US Politics 2026

As far as I understand, they do that every evening, in different colours - so you have to wait for your favourite colour to come up and take a picture. And they take requests, this one seems to be a good cause.

So ... we can't really know if that is true or just something some people on Facebook were claiming...

1793791545492.png
1793791643521.png
 
Kalshi and Polymarket betting markets have 75% chance for Democrats in Mississippi,.
Alaska is also at 80%-90% odds for democrats.
Another interesting test of betting markets here because the count of the votes doesn't support those odds, but maybe the betting markets know from where exactly the remaining votes are coming from?

These races absolutely matter. Perhaps less so for 2026 since Democrats have already got control of the senate but every seat won today increase the democrats chance of holding the senate again in 2028 and 2030 which may come down to a 51-49 situation at that time.....
 
It looks like the 5% wealth tax on billionaires on California is not going to pass. At least so far, that's how the votes are going.

However, my take on this is that wealth taxes are needed and will be popular, but perhaps can't be done state by state. The reason this vote failed is because the wealthy can escape it by moving jobs to other states. What we need is a national or even international level wealth tax agreed between the EU, US and others. There should be a provision in it that wealth taxes in the US are paid by people that own US companies and have held assets generated in the US or lived in the US for certain periods of time. Something that can't be avoided just by saying "Oh yeah, I live in Panama now".

I think people would vote for that.
 
I think I have mentioned this before on here, but we moved out to Essex from London after Covid and now when I go into central London I hear so many American accents! I noticed it again last weekend when I was there for a visit. I wonder if now people from the US will move back.

 
Right wing extremists called Talarico (U.S. Senator, Texas - elect) "Talafreako" and were extremely angry at him when he went to a diner with Obama and ordered a "cheese and egg taco." They were screaming "HE'S A VEGAN, AHHHHGGGHH!" So later, Talarico had to show pictures of him eating meat.

First of all, eggs and cheese are not vegan. :joy:

And second, who cares if he was vegan or vegetarian?! Now they have to call him "Senator."
 
It looks like the 5% wealth tax on billionaires on California is not going to pass. At least so far, that's how the votes are going.

However, my take on this is that wealth taxes are needed and will be popular, but perhaps can't be done state by state. The reason this vote failed is because the wealthy can escape it by moving jobs to other states. What we need is a national or even international level wealth tax agreed between the EU, US and others. There should be a provision in it that wealth taxes in the US are paid by people that own US companies and have held assets generated in the US or lived in the US for certain periods of time. Something that can't be avoided just by saying "Oh yeah, I live in Panama now".

I think people would vote for that.
Yep, I agree… At first I had only been thinking of a National Wealth tax, however an International Wealth tax on All income of All citizens in All countries would make it Unavoidable! That would be a Huge game changer!!
 
Indeed, the results are looking much better than anybody had any reason to expect, you did well :)

View attachment 35754


Now the big question is, what will Democrats do, come January?

The first thing they need to do - IMO - is to get rid of Chuck Schumer and Hakeem Jeffries.

They don't necessarily need to replace them with Democratic Socialist candidates immediately, but there needs to be some change to show that the party is moving on from kowtowing - oops, I wanted to say "sending strongly worded letters" - to Repugnicans.

So many good candidates out there - Van Hollen, Murphy, Warren, to name just a few.
Hmmm…I’m not so sure that getting rid of Schumer and Jeffries is necessary - at least not until they have a Chance to show what they can do in this new term… Apparently they were responsible for Choosing or rather Recruiting many of the candidates who Won! I’m also not sure that it sends the right message to the repugs or the voters who voted in the new members…Personally I’d give them or at least most Especially Jeffries a chance
 
Hmmm…I’m not so sure that getting rid of Schumer and Jeffries is necessary - at least not until they have a Chance to show what they can do in this new term… Apparently they were responsible for Choosing or rather Recruiting many of the candidates who Won! I’m also not sure that it sends the right message to the repugs or the voters who voted in the new members…Personally I’d give them or at least most Especially Jeffries a chance
They've both shown us who they are, both are entwined with Aipac, and have done more to ensure the party line follows the right wing very very closely. They made sure Bernie Sanders didn't get the nomination, fund republican campaigns and fuel the fear of democratic socialism.
They're weak and self serving
The democrats in charge today are further right then the repulicans back in the 70's
 
  • Like
Reactions: Andy_T
Hmmm…I’m not so sure that getting rid of Schumer and Jeffries is necessary - at least not until they have a Chance to show what they can do in this new term

I think they had plenty of time to show what they are capable of … and their candidates, from Vindman to the Fetterwoman in Michigan were not that great IMO …

Those candidates that inspired people like me in this election cycle were largely there despite their actions, and not because of them …
 
  • Agree
Reactions: 4silva
So now the Democrats are in the best position to disappoint all of us ;)

I do not doubt that they will find ways and means to do exactly that.

Hakeem Jeffries has already started the exercise by promising that they are not going to prosecute or impeach anybody.
According to his message, that's because they are only focused on "affordability and accountability".

Not sure what they exactly mean with that second phrase, however, if their preference is on "healing" instead of prosecuting.....
A stern talking-to maybe, after all the strongly worded letters?