About Lyndon Pryor

This author has not yet filled in any details.
So far Lyndon Pryor has created 16940 blog entries.

Virginia men get year in prison for carrying guns to 2020 election counting

By |2023-03-01T19:20:46-05:00March 1st, 2023|Election 2020|

Two Virginia men who were arrested carrying guns outside a 2020 presidential election counting location in Philadelphia were sentenced Wednesday to almost a year in prison.A Philadelphia judge sentenced Antonio Lamotta, 63, a resident of Chesapeake, to a minimum of 11 months and 15 days and no more than 23 months in prison. Joshua Macias, 44, a resident of Virginia Beach, received the same sentence. The two men were found guilty of carrying firearms without a license, a third-degree felony punishable by up to seven years in prison. Macias FACEBOOK Antonio LaMotta (left) was seen at the state Capitol in 2020 alongside state Sen. Amanda Chase, R-Chesterfield. 2020, BOB BROWN/TIMES-DISPATCH

Pricetag on Assembly Republicans’ investigation into the 2020 presidential election nears $2.5M

By |2023-03-01T20:23:13-05:00March 1st, 2023|Election 2020|

A court judgment against Assembly Speaker Robin Vos, R-Rochester, has added another $135,000 to the cost of the Assembly Republicans’ investigation into the 2020 presidential election.The ruling brings the total price tag attached to that investigation to almost $2.5 million in taxpayer dollars, according to a review by WisPolitics. Dane County Circuit Court Judge Diane Schlipper ordered Vos to pay $135,574 in legal fees to American Oversight, a Washington, D.C.-based liberal group that filed lawsuits related to the handling of documents in the investigation by former Wisconsin Supreme Court Justice Michael Gableman. Schlipper cited a state statute finding that the government is responsible for attorney fees when it loses a public records case. Vos had argued that the state should not be responsible for covering a nonprofit’s fees, citing laws in Illinois and Ohio. "Wisconsin’s public records law is not ambiguous and its interpretation requires no assistance from Illinois or Ohio courts," Schlipper wrote. "I award American Oversight its reasonable fees." Schlipper also found that the Legislature may owe an additional $7,637, but that Vos has seven days to file objections. Speaking to reporters Wednesday, Vos said he’d likely appeal this judgment and suggested that a "liberal Dane County judge" may have had political motivations.

Top Democrats push Fox News to stop promoting “propaganda” about 2020 election

By |2023-03-01T20:23:15-05:00March 1st, 2023|Election 2020|

Washington — The Democratic leaders in the House and Senate are urging top executives at Fox Corp. and Fox News to direct the network's hosts to stop pushing baseless claims and "grave propaganda" about the 2020 presidential election, warning that continuing to spread these narratives is harmful to the nation.The letter from Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer and House Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries comes after excerpts of a deposition from Fox Corp. Chairman Rupert Murdoch were made public Monday as part of a $1.6 billion defamation lawsuit filed against the cable news giant by Dominion Voting Systems.In the unsealed documents, which included excerpts from the deposition, Murdoch acknowledged that Fox News commentators endorsed false claims that the 2020 presidential election was stolen from former President Donald Trump, and he did not intervene to stop them from amplifying the allegations. "The leadership of your company was aware of the dangers of broadcasting these outlandish claims. By your own account, Donald Trump's election lies were 'damaging' and 'really crazy stuff.' Despite that shocking admission, Fox News hosts have continued to peddle election denialism to the American people," Schumer and Jeffries wrote.They continued: "This sets a dangerous precedent that ignores basic journalistic fact-checking principles and public accountability." The two Democrats said the actions of Fox News hosts are "even more alarming" given that House Speaker Kevin McCarthy agreed to give primetime host Tucker Carlson access to a trove of 41,000 hours of Capitol and police surveillance video from the Jan. 6, 2021, assault on the U.S. Capitol.GOP Rep. Barry Loudermilk of Georgia told CBS News on Tuesday that Carlson's staff was allowed to view but not record portions of the footage from the attack, and the Fox team can request copies of clips they may need. "We demand that you direct Tucker Carlson and other hosts on your network to stop spreading false election narratives and admit on the air that they were wrong to engage in such negligent behavior," Schumer and Jeffries wrote.Spreading false information about the 2020 election, they said, "could not only embolden supporters of the Big Lie to engage in further acts of political violence, but also deeply and broadly weakens faith in our democracy and hurts our country in countless other ways." "Fox News executives and all other hosts on your network have a clear choice," Schumer and Jeffries wrote. "You can continue a pattern of lying to your viewers and risking democracy or move beyond this damaging chapter in your company's history by siding with the truth and reporting the facts."The letter was addressed to Murdoch; his son Lachlan Murdoch, the executive chairman and CEO of Fox Corp.; Suzanne Scott, CEO of Fox News Media; and Jay Wallace, president and executive editor of Fox News Media.Murdoch's deposition is the latest filing from Dominion that has pulled back the curtain on how Fox responded to Trump's loss and his unfounded allegations that the 2020 election was rigged against him.In text messages made public in an earlier document, some of Fox's top hosts, including Carlson, raised concerns about the claims of voter fraud being spread by Trump's allies on its airwaves, but were worried about its audience turning away from the network and tuning in to its competitors after Fox said Mr. Biden had won Arizona, a call that angered Trump and his backers. Delaware-based Dominion Voting Systems, which sells electronic voting hardware and software, was at the center of election lies spread by Trump and his allies, including false accusations that its machines switched votes from Trump to Mr. Biden during the election.In response to the filings, lawyers for Fox Corp. have accused Dominion of citing a "handful of selective quotes" that don't have anything to do with the alleged defamatory statements. "Dominion's lawsuit has always been more about what will generate headlines than what can withstand legal and factual scrutiny, as illustrated by them now being forced to slash their fanciful damages demand by more than half a billion dollars after their own expert debunked its implausible claims," Fox News said in a statement about the suit. "Their summary judgment motion took an extreme, unsupported view of defamation law that would prevent journalists from basic reporting and their efforts to publicly smear FOX for covering and commenting on allegations by a sitting President of the United States should be recognized for what it is: a blatant violation of the First Amendment."  Nikole Killion contributed to this report.

Before Murdaugh jurors visited Moselle, O.J. Simpson’s jury went to Brentwood

By |2023-03-01T18:33:21-05:00March 1st, 2023|Breonna Taylor|

Before closing arguments got underway on Wednesday in the murder trial of Alex Murdaugh, jurors visited the sprawling hunting estate where the disbarred South Carolina attorney found his wife and son dead in June 2021. The field trip to Moselle became the latest in a series of rare but high-profile instances where jurors are taken out of the courtroom and to the scene of a crime.Last year, jurors in the trial of a former Louisville police officer involved in the 2020 raid and fatal shooting of Breonna Taylor visited her apartment before Brett Hankison was acquitted of wanton endangerment. Months later, the jury in the sentencing trial for Nikolas Cruz, the gunman who was sentenced to life in prison for the 2018 mass shooting in Parkland, Fla., toured Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School years after 17 people, including 14 students, were killed.But in the months since the Murdaugh murder trial has become the center of worldwide media coverage, including docuseries on Netflix and HBO Max and being carried live on cable news, the proceedings have drawn comparisons to another murder trial with high public interest nearly three decades ago that brought its jurors to the location of the killings: that of O.J. Simpson.On Feb. 12, 1995, Simpson, along with 12 jurors, nine alternates, Judge Lance A. Ito and the attorneys in the case, made the roughly 15-mile trip from Los Angeles County Superior Court to 879 S. Bundy Dr., the location of Nicole Brown Simpson’s condominium in the Brentwood neighborhood of Los Angeles. The jury’s field trip to the estate took place eight months to the day after his ex-wife and her friend Ronald Goldman were found fatally stabbed outside the residence.Their killings led to O.J. Simpson’s arrest after he attempted to evade police in a white Ford Bronco in a televised chase that became one of the most publicized events in U.S. history. The murder trial would become one of the most memorable and covered legal proceedings of the era. Simpson would be acquitted in the trial, but was later found liable for the two deaths in a civil lawsuit.While lead prosecutor Marcia Clark argued at the time that the trip to the Brentwood residence showed jurors how there could have only been room for one killer in the cramped area by Brown Simpson’s gate on June 12, 1994, Johnnie Cochran, Simpson’s chief trial attorney, claimed that the small space worked in his client’s favor.“How do you have a life-and-death fight in an area that small and not have bruises?” Cochran told reporters at the time.The jury in the Murdaugh trial arrived at Moselle at around 9:45 a.m. Wednesday. Video from NewsNation reporter Brian Entin shows jurors and law enforcement driven onto the 1,772-acre property in at least six vehicles for what’s described as a “jury view” of Moselle. Closing arguments began Wednesday morning as the trial moves toward a conclusion, possibly in the coming days. If convicted, Murdaugh, 54, could face life in prison.Circuit Court Judge Clifton Newman ruled in favor of Murdaugh’s defense team this week and granted its request to have the jury travel to Moselle so that they can better visualize the testimony and visit the site where Murdaugh’s wife, Maggie, 52, and son Paul, 22, were found dead June 7, 2021.“You can’t really appreciate the spatial issues without actually seeing them,” defense attorney Richard “Dick” Harpootlian told the court.What to know about Moselle, the scene of the killings in Alex Murdaugh’s trialAfter lead prosecutor Creighton Waters objected to the request and argued that the property looks different now than it did the night of the killings, Harpootlian told Newman this week that he did not want the jury to be “influenced by crazy paparazzi” after reports of intruders at the sprawling estate.Moselle was publicly posted for sale by the Crosby Land Co. of Colleton County on Feb. 14, 2022 — roughly four months before Murdaugh was indicted by a grand jury on murder charges. Moselle, which includes a four-bedroom, 5,275-square-foot house, a farm, two miles of river for fishing and kayaking, and dog kennels, has been under contract from an undisclosed buyer for $3.9 million since June 6, 2022, according to the listing — almost a year to the day of the killings.Netflix’s Murdaugh documentary series: 4 takeawaysAs the murder trial has gained more attention, some have pointed to similarities between the cases of Murdaugh and Simpson, including how their stories have been consumed as wildly popular docuseries. An expert in crime-scene reconstruction and blood-spatter analysis who was called by Murdaugh’s defense team testified this week that evidence from Moselle suggests that the killings of Maggie and Paul Murdaugh were carried out by two shooters. Some pundits have noted that the defense team’s strategy echoed the focus from Simpson’s attorneys in 1995, when Cochran argued that the “real killer(s)” DNA had vanished from evidence samples in an investigation that was “compromised, contaminated, corrupted.”But 28 years before the Murdaugh jury went to Moselle, Simpson’s jurors did the same in Brentwood.It was around 9 a.m. on a Sunday when the Simpson jurors were escorted by motorcycle police officers who shut down freeway on-ramps. When they exited a sheriff’s department bus — with steel bars over tinted windows — they walked into Brown Simpson’s Brentwood residence and retraced the gruesome details that had been presented to them in court.“It’s very helpful to a jury listening to a witness to a crime scene if they look at it themselves,” F. Lee Bailey, one of Simpson’s attorneys, said in court that day, according to UPI. “I’ve long been in favor of jury views.”[embedded content]The trip to Brentwood was not just for the jury but also for the attorneys, the judge and even Simpson. Even though Brown Simpson’s family objected to Simpson being allowed to return to the home, Ito allowed it. Simpson ended up waiving his right to visit the crime scene, instead choosing to stay in an unmarked police car around the corner as jurors went inside four or five at a time.When the jurors were touring the location, Ito expressed his concern with jurors being out in public as part of a trial that had garnered worldwide attention. Brentwood residents were spotted on the day of the visit carrying signs such as “O.J.'s Guilty” and “Free O.J,” according to the Los Angeles Times.“The problem is we will be out, literally out in Brentwood,” Ito said at the time.Both the prosecution and defense teams in the Simpson trial used the visit to Brentwood to strengthen their arguments. Prosecutors emphasized how small the area was where the slayings unfolded in an attempt to upend the defense’s argument that the killings were committed by more than one person.“It will go to the reason why one person could accomplish this,” Clark told reporters.Added prosecutor Christopher A. Darden, “I think that Ronald Goldman, having confronted a suspect with a knife, was essentially caged.”Bailey claimed to reporters, however, that the small space at Brown Simpson’s would not sway the jury.“They are a very impassive group,” Bailey said of the jury, reported the Los Angeles Times. “What we’re banking on is that they’ll understand the evidence better having been to the places where the evidence grew out of last June.”About eight months after the jury’s visit to the crime scene, Simpson was acquitted. If Murdaugh is acquitted, it could be in as little as a day or two after the jury’s visit to Moselle.

Louisville doubles for NYC in new indie thriller ‘What We Do Next.’ How to watch the film

By |2023-03-01T18:31:07-05:00March 1st, 2023|COVID-19|

What We Do Next - Official Trailer | IMDbDoes Louisville look like New York City? In the new indie thriller "What We Do Next," Bourbon City doubles for the Big Apple.Filmed in Kentucky at the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, "What We Do Next" premieres Friday in Los Angels, New York, and Louisville after a string of success on the international film festival circuit."Although the film is set in New York City, it was shot entirely in Louisville with a lot of Kentucky crew," said Louisville-based Merry-Kay Poe, who produced "What We Do Next" along with Max Neace and Chris Mangano of Small Batch Studio Entertainment.Written and directed by Stephen Belber, the film stars Corey Stoll, Karen Pittman, and Michelle Veintimilla."What We Do Next" tells the story of Elsa Mercado, played by Veintimilla ("The Good Wife"), who has been released from prison after serving 16 years for killing her father. New York City Councilwoman Sandy James (Pittman, from "The Morning Show") and corporate attorney Paul Jenkins (Stoll, from "Billions" and "House of Cards"), are forced to grapple with their involvement in the original crime. Power constantly shifts among the three characters throughout the film as they fight for their version of the truth.You may like:The Kentucky Derby Museum Hat Show is back. Here's your complete guide to the 2023 event"This was the perfect script to produce during the pandemic," Poe told the Courier Journal. "The story requires intense dialogue with a small cast and limited sets. Because the brilliantly-written script attracted equally brilliant actors, we were able to film the entire movie in seven days. Including on-site prep and wrap, we were confined for only three weeks. "Because business people were working remotely during the filming of "What We Do Next," in October 2020, the production crew had no trouble securing a vacant office suite that had plenty of separate rooms for sound, private dressing rooms and interior sets.Substituting Louisville for New York City was never an issue during production since most of the action takes place inside buildings."Windows were blurred so that the skyline wasn't seen, which added to the aesthetic of the shots," said Poe. "The only exterior we cheated shows Elsa walking the streets of Washington Heights. She is actually on the Second Street bridge underpass. I doubt that any Louisvillian would have caught that if we didn’t just tell them."You may like:Churchill Downs names 3 Featured Milliners for Kentucky Derby 2023. Meet the hat makersPoe says the film could have included more Louisville exteriors simulating New York City but restrictions during COVID-19 prohibited some movement of the crew. She said Belber and a camera operator did spend one day filming exterior establishing shots in New York City but other than those scenes, everything else took place in Kentucky.The winner of Best Drama at the San Diego International Film Festival, "What We Do Next" will premiere Friday at 7:15 p.m. at Baxter Ave Theatres, 1250 Bardstown Road. Those interested in learning more about the film's production can stick around after the screening when members of the film crew will conduct a Q&A session.For further information, visit village8.com.Reach Features reporter Kirby Adams at [email protected].

Rupert Murdoch admits some Fox News hosts endorsed false narrative of a stolen 2020 election

By |2023-03-01T20:23:19-05:00March 1st, 2023|Election 2020|

IE 11 is not supported. For an optimal experience visit our site on another browser.UP NEXTArrest warrants issued for Jalen Carter, top NFL prospect, linked to deadly car crash01:26Composer John Williams reflects on Oscar nomination for Spielberg’s ‘The Fabelmans’03:26Colorectal cancer rates in younger Americans on the rise01:50Eli Lilly announces insulin price cut01:49Growing concern over Ohio train derailment hazardous material shipments01:45Dozens killed in train collision in Greece01:16

Notes on the State of Politics: March 1, 2023 – Sabato’s Crystal Ball

By |2023-03-01T20:23:28-05:00March 1st, 2023|Election 2020|

Dear Readers: This is the latest edition of Notes on the State of Politics, which features short updates on elections and politics. — The Editors How likely is an Electoral College tie? The 2020 election came fairly close to ending in an Electoral College tie. While Joe Biden won the national popular vote by about 4.5 points, his margins in several key states were much narrower. Specifically, Biden’s 3 closest wins were by 11,779 votes (or .24 percentage points) in Georgia, 10,457 in Arizona (.31 points), and 20,682 (.63 points) in Wisconsin. Had these states voted for Donald Trump and everything else had been the same, the Electoral College would have produced a 269-269 tie, leaving both candidates short of the magic number of 270 electoral votes. If this ever happens, the U.S. House of Representatives would have to decide the election — we’ll have more about how this would work in tomorrow’s Crystal Ball. But before we do that, we wanted to look at whether there are plausible paths to 269-269 in 2024. Changes to the electoral vote allocations as a result of the 2020 census have altered the overall math slightly. Using the new allocation based on the 2020 results, the election would have been slightly closer: 303-235 Biden, instead of the 306-232 edge he enjoyed in reality. The 2020 map with the new Electoral College totals is shown in Map 1. Map 1: 2020 presidential election with new electoral vote apportionment This also would have changed what would have happened had Arizona, Georgia, and Wisconsin voted for Trump. Under the new allocation, that map would produce a 272-266 Republican victory as opposed to a 269-269 tie. So the new apportionment of electoral votes alters the potential Electoral College tie scenarios and, as we assess the map, makes such a scenario less likely, because the specific pathway apparent back in 2020 is now closed. But a tie is still possible, even if one restricts hypothetical Electoral College scenarios to only include changes to the states that were the closest in the 2020 election. In other words, one doesn’t have to go to absurd lengths — such as a blue Wyoming or a red Massachusetts — to come up with a tie. Using 270toWin — our go-to site for Electoral College strategizing — we played around with realistic scenarios for an Electoral College tie. We locked most of the 2020 Electoral College results into place, not altering any states beyond the 7 from 2020 that were decided by less than 3 points (Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin). As part of this scenario, we also locked in the 2020 electoral vote allocations from Maine and Nebraska, the only 2 states that award electoral votes by congressional district. Both states split in 2020, and under the new district lines, Donald Trump would have carried Maine’s 2nd District by about 6 points, with Joe Biden carrying Nebraska’s 2nd District by about the same margin. So that set a baseline electoral vote floor for each side at 226-219 Democratic, with 93 electoral votes from the 7 most competitive states outstanding. Using these Electoral College puzzle pieces, we came up with 3 scenarios, although scenarios 2 and 3 are very similar. Map 2: Hypothetical Electoral College tie, scenario 1 Map 2 shows the first tie scenario. This one would effectively be a realigning map, where Democrats lose the old “Blue Wall” states of Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin — states that Donald Trump won in 2016 but not 2020 — as well as Nevada, a state that Trump never carried but where Democrats only won by a little under 2.5 points in both 2016 and 2020. Meanwhile, Democrats would hang onto Arizona and Georgia and also flip North Carolina, which was Trump’s closest win in 2020. We don’t find this scenario that plausible because we don’t envision a world in which Democrats are winning Arizona but not its usually bluer northwestern neighbor, Nevada. Nor do we see North Carolina — clearly, to us, the reddest of these 7 states and the only one that backed Trump in both 2016 and 2020 — going blue while 4 of the others go red. The Tar Heel State also is the only one of these 7 states where Democrats had no statewide success in 2022, losing both an open-seat Senate contest and a pair of high-profile state Supreme Court races, making it even harder to imagine it voting Democratic while any of the others are going Republican. Map 3: Hypothetical Electoral College tie, scenario 2 Map 3 shows another scenario — and this one seems a bit more plausible. Democrats again hang onto Arizona and Georgia. They also keep Nevada and lose North Carolina. All of those states would be replicating how they voted in 2020. Meanwhile, Republicans claw back Michigan and Pennsylvania, but Democrats hold Wisconsin. While this doesn’t require North Carolina to vote blue, it does require Michigan and Pennsylvania to both vote more Republican than Wisconsin, which neither did in 2016 or 2020 (although Pennsylvania and Wisconsin had almost identical margins in 2016). Wisconsin still seems the shakiest for Democrats of these 3 states — Republicans did, after all, defend Sen. Ron Johnson (R-WI) there last cycle and kept the gubernatorial race much more competitive than in Michigan or Pennsylvania, and Biden’s margin was under a point there in 2020. But these states still vote similarly enough that scenario 2 is not out of the question. Map 4: Hypothetical Electoral College tie, scenario 3 Finally, Map 4 is identical to Map 3, except North Carolina votes blue while Georgia votes red. This one seems less likely than the second scenario, as Georgia has pretty clearly trended blue in recent years while North Carolina has not. Overall, an Electoral College tie remains unlikely — landing on a specific 269-269 outcome is something we would not rule out, but we wouldn’t bet on it, either, without getting great odds. Again, we’ll have more to say about how an Electoral College tie would be decided in tomorrow’s Crystal Ball. But we first just wanted to say that, yes, it’s possible, even under the new Electoral College allocation and even if you just focus on the states that were most competitive in 2020. Slotkin enters Michigan Senate race In January, the first Democratic Senate retirement of the cycle came in a light blue state. Sen. Debbie Stabenow, who has held elected office in the state since the 1970s, announced that she would not seek a 5th term. Though Stabenow’s retirement announcement was, in some reporting, considered to be an ominous sign for her party’s prospects, it came at a time of triumph for Michigan Democrats: They had a nearly perfect 2022 cycle. Democrats won most of the marginal House districts, flipped the legislature, and won each of the state’s 3 statewide races with comfortable majorities — their biggest disappointment was the Macomb County-centric 10th District narrowly slipping away. Surely, with the Michigan Democrats’ large bench, there would be a flurry of candidates ready to get into the open-seat Senate race, right? Instead, the past several weeks were relatively quiet on that front. If anything, the Democratic “shadow primary” seemed defined by the process of elimination. Almost immediately, Gov. Gretchen Whitmer, who was just reelected to a second term, ruled out a run. Other prominent Democrats followed, with the more notable exceptions of 7th District Rep. Elissa Slotkin and Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson. Though Benson and a few other notable Democrats are still considering the race, Slotkin announced her campaign on Monday. The Republican field, meanwhile, remains in flux, although Rep. John James (R, MI-10) — the party’s nominee in the 2018 and 2020 Senate races — recently filed for reelection to the House. While that deprives Senate Republicans of a potential recruit, it does give House Republicans an incumbent to seek reelection in a swingy seat next year. Slotkin, who was first elected amid the 2018 blue wave that crashed in the House, ran after serving in the Obama administration and has a background in the U.S. Intelligence Community. In the House, she has been part of a bloc of center-left Democrats that have taken an interest in national security issues — other examples from the 2018 class include Reps. Abigail Spanberger (D, VA-7) and Mikie Sherrill (D, NJ-11), both of whom could also be future statewide candidates. Slotkin’s district, which is essentially the successor to a seat that Stabenow held in the late 1990s, is centered on Lansing but extends into the Detroit metro area. Numbered MI-8 last decade, Slotkin flipped the seat by 4 points in 2018 after it gave Donald Trump a 7-point margin 2 years earlier. As Trump carried the district again in 2020, Slotkin replicated her 2018 margin, making her one of only 7 “crossover seat” Democrats that year. For 2022, redistricting turned Slotkin’s seat into a Biden-won seat, although his margin there was narrow (he would have carried it by less than a percentage point) and it would have narrowly voted against Sen. Gary Peters (D-MI) in 2020. Though the district was a bit friendlier to Democrats, Republican state Sen. Tom Barrett represented much of the area that was new to Slotkin, making him almost a co-incumbent in the race. Overall, the MI-7 contest turned into 2022’s most expensive House race. But as Map 5 shows, the result was a clear win for the (actual) incumbent: Slotkin won a third term by just over 5 points. Map 5: MI-7 in 2022 Note: Map 5 uses unofficial data, but the official result was almost identical Source: Jackson Franks Barrett is running again, and his candidacy could deter other GOP entrants (he was unopposed for the nomination in 2022). Democrats have several prospects for the seat, but it seems possible that whomever they nominate will have a home base in Lansing’s Ingham County — the blue bastion of the district, it gave Slotkin over two-thirds of the vote each time she was on the general election ballot. Aside from running up the score in Ingham County, one of the keys to Slotkin’s electoral success has been keeping Livingston, the district’s second-largest county and the one directly east of Ingham, relatively close. Livingston County essentially consists of the exurban communities between Detroit and Lansing, and Slotkin has held the GOP margin there to under 20 points. The Crystal Ball is starting the open MI-7 race as a Toss-up. The last time Michigan saw an open-seat Senate contest, in 2014, now-Sen. Gary Peters (D-MI) had no opposition to succeed the late Sen. Carl Levin (D-MI). A competitive primary may force Democratic contenders to better establish themselves with Black voters, although any statewide Democratic campaign in Michigan worth its salt should emphasize outreach to minorities. At the time of his election to the Senate, Peters was in the odd position of being a white member who represented a Black-majority House district — the credibility that he established with the Black community likely helped him in 2014 and 2020. Slotkin’s district is only about 7% Black by composition, a number half the statewide 14%, so look for her campaign to aggressively court that key demographic. McClellan enjoys broad-based overperformance Speaking of majority-minority districts, let’s take a quick detour to our home state. Last week, we wrote about the special election in the 4th District, a heavily Black seat that elected Rep.-elect Jennifer McClellan (D), who will be leaving the state Senate to enter the U.S. House. McClellan’s victory was not a surprise but her margin was — her roughly 3-to-1 edge was notably better than what most Democrats get in the district. Turnout dynamics often are different in special elections than typical general elections, which sometimes accounts for odd partisan results. In one fairly recent example, Louisiana had a special election for state treasurer in 2017. The treasurer runoff election was held concurrently with a mayoral runoff in heavily Democratic New Orleans. With the mayoral election on the ballot, Orleans Parish cast close to a quarter of the votes in the statewide treasurer’s race (the parish usually casts more like 10% of the state’s votes). With New Orleans exerting a disproportionate influence, the Democratic nominee for treasurer, Derrick Edwards, took close to 45% against now-Treasurer John Schroder (R). Considering the lean of the state and his lack of funding, Edwards’s showing was respectable. But when the office was up again, in the regularly-scheduled 2019 election, things looked more typical — Schroder was reelected by 25 points. Along those lines, we wondered if McClellan’s margin was padded by a disproportionately strong showing in her home area, Richmond. As it turns out, that wasn’t really the case. Richmond City and neighboring Henrico County are 2 of the largest, and bluest, localities in the district. Last week, the pair cast exactly half the total vote in the election — that was up only slightly from the 49% they accounted for in 2022. So McClellan’s showing was more of a broad-based overperformance than anything else. As a bit of a thought experiment, we took the 2022 result from the 4th District and applied a uniform swing. In other words, last year, the late Donald McEachin (D) was reelected by 30.1 points; last week, McClellan did 18.9 points better, winning by 49%. How would an across the board 18.9% swing towards Democrats compare the actual result? Table 1 considers this. Table 1: 2022 uniform swing vs actual 2023 result in VA-4 As it turned out, McClellan ran slightly behind “expectations” in both Richmond and Henrico, although she obviously carried them overwhelmingly. Her biggest overperformance was actually from another locality that she currently represents in the state Senate: Charles City. One of the smaller counties in the district (it only has 3 voting precincts), it was the commonwealth’s most Democratic county in 1990s-era presidential elections, but its blue lean has eroded in recent years. McClellan’s 44-point margin there was 33 points better than what McEachin earned, and 14 points more than what a uniform swing would suggest. McClellan ran ahead of expectations in several rural Southside counties, one of which was Surry. Just south of Charles City County, Surry County has been undergoing similar larger-scale trends. In 2021, now-Gov. Glenn Youngkin became the first modern GOP nominee for governor to carry this historically deep blue locality (although he did so by just 12 votes). When McClellan is next on the ballot, in 2024, it seems likely that she’ll have a more “typical” Democratic coalition. Next year, a much larger presidential electorate may be in a more straight-ticket mood. The 110,000 votes that were cast in last week’s election represent just a quarter of the nearly 400,000 ballots the district would have cast in the 2020 election. Still, we’ll be watching to see how McClellan’s initial rural appeal translates with an election held under more “normal” circumstances.

Go to Top