We experienced an issue in which many users were logged out and then unable to log back in. This is now fixed. A vendor we work with made a modification that negatively affected our capacity. Once we identified and understood the issue, we were able to resolve it. Apologies for the frustration and thanks for your patience.

WaPo published a fascinating piece this morning tied to their latest poll of Kansas. The headline, figurative if not literal, is that they came up with a result that shows incumbent Republican Sen. Roger Marshall not behind Adam Hamilton, but way behind. But they don’t buy their own result. What’s fascinating and laudable is that polls like this, this late in the cycle, often never get released or they get adjusted to bring them more into line with pollsters’ expectations or the consensus of other polls. But here the Post made the decision to release the poll as is and pull back the veil on all the internal details and decisions they made to get the poll as close to what they think is accurate as they could.

Differential response has been the bane of pollsters for more than a decade. We know that no one answers the phone (or the text message) when pollsters get in touch anymore. The problem is that Republicans and Democrats “never” respond at slightly different rates. And even more specifically, the slice of usually disaffected voters that Donald Trump has repeatedly activated when he’s on the presidential ballot are the most poll-resistant of all. So a huge amount of what has happened in the polling industry over the last decade is pollsters trying to find ways to tweak numbers in some coherent way to adjust for getting too few of those poll-shy Trump voters. (And to be clear, this isn’t the old idea that they’re embarrassed to say they support Trump. They just don’t want to talk to pollsters.) Further complicating the issue is that that activation — and the polling misses tied to it — doesn’t seem to happen in midterm elections, based on 2018 and 2022.

We’ll be live on YouTube at 1 p.m. ET today to recap the week’s headlines and talk about the election. Today, special guest Josh Marshall will be on the show. That is right — the founder of TPM himself will join me, Nicole Lafond and Hunter Walker. Hope to see you at 1 p.m.

As we get ready for the final days of the 2026 midterm campaign, I wanted to flag some key parts of our coverage. First, don’t miss our midterms liveblog which you can find on the front page and also at this link. We’re starting with a focus on election interference issues and then we’ll shift toward broader Election Day news and results as we move into next week. Next, the TPM team has done a comprehensive analysis of just who certifies election results in each of the Senate swing states and what funny business they can pull. You can see that here. We also have our take on which 13 races we think will define the midterms, which you can read here. Finally, join us here Tuesday night. For the first time we’re going to be doing live video coverage of election night. Think of it as comparable to what you might see on CNN or MS NOW but with more insight about how to understand the results, what’s happening in key counties and precincts rather than just the toplines and just TPM level analysis. I hope you’ll join us.

No big news or even original analysis in this post, just a general observation. I was just looking at the VoteHub Senate predictions. This is a relatively new entrant into the election modeling/forecasting world. They’re a bit more cautious than Nate Silver’s Silver Bulletin, seeing the most likely outcome as Democrats taking 52 seats versus 53. That’s probably actually technically the median result of running numerous modeling simulations. In any case, I was looking at the categories in which they place different races. For instance, they put Texas, as “Lean D”, so more likely to flip than Ohio, Maine and Iowa. I’m not sure that’s wrong. But it’s just wild to see.

Regional GOP chair from Indiana sending out a letter reminding the members of the party central committee for the state’s third congressional district that they’re obligated to vote for Republican party candidates …

I don’t want to go poll by poll. You know where to find them. But we have new and pretty bullish new poll data in the battle for the Senate. (Yes, they’re just polls. They can be wrong and all that.) A bunch of polls have come out in the last 48 hours, including two high quality ones (CNN and NYT/Siena). Both show pretty substantial leads for Democrats in key Senate races.

Here are some general observations.

I jest, a bit, in the title. As I’ve told you several times, friends don’t let friends watch the early vote. But there’s one thing I want to point your attention to. I’ll explain in a moment why this leaves me mainly consistent.

There’s one thing that seems to be showing up fairly consistently across the country and particularly in the Deep South. That is a high proportion of generally younger, non-regular Democratic voters. And they tend to be less white, relative to the rest of the electorate. In a number of Deep South states you’re seeing high turnout for non-regular Democratic voters which in states like Mississippi for instance means mostly Black voters.

Very much a feature of this moment that while Donald Trump is spending resources to upend the constitutional order he’s also expending resources on weird personal fetishes, like in this case a maniacal need to refurb a semi-run-down but comfy and convenient local D.C. golf course.

Axios reports on a new private GOP poll conducted in the aftermath of Vivek Ramaswamy’s decision to run his ad questioning his opponent’s having been raped by her stepfather when she was 12. It shows Ramaswamy falling to 8 points behind Amy Acton compared to 2 points behind in a poll conducted by the same pollster a month ago. The poll found that 86% of respondents had heard of the ad and by a 2 to 1 margin those said the ad made them more likely to vote for Acton.

Ramaswamy has always been an especially Trumpy character in the sense of leaning — both in his actions and how he describes his actions — into transgressive verging on sociopathic behavior as a signifier of Republicanness or Trumpiness. Indeed, when he released this ad he said explicitly that he was sending a message that he was ready to break rules and conventions in the context of Ohio politics just as Trump had at the federal level. All of this comes under the headline of being, as the phrase goes, “extremely online” and shaped by the aesthetics, mores and instincts of online trolling.

That’s a remarkable and a remarkably frank expression of MAGA politics and aesthetics. The problem, however, is that Ramaswamy is not Donald Trump. What’s most notable about this episode is that lots of fellow Republicans appear to have warned him not to do this — not because of some subjective sense of decency but because it seemed so obviously self-destructive. I’ve thought from the beginning that this ad might not only backfire on Ramaswamy but possibly pull down the whole ticket. Ohio has very Trumpy demographics. It’s the kind of state where, if there’s going to be a GOP-underestimating polling error, you’d expect it to be particularly pronounced. Sherrod Brown — who, remember, is a semi-incumbent — has had a very steady if modest lead for months. He’s currently about three points ahead on average. So this ad, a performance of bad personhood, could end up making a difference in that race too.