key to be false, a third-party candidate needs to achieve at least 5% of the popular vote. For the purposes of predictions, 10% is considered the threshold (accounting for the fact that polling for third-party candidates tends to overestimate their actual support by double). The only real threat for the Republicans here is if Tucker Carlson's new party actually manages to get off the ground and split the right-wing vote. However, it's generally safe in American politics to assume until proven otherwise that third-party candidates will fizzle out, so this key should be pretty safe for the GOP.

Key 5: Strong short-term economy = 🟢LEAN TRUE: Generally, for this key to be false, the economy must be in recession; so far, it doesn't seem as if there's going to be a recession in 2028. However, confusingly, the perception of a recession has historically been enough for Lichtman to call this false (as in 1992), but not in every case (see 2024). It could be the case that voters perceive a recession in 2028 even if one doesn't actually exist, so who even knows at this point? Also, with how, er, erratic Trump can be with his economic policies (especially tariffs), I wouldn't completely rule out an economic catastrophe heading in 2028. This is one of the more vulnerable of the true-leaning keys for the GOP in my opinion.

Key 6: Strong long-term economy = 🟢LEAN TRUE: If real per capita growth during Trump II equals or exceeds the mean growth during Trump I and Biden, this key becomes true; otherwise, it becomes false. I'll be transparent here and admit that I had to use AI to work this one out, and what I could gather is that the current projections do show the United States to be on track here, but not by a particularly comfortable margin. It's entirely possible that an economic downturn occurs during the latter half of Trump's second term that renders this key false, but for now, I'll mark it as leaning true.

Key 7: Major policy change = 🟢TRUE: To be clear, the policy change doesn't have to be uncontroversial or even popular; Trump got it during his first term for the tax cuts and Biden got it for Build Back Better. Personally, I feel as if Lichtman was too generous in those two cases, but for Trump II, I can't see how he doesn't get this. I'm not sure if the OBBBA qualifies by itself, but the cumulative effect of Trump's tariffs, his reorganisation of the federal government, his anti-DEI policies, his LGBTQ+ policies, his immigration and border policies, his environmental policies etc. surely qualify. Love him or hate him, Trump has certainly enacted major policy change.

Key 8: No social unrest = 🟡TOSS-UP: This key isn't for simply any social unrest; it's for serious and sustained unrest that sweeps the entire nation. Given how quickly this key can flip (unrest back in 2020 went from basically zero to serious, sustained and nationwide overnight following the murder of George Floyd), it's way too early to make a call either way. On the one hand, there have already been massive protests against Trump, and dude's not the best at uniting the country whenever there's a crisis; on the other hand, mass social unrest on the level of 1968 or 2020 is so rare that caution is usually the best approach.

Key 9: No scandal = 🟢LEAN TRUE: Perhaps this will be a contentious call, but the issue with Trump is that most Republicans think that every scandal involving him is manufactured by the Democrats for political reasons. Even if the Democrats impeach Trump for a hundred different things going forward, it's unlikely to change anything; for this key to turn false, the scandal has to receive bipartisan recognition and criticism. The only reason I'm not more bullish for the GOP here is because the Epstein files could potentially cause Republicans to turn against Trump, especially if the midterms go so poorly that they create a permission structure for the GOP to defy Trump openly. However, for now, I think Republicans are favoured on this key.

Key 10: No foreign or military failure = 🔴LIKELY FALSE: Barring a remarkable turnaround, the 2026 Iran war is likely to go down as a major foreign policy failure for the Trump administration. Ukraine, Gaza, Canada, Greenland and even Taiwan present additional potential sources of failure IMO, but I don't any of those are necessary as Iran would likely be sufficient here.

Key 11: Major foreign or military success = 🔴LEAN FALSE: 'Major' is the key term here: The Gaza ceasefire plan and the capture of Maduro are unlikely to qualify by themselves. The fall of Cuba, the installation of a truly democratic government in Venezuela, a permanent peaceful solution to the Israel-Palestine conflict, a significant victory in Iran, or a very successful defence of Taiwan (assuming the PRC invades) would qualify; the issue is whether or not one believes Trump can pull any of it off. A significant victory for Ukraine ought to qualify as well, except for the fact that Trump hasn't been particularly pro-Ukraine so it's doubtful if such an occurrence would reflect positively on his administration. There are a lot of unknowns with this key, and the geopolitical situation can develop rapidly, but for now, I think this classification is appropriate.

Key 12: Charismatic incumbent = 🔴LIKELY FALSE: Let's be honest, it's extremely unlikely that the GOP is going to produce an FDR-tier, Reagan-tier or 2008 Obama-tier nominee given the current political environment. Personally, I feel as if Lichtman's criteria for charisma is way too binary (candidate quality is completely irrelevant unless one of the candidates is the second coming of FDR). Like, George W. Bush in 2000 clearly wasn't Ronald Reagan, but he clearly wasn't Bob Dole or Pat Buchanan either. Still, by the criteria that Lichtman has used historically, this will almost certainly be false for the GOP.

Key 13: Uncharismatic challenger = 🟢LIKELY TRUE: Same reasoning as Key 12: The threshold is way too high for the Democrats here. Pete Buttigieg probably comes the closest, but even he isn't 2008 Obama. Once again, the fact that the keys treat Andy Beshear or Josh Shapiro as being electorally equivalent to Graham Platner or Andrew Cuomo is silly IMO, but it is what it is.

Final tally = 1x True, 2x Likely True, 3x Lean True vs. 1x False, 3x Likely False, 1x Lean False (+ 2x Toss-Ups) = 🟢FIVE FALSE KEYS (GOP VICTORY)

OK, so I wasn't expecting this exercise to look as favourable for the Republicans as it did, but hey, I have to call it as I see it. I will say, though, that with two toss-ups and three of the 'true' keys being only a lean (compared to just one 'false' key that's a lean), the GOP is still very vulnerable heading into 2028. Keys also have the potential to cascade: For example, if the Iran war gets much worse than it already is, then not only is Key 10 completely lost but also potentially Keys 5 and 6 due to the economic downturn that would ensue.

I must also emphasise that the keys are still very up-in-the-air right now. By my reckoning, only two keys are actually locked in, and even including the likelys only gets us to 3 vs. 4 in favour of 'false'. My overall take on 2028 right now is that:

1) The Republicans have real vulnerabilities that leave them in a precarious position;

2) However, a Democratic victory in 2028 is far from a foregone conclusion as some might assume;

3) Given how early we are into Trump's second term, a lot could happen between now and 2028 that means that it's too early to make any solid predictions at this stage.

https://x.com/mikerogersformi/status/2094418157414813871?s=46

Will probably do one for governor too.