Guest post by Adrian Beaumont, who joins us from time to time to provide commentary on elections internationally. Adrian is a paid election analyst for The Conversation. His work for The Conversation can be found here.
Republicans won the US House of Representatives by 220-215 over Democrats at the November 2024 elections, but they currently hold a 220-212 margin owing to three Democratic deaths where the previous member has not yet been replaced at special elections.
On July 3, the House passed the Senate’s version of Donald Trump’s “big beautiful bill (BBB)” by 218-214, with just two Republicans joining all Democrats in opposition. In the Senate, where Republicans hold a 53-47 margin after the 2024 elections, what Democrats call the “big ugly bill” passed by 51-50 on Vice President JD Vance’s tie-breaking vote. Three Republicans had joined all Democrats in opposition. One Republican senator and one House member voted against from the right.
In Nate Silver’s aggregate of US national polls, Trump’s net approval is currently -6.7, with 51.4% disapproving and 44.7% approving. Trump’s ratings have barely changed since the BBB was passed, although there haven’t been many recent polls owing to the July 4 US holiday.
In a July 4-7 YouGov poll, Americans were opposed to the BBB by 53-35. On the deficit, 52% thought it would increase due to the BBB, 11% remain about the same and 19% decrease. By 52-28, respondents thought the BBB would hurt the average American, and by 42-24 they thought it would hurt “you and your immediate family”.
The BBB’s passage wasn’t Trump’s only recent victory. The Supreme Court currently has a 6-3 majority for right-wing judges, and they ruled on June 27 by this 6-3 margin that lower court judges cannot now issue nationwide injunctions. Trump’s policies will be harder to challenge in courts.
Musk’s new party and NYC mayoral general election
In other US news, Elon Musk has formed a new party called the “America Party” that will contest the 2026 midterm elections. Musk’s net favourability in Silver’s tracker is currently -21.8, with 56.4% unfavourable and 34.7% favourable. It’s unlikely that his party will succeed with Musk unpopular, but it’s more likely to take votes from Republicans than Democrats.
Socialist Zohran Mamdani defeated Andrew Cuomo by 56.0-44.0 after preferences to win the June 24 New York City Democratic mayoral nomination. The general election will be held on November 4 using first past the post. Cuomo and current mayor Eric Adams, who was elected as a Democrat, will be running as independents, and there’s also a Republican. Polls suggest Cuomo is Mamdani’s biggest threat, but Mamdani may prevail owing to vote splitting between the more conservative candidates.
UK Labour MP defects
On July 3, UK Labour MP Zarah Sultana defected from Labour and announced she would join a potential party led by Jeremy Corbyn. In 2017, the Conservatives suffered a surprise loss of their majority in the House of Commons to Corbyn’s Labour, but Boris Johnson thumped Labour in 2019, ending Corbyn’s leadership. Corbyn was expelled by Labour, but retained his seat at the 2024 election as an independent.
A late June More in Common poll gave a Corbyn-led party 10% of the national vote, with the far-right Reform on 27% (unchanged from the standard poll), Labour 20% (down three), the Conservatives 20% (unchanged), the Liberal Democrats 14% (unchanged) and the Greens 5% (down four).
The Election Maps UK national poll aggregate has Reform leading with 28.8%, with Labour at 24.1%, the Conservatives 17.7%, the Lib Dems 14.2% and the Greens 8.5%. Reform has been the clear leader since the early May local elections. Most recent polls give Labour leader and PM Keir Starmer a net approval below -30
Labour won 411 of the 650 House of Commons seats at the July 2024 election, and they currently have 403 MPs. Despite Labour’s big majority, Starmer was forced into making major concessions to get his welfare reform bill past the second reading on July 1. But 49 Labour MPs still rebelled and it was opposed by all other parties, so it passed by a 335-260 margin.
The Guardian reported Thursday that a Labour-endorsed bill would revert mayoral elections to preferential voting. The Conservatives in 2022 had regressed these elections to FPTP. But Labour has not proposed adopting preferential voting for Commons elections.
If Corporate Democrats support Cuomo over Mamdani in New York, that would probably be the death of the party.
Mamdani won the primary fair and square, and if they decide to ratfuck his campaign in the end, there’ll be much anger about that.
I’ve heard it said that the average Democratic supporter is so furious at Trump that they want to strap themselves to a rocket and fly at D.C. and it’s only pissing off the base further that the leaders are bleating like stuck lambs for “comity” and “respect for our institutions” while Trump and fellow fascists are laughing at just how easy it is to do a rerun of 1933 Germany when their opponents are so weak and divided.
Bad news for Starmer is that in every poll since June he is more unpopular than Farage, and Labour is slightly behind in the keys when thinking long-term.
Good news for Starmer is that his job approval is marginally improving, and Labour is slightly ahead in the keys right now.
If it was today:
Definitely True 7
Probably True 2
Probably False 1
Definitely False 4
For 2028/9:
Definitely True 2
Probably True 5
Probably False 5
Definitely False 2
7 false keys for the gov to not win the popular vote.
Okay so, thinking back to Tony Blair’s first government from 1997-2001, would anyone who was politically aware of the situation be able to share exactly how he won back-to-back landslide elections from back then?
I was just a kid back then but I’m eager to learn from history as to what he did back then that was so successful that Starmer appears to be flailing about with now.
I think basing the party’s future on a mayoral race result in New York isn’t necessarily logical.
My own view is that there are likely to be a lot of older, go-nowhere, do-nothing Democrats who get primaried next year and/or decide to spend more time with their families. If they’re just taking up space in congress then they really should be challenged.
I was interested to see reports of Ruben Gallego visiting an Iowa state fair in a couple weeks.
Confessions @ #4 Saturday, July 12th, 2025 – 6:02 pm
I disagree, I think Mamdani’s campaign has lit a fire under the Democratic Party establishment.
His winning strategy was to keep it to the economy, and it worked in the end. He says it clear as crystal, “This is the richest city in the richest nation the world has ever seen, yet most of us are struggling to afford to live here. I want to at least attempt to make moves to change this.”
When Eric Adams won the 2021 Primary for Democratic Candidate for Mayor by like less than 1%, he was treated as a champion by the Democratic establishment. And now he’s Trump’s bitch.
Zohran Mamdani meanwhile is running a very charismatic extrovertive campaign, and Corporate Democrats don’t want anything to do with him.
I mean just look at any video of Mamdani’s campaign, all he’s doing is wishing the best of those around him, unless they’re Republicans that are breaking the law, but meh, who can stop that at this stage? He’s a delightful person and I hope he wins to become Mayor.
It is just a city but it’s also a bigger city than all but 13 states, and the democratic party is certainly treating it like a threat to their future. His ability to reach Trump supporters should also be noted.
I think really the root of the issue is that an overwhelming majority of Democratic voters are feeling like they aren’t being listened to, and so far the Democratic response to Mamdani has been to either ignore him, or slander him with racist comments, proving their point entirely.
I mean they wheeled out a rapist, Bill Clinton, to whip up support for a serial sexual harasser. It’s not a good look when you’re up against another rapist, Trump, to be out there doing these stunts.
Kirsdarke:
He has certainly been the more authentic candidate and I wish him all the best in the election. But I think predictions of the Democrats’ demise are a little premature.
I hate US politics. It’s just post-truth, delusional and fuelled by petty gripes, persecution complexes and unsubstantiated conspiracy theories.
Confessions @ #7 Saturday, July 12th, 2025 – 6:37 pm
Yeah true, such an extremity probably won’t happen, but it certainly won’t be helpful for their cause if they continue their “There is no war in Ba-Sing-Se” routine and that Hakeem Jeffries and Chuck Schumer must be obeyed no matter what.
Chuck Schumer will very likely be primaried. As for Jeffries I am curious to know what sort of authority he commands with congressional Dems that would see him hang onto a leadership position, especially if they take back the house in the midterms.
Is he just a seat warmer? Or is there someone else waiting their turn in the wings who would be elevated the second the Democrats start winning again?
Confessions @ #10 Saturday, July 12th, 2025 – 7:02 pm
With Hakeem Jeffries it seems that all he is is a Temu Obama, basically just a Wall Street Corporate Democrat trying to bring things back to 2008 when he actually doesn’t have the political skill or talent to do so.
Chuck Schumer would be hard to primary, he has a war chest and a strong personal rapport with a lot of voters, especially older Jewish voters in NYC. Yes, I know “they said the same about Cuomo” but he’s not a disgraced sex pest. Also, areas outside of NYC vote in the primaries too.
In terms of who AOC should primary, if and when, while I have no problem with her primarying Schumer, I think she would be much stronger and more successful against Gillibrand. She has my support either way but that’s my two cents.
Surely those bloody keys have been discredited beyond redemption?
Yes, Schumer might be hard to primary, but he should be primaried. He was Senate majority leader for the last 4 years and still Mitch McConnell ran rings around him…from opposition!
As Kirs said, Dem voters are crying out for representatives who are prepared to fight. Schumer isn’t that person. If he doesn’t want to lose his Senate seat then at the very least he should step aside as party leader in the Senate. Let someone else with more gumption step up to the plate.
And, as I said, I’m not opposed to any challenge against him (unless it’s by someone much worse e.g. Cuomo), I am just giving my opinion of the electoral prospects.
I think, regardless of what Democratic Primary voters in New York want in regards to who represents the state in the Senate, Schumer should move aside as Senate Leader. I get being initially shell-shocked at how quickly Trump has acted and how much more extreme his second presidency has already been versus his first, but his answer being letters and waving through some stuff to play nice and hope that stops Republicans from being too mean is just not enough.
Detained by ICE – she still loves Trump: “I will support him until the day I die”
https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2025/7/11/2332833/-Trump-locked-her-up-but-she-still-loves-him-I-will-support-him-until-the-day-I-die?pm_campaign=front_page&pm_source=trending&pm_medium=web
The Albonatorsays:
Saturday, July 12, 2025 at 7:33 pm
They’re always correct. Except when they’re not. 🙂
The keys applied in a particular time and place that doesnt exist any more. Meanwhile ICE has got the funds to establish itself as a state within the state, like the Nazis’ SS. The SS also had border police as one of their myriad departments. The MAGA ideologues eg Bannon should watch their back. They are now past their use by date, like the SA in 1934
Wat Tylersays:
Saturday, July 12, 2025 at 9:46 pm
“They’re always correct. Except when they’re not.”
They’re always correct. Sometimes the user is wrong. I ignored the post because
A. I wasn’t wasting my whole day looking at a screen and
B. Even if I was, I rarely give snide remarks any attention when they can’t give a single valid argument other than “the keys are subjective”
“And to that I say, the ways the pollsters decide their methodologies are subjective too, but when you chuck them together, you’re often close to the mark. It’s the same with the keys.”
If there actually are still anti-key posters around, they obviously haven’t seriously read many of my other posts.
I predict a real show of force by ICE at polling stations at the midterms, as intimidation for Democrats and validation for the MAGAts
subgeometersays:
Saturday, July 12, 2025 at 10:59 pm
“The keys applied in a particular time and place that doesnt exist any more.”
I don’t really get your point here.
They work in every democracy on earth (fact most anti-key posters either deny or ignore)
They work in every part of history in at least the past ~300 years (also a fact)
Why would those trends stop now?
“Okay so, thinking back to Tony Blair’s first government from 1997-2001, would anyone who was politically aware of the situation be able to share exactly how he won back-to-back landslide elections from back then?”
Because a disillusioned and apathetic electorate didn’t see a Conservative party ready to vote back in, though if William Hague had not made some rookie errors in the campaign he could have capitalised on a poor Labour campaign and shrunk the gap.
Both parties ran silly, negative ads that the public hated: Tories showing Tony Blair with demon eyes, and Labour showing William Hague with Maggie Thatcher hair / as Maggie. Widely panned by the public who felt they were playing games as well as being negative. Result: lowest turnout ever, a massive, massive drop from 4 years earlier.
But fundamentally, Blair was able to do it because:
1. Politics was less fragmented then – no Reform equivalent;
2. People still remembered a Tory party that had become inward-looking and marked by scandals for years up to 1997, plus ‘Black Wednesday’ was still too recent to be sure the Tories would be better managers of the economy, so Labour won on that.
3. Labour inherited a booming economy in 1997, coinciding with a global growth boom that enabled them to carry out their big spending plans and not need to make cuts in 2001 but keep spending (people can argue about the long-term wisdom of the debt they accumulated and the way they spent, but the fact is they could do it then without spooking the markets or immediately crashing the economy).
4. In 2024-25, the world is very different. Labour are discovering that they have to put square pegs into round holes now they are the ones in government making the tough choices following Brexit, Covid and Ukraine war/inflationary impacts.
5. People are not very forgiving to Labour even though it’s early days, because they refused to spell out their policies much before the election and people assumed they’d be much better. It now seems their policies weren’t / aren’t very well formed, they have had to make lots of U-turns; and people are just angry at them doing things they didn’t say beforehand they would do/not do.
6. Tony Blair had the ‘common touch’ and could connect with people’s optimism, especially younger generations. Starmer is a bit older, but more to the point is dull, lawyerly, apparently lacking in humour; and no-one really knows what he stands for.
7. Although Corbynites beg to differ, Starmer is A LONG WAY to the left of Tony Blair who was centre-left. Blair would NOT be introducing all the anti-business taxes or legislation that are threatening to stifle the economy much more than necessary.
Thanks, BTSays.
The most I know about it was hearing early Dead Ringers episodes where William Hague seemed like something of a dropkick and Blair fared little better.
I do wonder sometimes what would have happened if Michael Portillo had not lost his seat in 1997 and instead became Tory Leader after that election, since he was widely regarded as one of the more likely to succeed John Major after that loss.
If Portillo had become leader, yes he’d have made better TV (though Hague was pretty unsurpassed as a sharp-witted parliamentarian who used to get the better of Blair week after week) but the party wasn’t ready for someone who was embracing all the socially liberal stuff that Blair / New Labour was espousing.
He was Eurosceptic so had that going for him as far as the base was concerned (EU being one issue that had divided the party so much during the previous parliament, as many backbenchers were furious with John Major for ‘signing away Britain’s sovereignty’ through the Maastricht Treaty etc.).
But the party would have not responded well to Portillo – and what is a party without its members/base, however much it needs to modernise?
Portillo did stand for leadership in 2001, having been re-elected into Parliament by then, and was a dismal flop.
It ultimately took David Cameron, who found a way to please the media whilst having a plan for the modernisation of the party AND winning over the party membership in the leadership race through his eloquence and skilful positioning. His personal family situation probably better helped him be palatable to the base in a way that Portillo would have struggled with.
I’m also not sure what, in the end, Portillo really stood for as he ‘changed his spots’ so many times over the years having started at the right-wing end of the Conservative party.
Portillo is an intelligent man, but would he just have been a weak leader when confronted with the demands of international crises as PM?
@BTSays
Interesting stuff, thanks again.
Canadian tourism to the US shows no sign of recovery : https://www.travelandtourworld.com/news/article/canadian-tourism-continues-to-fall-as-over-thirty-percent-drop-in-june-hits-us-states-including-florida-california-maine-new-york-nevada-texas-amid-border-crash-political-feud-and-more/#gsc.tab=0
The dems ratfucking Mamdani is just dems being dems. They are controlled opposition funded by corporations. How can Cuomo fight Trump? He is Trump. Pro-billionaire, anti-working class, sex pest, corrupt. The only difference is Cuomo resigned when he got impeached before he came back.
Coming up this week on Wednesday Australian time will be the hotly contested Democratic primary for Arizona’s 7th Congressional district Special Election (a safe D+13 district).
The two main candidates are Adelita Grijalva, daughter of the previous member Raul Grijalva who died in March and Deja Foxx, a progressive 25-year-old.
The latest poll from 2 weeks ago has Grijalva on 43% and Foxx on 35% (with third candidate Daniel Hernández Jr. on 9%).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2025_Arizona%27s_7th_congressional_district_special_election#Democratic_primary
Sorry that should be D+27 since the 2024 result was 63.5% Dem, 36.5% Rep.
I still wonder why 77 million Americans voted for total chaos bordering on fascism – doesn’t say much for their education levels, or was it just because they didn’t want a black woman to be President?
The MAGA red Republican states probably deserve all the BS they’re about to be put through, the shame is the blue Democrat states will cop it too.
As for the Democrats, they better pick Josh Shapiro or Andy Beshear as their presidential candidate in 2028, assuming Trump hasn’t declared martial law by then and cancelled all democratic elections. 2016 and 2024 have proven that America won’t vote for a woman to be President, and they won’t vote for a gay man to be President either(that’s for Pete Buttigieg fans).
Democracy Sausagesays:
Monday, July 14, 2025 at 1:47 pm
“As for the Democrats, they better pick Josh Shapiro or Andy Beshear as their presidential candidate in 2028”
Could be wrong, but I don’t really believe the actual candidates have much impact on the nation-wide popular vote – only the electoral pendulum, unless 1 of them is personally appealing to the other side’s moderate voters.
For Democrats to have the highest chance of winning in 2028, they should choose a candidate from a swing-state that’s personally appealing to moderate GOP voters.
Arange @ #31 Monday, July 14th, 2025 – 2:01 pm
Well, Beshear won Kentucky in a statewide election, twice, so he’s definitely onto something in winning over moderate Republicans. Plus he’s term limited and his last term ends in 2027, so, he might just well be that ideal candidate.
Beshear as a Democrat has won twice in a red state, seems an obvious option for 2028. If not him, then Josh Shapiro, whose ratings as Pennsylvania Governor are pretty high.
AOC or Bernie Sanders or a Mandani like candidate from the extreme left of the Democratic Party – won’t cut it.
Come to think of it, if Beshear does turn out to be the Democratic candidate for 2028 he might just have a dream run.
Trump can’t run again because of the 22nd amendment to the constitution. If he disregards that and runs again somehow, that’ll piss off a lot of people who have supported him so far, giving Beshear an advantage.
If he doesn’t run and instead the Republican candidate is some Temu-MAGA substitute that their base decides is no substitute for the real Shit-King they’ve supported for so long, then Beshear who won over voters in deep red Kentucky would be someone they’d be open to vote for.
Given that Kentucky went to Trump 65-35, I’d imagine there’d be a lot of Trump-Beshear voters there, and conversely a lot of similar voters in other states.
It’s interesting the far-right haven’t found the correct “NPC Update” to get their base off the Epstein files. Every other scandal or problem has lasted about 10 hours before Fox News or Peter Thiel or Project 2025 have come up with a talking point that is rapidly disseminated to the rank & file.
This time, nothing.
The spent so much time fueling Qanon conspiracies about deep state pedophiles on the Epstein list that there’s nothing easy to say to get the NPC’s back on side.
I don’t think Josh Shapiro could cut it on a national stage, he might be popular in Pennsylvania but I think most would find his involvement in the cover up of Ellen Greenberg’s murder and his obvious imitation of Obama’s speech and accent quite unappealing, as well as making him a very easy target for ridicule and scandal.
Bean @ #36 Monday, July 14th, 2025 – 5:44 pm
Yeah, I’m in agreement with that on Josh Shapiro, he might be strong in Pennsylvania but has a lot of vulnerabilities that could take him down in a national Presidential campaign.
Yeah for real, I don’t think he would even make it out of the primaries, just too much heat.
I will push back against the idea that a candidate needs to be someone from a swing state. The last few successful Democratic candidates actually came from blue states. I don’t think winning in a swing state automatically makes you electable in other swing states. That kind of thinking is that cynical “perfect on paper” logic that often leads to losing elections. Winning in a swing state can also mean you’re just lucky enough to ride a blue wave, nothing more. At least, in Beshear’s case, it does take some skill to win a red state which can be transferrable to the national scene, as riding a wave isn’t enough.
Either way, the secret sauce isn’t what state they’re from, it’s how relatable and trustworthy they seem to voters and, to a sadly lesser degree, what kind of agenda they have. They can come from Mars for all it matters (well somewhere in the US at least.)
As for Shapiro, I agree. He’s the well-groomed centrist from PA type that works well on paper but nothing stands out about him. He has also been rather quiet in the last six months. When even Kathy Hochul and Gavin Newsom are doing a better job taking the fight to Trump, you have a problem. Also, some of the internal ratfucking against Harris last year seemed to be suspiciously close to him and his office, which leaves a bit of a bad taste in my mouth as well. He’s basically got a lot of Bill Shorten energy about him TBH.
Anyway, 2028 is a while away. There’s no point in getting too serious about it yet. We’re in this term’s equivalent of 2013 or 2017. No serious candidate is declaring until after the midterms (although, you can get some hints by their travel arrangements and speaking schedule.)
Wat Tylersays:
Monday, July 14, 2025 at 6:31 pm
“I will push back against the idea that a candidate needs to be someone from a swing state.”
Tell that to Nate Silver, or anyone else who knows what an electoral pendulum is.
The fact that you think Nate Silver is infallible goes a long way to explaining your uncritical and dogmatic clinging to magic electoral prediction methods that work except when they don’t.
Wat Tylersays:
Monday, July 14, 2025 at 7:05 pm
“The fact that you think Nate Silver is infallible goes a long way to explaining your uncritical and dogmatic clinging to magic electoral prediction methods that work except when they don’t.”
I never said Nate Silver is infallible.
Irrational hatred of me aside, maybe try thinking with your brain, and not your party.
And also maybe try to stop denying facts.
Maybe stop being so abusive to people who don’t have the same opinion as you and you might be treated with a bit of respect. Just a suggestion.
Wat Tylersays:
Monday, July 14, 2025 at 7:09 pm
“Maybe stop being so abusive to people who don’t have the same opinion as you and you might be treated with a bit of respect. Just a suggestion.”
What exactly have I done that’s abusive? Seriously.
Well, for the crime of having an opinion you didn’t like, you’ve condescendingly used an argument from authority to try and shoot me down, then accused me of not using my brain, arguing from partisanship (???) and then denying facts.
Again, all for sharing an opinion you didn’t agree with. Also, you’re quite aggressive about any criticism of Lichtman’s keys.
Wat Tylersays:
Monday, July 14, 2025 at 7:15 pm
“Well, for the crime of having an opinion you didn’t like, you’ve condescendingly used an argument from authority to try and shoot me down, then accused me of not using my brain, arguing from partisanship (???) and then denying facts.
Again, all for sharing an opinion you didn’t agree with. Also, you’re quite aggressive about any criticism of Lichtman’s keys.”
Firstly, thanks for actually replying.
Secondly,
I’ve never tried to be condescending, and I apologize if I came across that way.
You don’t seem to consider the facts about the keys. Looking back, I’m probably wrong, but you seem to copy what you think your fellow Partisans think.
I’ve never denyed a fact the whole time I’ve been posting too. (I’m not quite sure what fact you think I denyed)
I do probably come across as aggressive with the keys, cause I’m done with the abuse I get for them, and I spend hours writing all the facts, and then get ignored.
Jesus christ, you contradict yourself immediately.
Kirsdarkesays:
Monday, July 14, 2025 at 7:31 pm
“you contradict yourself immediately.”
I didn’t realise stating what I honestly think is suddenly condescending now. Go tell C@tmomma, as by that definition she’s probably the most condescending poster on this site.
I personally think swing states are overrated. Without mandatory voting, the path to victory is getting more people to go outside and vote for you, and most people live in cities. Probably every red state has a city that sits within a county that makes up over 50 percent of the population. Biden knows it, he won 2020 off the backs of city voters in red states turning up to the booth, and it’s how Kamala lost 2024 by trying too hard to appeal to dirt (which doesn’t vote).
@Arange
Well, yeah, you start off by saying that you don’t mean to say something condescending, then you immediately say something that most people would take as condescending, as though them disagreeing with you is something you can scoff at as being irrelevant partisan think.