South Carolina? Florida? Mississippi?! Democrats Test the Limits of a Blue Wave | Bulwark on Sunday

Hi, Bill Crystal here. Welcome to Bullwork on Sunday. I'm very pleased to be joined by my colleague, Lauren Egan, who writes the terrific newsletter, the opposition about the Democratic Party and its different manifestations, and in this campaign season has been covering a lot of the Democratic candidates for House Senate governor, as well as various internal machinations to the Democrats. So anyway, Lauren, thanks for joining me today. Hey, Bill, thanks for having me. So I thought we talked maybe primarily about the Senate races. I'm happy to talk about some governors races in the House. I guess we'll give me an overall sense. You talked to a lot of Democrats. They talked to you on the record and end off the record and sometimes are pretty candid. What's your saying? What do they really think is going to happen in ideas? I think there's a lot of hope. There's a lot of cautious optimism. Certainly, you'd rather be Democrats right now than Republicans are leading in the polling averages and a lot of these key Senate races. I think it was Nate Silver tweeted this analogy the other day. So I'm going to steal it from him. But it's helpful to kind of think about this as like we are in the fourth quarter of a football game. Democrats are up by touchdown. But as we all know, you can go into a fourth quarter leading by touchdown. And that does not always mean that you are going to win that game. If you watch the Tennessee South Carolina game over the weekend, you know exactly what I'm talking about. So you'd rather be the Democrats right now, but just to kind of like hammer on this metaphor a little bit more, there are also Democrats are playing an away game essentially here. The states that they have to win in order to take the Senate are all in very, very red territory. So Republicans have a lot of built-in advantages here, even though they're behind, they've got a lot that they can kind of rest back on. And these, what are we at now? A little bit more than a week. Yeah, and a big money advantage. I mean, I'm probably prejudiced a little the other way because of having the first congressional level race. I was really involved in it was 94. I was running this little project for the Republican future and worked pretty closely with the Republicans and Gingrich and all. And it was such a massive wave in 94 that I've kind of, and then I watch 2006, 2010, a couple others that sort of in turn, I internalized the idea that you can get a big wave. And suddenly stuff gets into play that you didn't think was going to play. And suddenly all these advantages that are supposed to be there, these structural advantages and the history of voting for a certain party, if it's 30 years and the money doesn't matter much, if voters are just sick of, they really want to check the administration of power or sick of what it's been doing. And so, I guess I've always inclined a little bit towards that interpretation of this election. Obviously, there's some truth to that and some truth to the fact that at the end of the day, the wave doesn't, there are barriers to the wave, and some of those barriers can make it fall a bit short, right? So I mean, it is, yeah, like, like, Silver's analogy, that was pretty good sort of, yeah, the question is whether or they're 13 minutes left in the fourth quarter or three minutes left, you know, the other vote is we getting to come in. So yeah. And I mean, some people have brought up the 94 election and compared it to that, I think like broadly speaking, the Democratic apparatus as a whole is a little almost like afraid to say that it could be like 94. I think the Trump era, they just feel so burned so many times that there's kind of like this almost like learned helplessness with some of this were like they're like just like a little bit too afraid to say, yeah, maybe this actually could be a giant wave because it's how a 16 went and there's just a lot of PTSD in the party. No, that's really well said. I think in 18, which was a good election in the house and I'd say sort of a wave in the Senate, there was that reversion to the mean at the end and the Republicans gain seats. I think I've really burned people in the sense that then they spent a hundred million dollars to South Carolina with Jamie Harrison in 2020 and lost by ten points. So there's a special Senate PTSD. I think you know, they always thought the house was doable. But well, let's talk about the Senate for bid you were in the I mean, what is striking just to step back for one second is that the seats that were sort of the reach seats, the Trump plus 10 or more seats that were supposed to be maybe the Democrats can put these in play. The Iowa's in Texas and Alaska's was the fourth Ohio that Kansas kind of crept in. I would say I was kind of early on Kansas and thought that would be like Iowa. Those are now sort of obviously toss-ups basically and now people are what we can talk about those if you'd like and you think particularly yet. But I know you were in Mississippi, but then I think the next wave is kind of coming to possible play at least, which would be what Mississippi, South Carolina, a couple of others. So I think you were in Mississippi fairly recently. A couple months ago. Yeah, you were early on the Kansas. I remember you were telling me about Kansas like back in the spring and I was like Bill is crazy. And I also went to Kansas. I don't know I'm going to Kansas a couple of weeks ago. So Kansas, I went out of Hamilton for two days when he kind of had this like block party in his childhood neighborhood that he grew up in. And there does seem to be I mean, he is a very well-known person in that state for sure, which is like all so much. I mean, it's kind of cliche to say candidate quality really matters. But you get on the ground in some of these states and you're like, yeah, the quality really does matter. He has a lot of name ID in the state. And you know, just he's people just trust him in the way that like, you know, I'd stop and ask people outside of grocery store like, what do you think about him Hamilton? And everyone who he was and even if they weren't Democrats, they didn't think he was a bad guy. But I think there's a few different things that are going on in Kansas in particular. Diesel prices we've talked a lot about. You heard that from so many people in the state there. Agriculture industry is huge there. So that's driving a lot of voter dissatisfaction. The ice rates when I was there, they had the ice rates had just happened. You know, kind of more the real part of the states that had really thrown a lot of the dairy industry for a loop because all of a sudden they ice came in to these raids. They didn't have any workers showing up. And next thing, you know, there's these whole communities are like, how are we supposed to make a living? And that had a huge impact when I was there, for sure. So I just want one thing on that. I mean, is that the those are the raids that provoked the Sabin from I don't know, the cattleman association or something like that, isn't that right? Which is not presumably, which was only mostly Republican-ish type group here in the past, right? Right. Saying this is crazy. Yeah. They're not and they they're right. And they usually they've they've endorsed Democrats and Republicans in the past, but typically it's a pretty Republican group. They did not endorse this. They made the decision to not endorse the Senate race this year, which is a pretty big deal. I don't know if they've ever decided to sit out a race, certainly not in recent memory. So that was kind of seen as like a oh crap moment, for sure. And that was I want to say about a month ago that they made that decision at this point. And yeah, then we when I was on the ground there, that was right around when Senate majority pack, which is the big Democratic super pack, decided to start starting money there, same with the Republican counterparts as well. So to me, when we get to this part of the race, you know, we can all agonize over every single poll that comes out. And I'm sure we will until all the votes are counted. But the most telling thing and it is kind of cliche to say, but like follow the money the most, if you want to really see read the tea leaves right now, like I when I'm reporting, I look at where all the big Senate or all the big super packs are spending their money. And so for Democrats right now, I think they're down to main Alaska, Iowa, Ohio, Texas, New Hampshire, Michigan, Kansas, and Mississippi. So those are kind of the states to me that are really on the map. So curious, I was in Iowa three or four weeks ago, I guess. And I don't actually watch TV much when I'm in the sometimes when I did flip back, maybe it was like late in the baseball, I was watching something. And it was, you forget, I mean, it's been a while since I've been, you know, Virginia hasn't been that competitive the last two or three or four cycles. So I've been swamped with ads the way you are when you were in one of these swing states. It's really crazy, right? And was it did you feel that way in Kansas? I mean, yes, I also mean myself turn on the TV for a little bit while I was in my hotel. Yeah, there's a ton of ads coming in. And it does really, when you're, I'm curious how you felt, but when you're when you're in those situations and you're on the road and doing some like campaign trail reporting, you understand how there is diminishing returns with some of these ads, you know, once you've seen like your 30th ad within 24 hours, you're like, I completely see how, you know, voters just at a certain point start to tune this out. And that actually, I think Democrats, you know, they're pretty nervous about the Republicans' money advantage. But when I'm talking to folks at some of these big committees, they say, well, you know, at a certain point, like you can just keep pouring millions of dollars into some of these races and throwing more and more ads at voters, but they just tune them out. There is like a diminishing returns kind of dynamic that goes on, which I think is true. Or maybe that's just me. I get, you know, I get a little sick of just political ads after a while. Yeah, those big states are so much more expensive. And I do think the Democrats, they feel they have, they can't, you know, they got this parole on money to Texas, because it's obviously genuinely competitive, and it would be very big deals to win it. On the other hand, you sort of wonder if the $237 million Texas is worth as much as what would be the $20 million in Kansas, or even, you know, or Nebraska, or if you can get, we're going to go one state further out, you know, maybe the $5 million, $5 million in South Dakota, or South Carolina, or some states, which you're not, you know, out of question, and they're not that big states, right? So the committee is, I think, always a little cautious. I don't play in the modesty. They don't want to be second guests, and they don't want to shortchange the obvious ones. But yeah, I think that's really right. And when I was in Mississippi, Gus, I was there in the spring, following Scott Colom, who's the Democrat that's running there. And this is something that I talked a lot about with him, and, you know, he wasn't really trying to, like, throw any other Democratic candidates under the bus. but I could tell that there was a little bit of like, oh, it really sucks to see someone like James Talleriko just raking in all of this money in a state that's so expensive to run in. And Granted, you know, I think Democrat should absolutely, clearly they are making a play in Texas. Like this does seem like there could be a real opportunity here, especially given how bad of a candidate Ken Paxson is. But Scott Colom was like, you know, hundreds of millions of dollars are going to be spent on this race. Meanwhile, I'm over here and all I'm saying is I just need 10 million dollars and I think I can win with 10 million. Someone just give me 10 million dollars. So there does become this really challenging dynamic that's always kind of existed in the way the Democratic parties sort of, you know, fundraising structure is set up as well. That it can be really hard to decide where you throw some of your money at. Well, Sarah, we're about Mississippi. It seems like an interesting state. I mean, Mississippi is one of the states that had as a large, I think we have the largest black population, African American population. And as always, voted a lot, but a little bit under their actual percentage in the state. And some of the early voting suggests they're now really turning out and they have a lot to be unhappy about in terms of the Supreme Court decision in Cal A. But did you pick any of that up or have a sense of it? Yeah. It was a little early for me to pick some when I was there because it was spring. But what I think so interesting about Mississippi is that coming out of the 2024 election, right? Democrats were having this huge kind of come to Jesus moment about how do they expand the map long term, right? Not just for this election cycle, but how do you build sustainable majorities? What are other states? If you can no longer rely on the traditional blue wall in the Midwest in the same way that Democrats have in the past, where do you, where do you add states to the map? And Mississippi kept coming up, which, you know, 18 months ago sounded like kind of crazy. But you start talking to folks, start talking to strategists, and you know, they'll point out that it has one of the, I think, the largest black population of any state in the US. It's like around 38%. And that's really kind of like what roots a lot of the Democratic Party's optimism with the state is if you can drive up, get black turnout as high as you possibly can, and then hope that the white turnout is somewhat depressed. And if you have a really good candidate like Scott Columbus, a very dynamic, very dynamic candidate, if he can win around 25 ish percent of the white vote, which is still hard to do, you know, in the deep South, people tend to vote. It's not like the Midwest. People vote largely on racial lines, a lot of the time. So even, even as a Democrat, winning 25% of the white vote is pretty hard to do, but if you can manage to do that, the state flips. And so, you know, for my newsletter that I'm writing tonight too, I'm kind of talked to folks about like, what is the, what is the 2026 midterms tell you about what could be in play in 2028? And I was shocked at some people were even putting Mississippi on the map for states that Democrats should be trying to win a long term in presidential years as well. So all that is to say, I don't know if it's going to flip this year, my, you know, it's still really, really hard. They've gotten in within the past couple of races for the, for Senate and governor's race. They've come close. It's been single digit races. Still really challenging to win, but I do think this is a place where if you're looking down the map or down the road 10 years from now, this is somewhere that Democrats are going to try and be competitive long term. Yeah, that's interesting. It also could be the case that this is also Sarah Longer has made this point. Could be a kind of once in a generation opportunity to snatch some of these seats, though, you don't get a president dropping from 50% approval to 37 let's just say 38 whatever in 20 months all the time, right? And you don't get a party that's so closely tied to that president that they can't really separate themselves, whatever they they try to do a little bit. Yeah, suddenly suddenly states that, you know, if you think what just the math here, you know, a state that you lost by nine points, that's a big defeat. If you pick up the next morning, you look up 5445, well, that wasn't very close. But honestly, if the president's down 15 points from where he was and if the generic is plus eight, well, then a nine point gap is not that big, right? I mean, if it was the generic was zero and goes to plus eight or nine or 10. So I think people sort of underestimate just the, you know, they see that generic number, especially as plus eight, it doesn't sound that big, right? A funny way. I don't know. I feel like it's single digits or something. But it's a big move. I mean, you know, plus eight means 5446 is now even. I mean, too wildly over simplified. And then if you do a little bit of adjusting for turnout, you know, if you have a movement of voters and a differential turnout within the two camps, right? If you get those two things going at once, which I think is what's happening this year, you can get a pretty big move in some of these states. Yeah. And I think it's, you know, the Republican candidate in Mississippi Cindy Heidsmith, she's not nearly as bad as a candidate as someone like Ken Paxton, but she's still a very weak, weak incumbent. She's not really, she's not a good campaigner. You don't see her out there a lot. She's not like past Republicans that have represented the state that have really understood how important the black vote was and would show up at black churches and would go into black communities. Like she doesn't really do that at all. And when I was there, that was something that people brought up to me. I was, you know, we're going around to, was there in a weekend. So we were going to like community events and like, I don't know, we're at some like local fair and stuff. And like, mostly black parts of the state. And that was something that people brought up on prompted constantly. Like we've never seen her here. Like we used, we used to see, you know, our representatives come, but like we've never once met Cindy Heidsmith. And that really robs people the wrong way. And then you add in some of the Supreme Court ruling, redistricting all this stuff. You know, that could be enough to do it this year. I wouldn't be shocked, but it is still an uphill battle, obviously. But the Democratic Committee has moved some money into Mississippi, right? So that's on their, on their left. That's right. Senate Majority Pack put some money in it last week. And interestingly, I think Republicans are now following them there as well. So you've got, you know, both national parties now spending there, which, yeah, to me, that is very, very telling in these last couple days. And it was, it was one of those states when, you know, Senate Majority Pack Injection were sitting down to kind of map out everything at the beginning of the year. It was sort of like, you know, it was all like their seat year of states. Like we'll see what happens. But I think it just speaks to, yeah, Scott Clemson, candidates, Cindy Heidsmith, not that great of a candidate. It's a poor state. So all these affordability issues that we've been talking about for the last 18 months, I think hit twice as hard in a state like Mississippi. So who knows what could happen. And I think Donald Trump, President Trump is going there to our night, right? So that's kind of interesting. Yeah, he'll be there Monday night. He's going to be, I think, in like the northeast part of the state, which is interesting too, because it's right on the border of Tennessee, so that we'll also get into the media market for for Justin Pearson's congressional race, who's the Democrat who's trying to flip one of the resisted seats there. So it's kind of a one-two punch. There's a shockingly competitive house race there, plus the Senate that he'll get into the media market for in Tennessee, plus Mississippi. So let's say we actually hadn't thought about Tennessee, but you're in Tennessee and the other pretty far away on the other side of Tennessee. I guess, but still you say where it was, you covered that quite a bit when they did the addition. Well, first, there's the controversy. They tried to kick him out of the legislature, right? I've sort of forgotten. And then they did the redistricting at all. And then the whole point of that was to take away his, and I guess, two democratic, well, one democratic seat, right? And make sure they tried to quit to zero. What's happening there in that part of Tennessee? So there's two competitive house races. It's Justin Pearson's one of the Democrats who's running. He's from the Memphis area, and then Chasmulger, who is running initially against Andy Ogles, and then Andy Ogles lost his primary. So that was an unfortunate thing for Democrats, because I think they really thought, at least for the Chasmulger race, that Democrats had a really good chance of picking up that seat, because Andy Ogles was just such a horrible Republican candidate. And now they're Republican that beat him in the primary is kind of, you know, is not quite as awful of a human. Let's just put it that way. So he's a little bit more challenging to beat. But these are both still like R+9 districts. So they're, they're hard, but not impossible. A lot of that's before, if the generic is moved from nine points, R+9 means it's kind of a toss-up, you know, again, it's so hard. I think everything got so polarized. And so, you know, I mean, what was the expression people use? Our elections are all longer about persuasion. They're about demography. You just look at the numbers. What's a white black split? What's the college non-college split? You know, a couple of the things, evangelical, non evangelical split, and then you just know the vote. And that's been true a lot in the last decade, much more than it used to be, obviously, even less two decades. But then sometimes that breaks open, you know, sort of unexpectedly, and Trump has shuffled, Trump turned that unbelievable number of voters on his side. And the presidential thing is that would say in the, in the off years, he hasn't, why we don't really have one test case of this, I guess, 2018 when he was president. But even 2022, when he was active, if not president, he hasn't really been able to get his voters out as much as he, for congressional races when he's not been on the ballot. He likes to say, I'm on the ballot, but he's not on the ballot, right? Right. Right. And that's, I mean, that's why he's going to something that's really red areas, because that's kind of the last kind of their Hail Mary that they can do. And I mean, for the House races too, it's interesting. Like we're talking about Senate and like where Senate majority pack and where all these big congressional Senate committees are spending their money. I think you have to spend money more so for the Senate, right, to really win. Like those are hard to state wide races. I think that there probably will be some surprise House races that we're like not really paying attention to, or where Democrats and Republicans aren't really spending their money that we're going to wake up on November 4th and be like, really, like that flipped. Just because the denim, you know, the denim makes our much more look can be much more localized sometimes. And there's just a little bit more room for a surprise in a way that sometimes, you know, we kind of know what's on the map for the Senate. There's more room to be shocked and surprised and to have like some random person win a Senate race that we've never once talked about before, or sorry, we're in a House race and we've never once heard about before. So those Tennessee races, you know, they're hard, but who knows, both of those races could be those kinds of places. Yeah, people know their senators sometimes, usually, and therefore they can vote for a senator even at a bad year, whereas House members, or especially if it's an open seat, but where we just should see where people are quite used to the person they're voting for, even if he's an incumbent, he or she's an incumbent, you know, that there's just more of a wave of fact, you might say. The less well-known the candidates are, the more the wave, you know, has an effect, right? Almost my definition is like that the people aren't going to vote on the candidates, or they just say, okay, I don't want someone to check Trump, so I'm voting for the Democrat. And I do think that's why the House will move by, can move much more dramatically sometimes than the Senate, where people know they're incumbent, so whatever. I mean, you know, those are things happen, right? I mean, Lindsey Graham sadly died suddenly, and suddenly a race that I think if Lindsey Graham were alive, we would assume South Carolina would be reasonably safe for the Republicans, sadly looks very much in play. Yeah, that one's been shocking that it's gotten this close, for sure. That one's interesting. I think when he died, there was some conversation on the national level about, do we start spending here? Like, what do we do here? Let's wait and see. I think that this has gotten more competitive than anyone predicted that it would. Darling Graham obviously is now the Republican nominee. I think that that's, she's just a weak candidate. I mean, I don't think that her taking over, filling her brother's shoes really sits well with a lot of folks in the state. When I talked about Mississippi, kind of, how Democrats sort of, you know, long term, they want to be more competitive there. South Carolina is also another state when you ask, you know, where beyond the Georgia's and North Carolina's of the world, like, where else are you thinking about trying to be more competitive long term? South Carolina's a state that comes up frequently because population's growing. A lot of people from out of state are moving there. So there's a lot of hope among Democrats that that is a place that they could be more competitive long term. I'm pretty skeptical about some of that just because it is still South Carolina. Does not have quite as big of a black population as a place like Mississippi. And I think there's still a lot of questions about, you know, Democrats in general are trying long term to be more competitive in some belt states. And there's still a lot of questions about the people who are moving to a place like South Carolina, like Charleston and some of these retirement communities are totally booming just across the border of North Carolina. You got a lot of people who have worked in Charlotte who live right across the border in South Carolina. But are those people actually Democrats? Just because they're coming from some of the Northeast states that's a huge assumption. I think some people in the party can sometimes make. They look at a population booming and assume that that's Democratic voters moving to a red state. Just by live in Tennessee, that's, we see this in Tennessee all the time. This national population has boomed over the past couple of years. A lot of people from the Northeast and from California moving here. But they are not Democratic voters. They are still largely Republican voters. Yeah, that's why they're moving there because they like low taxes and Republican issues. Exactly. That means people forget that. No, I had no argument with someone in '24 where I thought that six months before the election that I thought North Carolina really could be in play. And I taught for a term of Davidson, which is just near Charlotte. And I thought, you know, that's, I kind of got a sense of what was going on there. And the person who was from North Carolina said, you're thinking about Virginia, you're thinking about Atlanta, Georgia, somewhat. But the people who moved to Charlotte and not the same as people who were moving to Atlanta was this point, and that, you know, it's many fewer immigrants for one thing, many fewer less diverse people, a set of people. And people who want to live in a kind of reddish state, therefore, that's why they're going there, you know. And so I think we see that in Florida, incidentally, where there's been a huge boom. I mean, moving to Austin is different from moving to, yeah, what West Palm Beach probably is. Right, like a state like South Carolina doesn't have a big Atlanta type city to anchor it. It's still a really white state. And still a pretty rural state. And yeah, like in Tennessee, it's kind of like a joke, you know, people come here for the quote unquote Tennessee values. And you know, how you define that depends who you ask. But you know, the implication being, yeah, it's a lot of people from California who coming here for lower tax, the whole thing. And those are not people that are going to reflexively start voting for Democrats by any stretch of the imagination. I mean, on the other hand, I the one way I was thinking about is you got North Carolina, South Carolina and Georgia. I mean, in fourth Carolina is going to go plus 10 for Cooper or plus eight or something like that. And Georgia's going to go looks like plus eight or 10 for us off. I don't know, it's North Carolina. It's not crazy to think that South Carolina could be within eight points of North Carolina and Georgia, right? I mean, you know, people do a little bit too much. I think sometimes of the, it never, we've never seen it happen. If you're young like you, you have never seen a Democratic Senator from South Carolina. I actually remember Fritz Hollings, but that was, I don't think he left an idea in neighbor selling. So yeah, I mean, it, but you know, you think about this neighboring states and the movement you can get in those states. And maybe South Carolina could happen to, I don't know. What else do you, anything else striking? Governor House, either in your region or elsewhere, I think of you somehow as because you're in Tennessee as an expert on Southern politics. But I was a you covered everything and, you know, I, I, I like to consider myself an expert on public spell. So it's all good, but yeah, I am paying close attention and very interested in the governor's race in Georgia. That I think is going to be a really interesting one. I don't know how closely you've been following this. Little bit. Yeah, but we were in Atlanta Tuesday night for the more than that. So I talk to the people, yeah. Yeah, I'm curious what you were hearing from folks about it on the ground there. But essentially Kishel and Spottens is the Democrat that's running there. She was one term mayor of Atlanta. And I'm so interested in this one because if a Democrat, if she does not win, we, we've saw how 2020 went, you know, with the Trump selection interference in Georgia. So I think there's just huge, huge, huge national consequences for whether or not a Democrat can, can hold that gubernatorial seat going into the next presidential election. So there's the national sort of election interference kind of questions swirling around that add a lot of importance to winning that seat. And then there's also the added element of if the Republican does win, can John Ossoff run for president? You know, that's getting a little bit into some of the horse race stuff down the line. But that will have some, that's a dynamic he would have to think through because if Kishel and Spottens wins that, if John Ossoff runs for president, she can replace him in the Senate with a Democrat. And let's say that, you know, Democrats only end up with a 50, if it's 50, 50, 51, you know, like, those are real, real choices that you have to make. So I think that that's, for me, that's probably one of the more interesting governors races that we've got on the board right now. Yeah, it is, I mean, there it was, of course, Republican in 2020 with camp in Raffinburg, they resisted Trump. But I think we don't, people don't think the current Republican governor candidate and the other constitutional offices were necessarily resist Trump's election modeling. I think people who have been very nervous and I certainly have been about election subversion have been somewhat reassured that Pennsylvania looks safe for Shapiro and Michigan pretty safe, I think. For the Democrat, for Benson and Wisconsin looks okay for the Democrats and Arizona, actually. So Georgia sees it innovative up in the air. But I think they're the Republican as a little less of a election, election to dire. So really is kind of our, Georgia is the one, say, in that respect that could flip, but it is striking. I mean, Georgia looks, it looks toss-up issue, I'd say. And then Texas and Florida, not that far off being toss-ups, Texas thought a little tougher in the governor's race than the Senate. People, I think the conventional view is that Democrats have a better chance in the governor's race to Florida with jolly than they do in the Senate race. I never know if these conventional views are quite correct in any case, they're all pretty close. But if any thought, I mean, it would be kind of a me. I mean, those Texas and, that's why I think Texas and Florida would be so big to win any of these states, big to win the Senate, I'll come back to that in a minute actually. But I mean, Texas and Florida have been so much the backbone of the Republican electoral college majority, right? And generally of their governance and everything else, right? The Santa's and Abbott and the House members to redistricting everything has been in Texas or Florida basically. It would be pretty amazing if the time were over. a big deal, I guess, is the way I would think of it as the Democrats for one of those governorships. Yeah, totally. But yeah, your right that sort of the conventional wisdom within the party is that that governor's seat in Florida is more doable than the Senate seat. And Texas is fascinating, because those, I mean, you know, Tallerika's pulling slightly that what, the Senate race there looks more winnable than than the gubernatorial one. But even if both of those races are super close, I mean, that does have, I'm really curious like what do Democrats then turn around and decide to do in 2028, because that is that is the backbone of the Republican Party's electoral college strategy. And it's tough because Texas just costs so much money to compete in. So I do think going into 2028 Democrats will have to just kind of when they're like mapping out what their battleground map is going to look like, really think hard about you, we'll have to see what the margins are right coming out of next week. But there's a world in which Texas is going to be competitive in the next couple election cycles and Democrats try and invest long term there, which is something that's been saying that they were going to do for forever. But I'd, you know, and obviously Beto got close and that investment didn't really happen in the same way. So we'll have to see what happens. Yeah, it's going to be, and this will be an interesting election in so many different ways. And the other thing I was thinking of before is that if Democrats could win the Senate with a couple of seats to spare, and I don't think it's out of the question if they get a late break, if the wave continues, that's put it this way through the finish line, and they end up running a point of two better than the polls. And they really both, some of it suggests that's possible. And they win 53 seats. I mean, then they really, I'm quite a good chance of holding the Senate in 2028. I mean, it really is that the Senate, everyone will sort of forget the, I don't forget this, but it's a two year, you know, every selection is every two years. And these, that's when off your elections happen. But of course, only a third of the Senate seats are up. The whole house is up. House can go back and forth. If you get a couple of seat edge in the Senate, you can hold on even if it's a so-so election. And so, and if a, and if a Democrat were to win in 2020 at the presidency and you went into that election with 52 or 53 senators and a majority in the House, finally, I can lose seats actually if you're representing the presidency. So the whole question of a trifect, then suddenly you've got a Democratic trifect. I mean, I think the degree to which the Senate really affects the future governance of the country. The House can go back and forth, honestly, and I, you know, probably would have a Republican way. So, but I think that's one reason people have sort of awakened to the Senate races. And maybe people are, I've noticed some private big donors are coming in in a pretty big way to some of these Senate races too. I think thinking a little bit ahead, not just about the merits of the nice Senate to check Trump, if you're a Democrat, but also thinking about 2029 actually makes a huge difference. Yeah. And I know that some of these, you know, top like Democratic fundraisers and some of these companies, that's been an explicit pitch that they've tried to make. Is that right? There was, there was so much donor fatigue coming out of the 2024 race. Understandably, I think a lot of big donors, we've talked a lot about how they felt burned. They didn't have a lot of confidence in, you know, the DNCs. They're kind of like, it was too early to have really dynamic Senate candidates. Yeah, you know, no one was announcing. And so, it was hard for Democrats for a while to raise money. And then there has been a lot of effort from some of these groups to, yeah, go in there and sort of make the case of like, you want to talk about a trifecta again. Well, that starts with this cycle and the Senate to your point. Like, you build upon cycle cycle after a cycle. It's not like the house where you can just kind of, you wait for the good year maybe and see what happens. I mean, Susan Collins is obviously like the perfect example of that, you know, someone has managed to get in there and stay forever. Who, who is that for Democrats? Like, where can they kind of find their version of that in a really good year and told onto it for six plus years? And, you know, it's interesting talking to folks, talking to strategists and stuff and they say, you know, like, we need to remember that Trump's polling is not probably not going to be any better. The Republican Party's polling probably is not going to be any better going into 2028. So we need to create the momentum now and carry that into 2028 and see what we can set ourselves up for in 2029. Yeah, it's so interesting. It's turned out to be more important. I mean, there's always going to be pretty important off your election. Obviously, this Trump's second term, what do you be checked, what do you be ratified and what he's doing? But it's got implications, little even beyond Supreme Court also and certainly even beyond what I think a lot of us, what I thought of a year ago, you know, so it's yeah, very interesting nine days for now. So maybe you're going to stay in Nashville. You're going to come out to DC and watch it to the Bull Work Offices. My plan is to go to Georgia. John Ossoff and Kishelian's Bottoms like the Georgia Democratic Party kind of does like one big election night party. So my plan is to go there. Oh, that sounds like fun. Yeah, even more fun. I know the Bull Work Offices. I can't believe it. Yeah, yeah. I'm sad it's not being the Bull Work Offices, but decided to get some, you know, our last bit of campaign trail reporting and before we turn to 2028. I know which will begin the day after, right? Yeah, totally crazy. Lauren, thanks a lot for joining me today for joining us, it's really terrific and stay well and we'll see you soon whether at least maybe not on November, on election night here in DC, but soon after I'm sure. So okay, safe travels, stay well and thank you all for joining us on Bull Work Offices Sunday. [BLANK_AUDIO]