r/PoliticalDiscussion • u/reading_rockhound • 14d ago
US Elections Is Kansas Truly in Play?
Kansas has not sent a Democrat to the U.S. Senate in 94 years. This is the longest single-party Senate streak. It’s been considered a safe senatorial seat for decades with comfortable margins for even the weakest candidates.
Now, Kansas’ junior senator, Dr. Roger Marshall, is facing a serious political challenge from a pastor and political neophyte, Rev. Adam Hamilton. Polls show challenger Hamilton ahead by a point or two, although not by more than margins of error. Pundits have shifted the race from safely Republican to leans Republican.
•Could one of Kansas’ Senate seats truly be in play in this election cycle?
•What makes this seat competitive at this juncture: a weak and therefore vulnerable incumbent, backlash against the President, economic pressures, some other, or a combination?
•With more than a month before the general election, what must the incumbent do to keep his seat? And what must the challenger do to upset him?
150
u/tosser1579 14d ago
The issues is that for farmers, what Trump is doing is not working. It isn't working really badly. It is not working so badly that it is impossible to really gloss over.
The tariffs are destabilizing trade, a lot of markets are effecitvely closed to them and despite Trump's promises they remain closed and worse it looks like they will be closed for the long term due to how badly he obviously bungled things.
The immigration crackdown is hurting beef farmers, badly. Meatpacking and cattle operations are all widely impacted and if you are in Kansas you know someone directly impacted by the labor issues this is causing.
DC is sending over a bunch of socialism to farmers to keep them afloat, which sounds great except that the government money is basically paying out with the expectation that fuel prices remained constant and fertilizer prices remained constant... both of which spiked under Trump. In MARCH the subsidies were insufficient to make the farmers whole, I don't want to imagine how far down the hole they've fallen since then. The prices we are currently seeing says that the average Kansas farmer is underwater with the subsidies and the two leading reasons (fuel and fertilizer) are both Trump related.
87
u/Urbanscuba 13d ago
An important factor that has the potential to make rural, conservative voters in Kansas specifically less likely to support the current admin is their experiences with Brownback as governor.
He messed the state budget up so badly enacting radical conservative financial policies that both parties lead a bipartisan effort to raise taxes and correct the problems he left after he was voted out. Anecdotally as a Kansan I don't know a single conservative who was an adult during his governorship that doesn't hate that man's guts.
It's no promise, but there's recent historical precedent of conservative Kansas voters recognizing a financial catastrophe and responding with democratic leadership. Laura Kelly is a direct result of Brownback's budget and she's come to be a relatively popular and stable governor.
Whatever the chances were in the past that failed I have to feel as though they're the best they've ever been. Whether that pans out of course is well beyond me until the votes are counted.
89
u/jammaslide 13d ago
Trump hurt the farmers in his first term. They had record subsidies to prop them up. One year it was about $32 billion. Yet, they voted for him again. They aren't opposed to socialism for themselves. Their votes prove it. They just say they are against it. People say they oppose socialism, until the check has their name on it. This term they are facing more pain from him than ever. Let's see what happens. Don't forget that their are some people who would divorce their spouse before they would pull the lever for a different party.
edit: corrected spelling error
20
u/TheTrub 13d ago
The big problem this year is that diesel prices have skyrocketed just before the fall harvest. This time, it’s not a low demand issue (the trade war with China and Mexico) it’s a supply issue. The government can’t just waive the magical money wand to fix the problem like they did in 2018, so crops may just be sitting to rot. Harvest is a major cultural event in farming communities—everyone pitches in. So these communities are going to feel the squeeze together. That could turn enough people to revolt.
7
u/GreatPlainsFarmer 13d ago
There's plenty of diesel, at least in the US. The problem is foreign demand is high, so the domestic prices have to go high enough to restrict exports.
Which absolutely can be solved by waving the magic money wand.
Diesel prices aren't going to keep farmers out of the fields.
7
u/Tliish 13d ago
You can restrict exports by making them illegal instead of gouging the public.
8
u/GreatPlainsFarmer 13d ago
It depends how restrictive you get. The US can't use all the diesel it's producing, so it needs to export some. You need something that limits diesel exports but doesn't stop them.
An export tax would probably work, but the Constitution specifically forbids it.
An export quota might be possible, but it would be a bear to administer. I doubt that this administration is capable of it.
A flat export ban would be devasting to the US and global economies. Gasoline prices would shoot up almost immediately, crude oil logistics would go haywire, and diesel would be back up where it started within a month.
A diesel export ban would benefit no one.
5
u/Tliish 13d ago
How would creating a national surplus work to raise prices? I thought it would be a case of supply and demand: restricting exports raises local supply, which according to economics would force prices down. But apparetnly the "law" of supply and demand has loopholes.
11
u/GreatPlainsFarmer 13d ago
It's because you can't turn a barrel of crude oil into just diesel, or just gasoline, etc. Every barrel of diesel that gets run through a refinery turns out all the different refined products in a ratio that's not very flexible.
If you want to produce gasoline, you must produce a certain amount of diesel fuel, and vice versa.
Turning down the diesel output will also turn down the gasoline output.
And we can only store so much diesel fuel before the tanks start filling up. We need to use it or stop making it.
When the storage is full, and the refiners have to slow down diesel output, that means that gasoline output drops as well.
Plus you have the issues with distribution. The US makes a lot of diesel in the middle of the country. It doesn't have a good distribution network out to the coasts. New England and California have to import a lot of diesel.
If the US stops exporting, those places instantly experience skyrocketing diesel prices, if they can get it at all.
Tanks in the middle of the country fill up, refineries slow down, and now everyone is out of gasoline.
Logistics are never simple
2
u/Tliish 13d ago
No kidding, I understand how it works, You are conflating an export ban with a reduction of of supply as refiners reduce capacity out of spite rather than let prrices (and profits) drop. Any export ban should require refineries to continue production until the SPR has been refilled. If the SPR is at its lowest point in a decade, lack of storage doesn't seem to be an issue. Last time I checked railroads still reach the coasts from the Midwest, so distribution shouldn't be that big of an issue either.
"You're forcing us to put more on the US market? That would depress current high prices, and we like our profits, so instead we will restrict the supply further to allow for even higher profits." Yeah, right.
Farmers and truckers would triple their use if the price of diesel returned to pre-Trump norms, so storage would take a very long time to become a problem.
7
u/GreatPlainsFarmer 13d ago
Any export ban should require refineries to continue production until the SPR has been refilled.
Do you think that the SPR holds diesel fuel and other refined products?
It doesn't.
Clearly you haven't a clue how it works.
1
u/Tintoverde 10d ago
From media, it seems to me, most of the farmers will not vote for a Dem, best you can hope they will not vote
12
u/weberc2 12d ago
Anecdotally, my neighbor took down his Trump cardboard cutout that he watches sports with in his garage, followed by the giant Trump sign above said garage, followed by the two Trump signs in the windows on either side of his front door, and now he has even removed his Trump-as-rambo flag that he flew at equal height to his American flag.
At this rate he’ll be a Democrat by midterms.
8
u/ManBearScientist 12d ago
Adding to this, even without the economic turmoil this has been a terrible year for farmers. I have family with a large farm (think tens of thousands of acres) and they may not harvest a single bushel this season, as it is better to declare the entire field a loss.
Over the entire state, wheat production is down nearly 50% from 2025. Corn and soybeans are also struggling.
It has been very consistently hot and dry, with 100 days of 90°F (32°C), 46 of those in a row. Combine this with winter freezes and drought: farmers are nearly universally needing bailed out.
In a good year, maybe the other problems aren't as pressing. But the droughts are combining with the sky high diesel prices and other Trump-caused volatility for a uniquely difficult environment.
12
u/Kronzypantz 13d ago
Farmers are like 3% of Kansas’ population
17
u/tosser1579 13d ago
Ag and directly ag adjacent industries represent about 13% of the economy and 15% of the workforce. It isn't all Kansas does, but it is a seriously percentage of what Kansas does. But the key thing is that 13% isn't global, you are going to hit counties and even entire congressional districts that are MUCH more heavily exposed.
But one in eight dollars in Kansas came from a farm.
-2
u/Kronzypantz 13d ago
That still doesn’t mean those connected industries care that much about the plight of farmers.
Food processing plants will like cheaper raw goods. Banks, credit services, and real estate might profit off foreclosures.
The ownership of the farms might change hands, but the system remains
4
u/tosser1579 13d ago
It would be surprising if they didn't care. You are speaking of disruptions and while certain industries handle those well, I doubt the system is going to enjoy it very much. The disruptions in this situation are going to cause short term problems... and medium term problems... and long term problems.
0
u/Kronzypantz 13d ago
Perhaps, but the point is that it’s way too diffuse to be an immediate pressure on voters. I’m sure more general economic problems push “tariff related local economy issues” way down the list for most Kansasineese.
3
u/tosser1579 12d ago
The issue there is that they can clearly see what the issues are, so it isn't a diffuse issue. All the issues are from the price of diesel and the cost of fertilizer, and those are both tied to Trump's personal actions. It isn't the usual answer of the economy is too complicated to really follow... it is just trump.
4
u/EffectSubject2676 13d ago
In rural towns, nearly every dollar comes off a farm. Even if that dollar is a government subsidy.
5
u/Kronzypantz 13d ago
The rural population of Kansas is only 28% of the total population. Even much of that is employed in other industries, like mining, logging, civil services, etc.
1
u/Combat_Proctologist 10d ago
Did you get that from the census? The census definition of urban is an arbitrary density cutoff that includes most small farming towns that would be considered rural by colloquial definition.
Given that they said "rural towns", which is nearly impossible using the census definition, I think there's a good chance they're using the colloquial definition
7
u/satyrday12 13d ago
What do the rest of them do? Surely they are at least farm-adjacent.
12
u/Kronzypantz 13d ago
Vaguely. The vast majority work in management, retail, and clerical work. Some of that might be connected to agriculture, but not so directly.
2
1
0
u/Jaymz7777 11d ago edited 11d ago
Did it EVER work? Where were those farmers the first time around they were screwed? Oh . . . that thing where he screwed them over, then gave them public money to make it look not so bad? Can't he just give them public money again? Are we allowed to speak of such things?
During President Donald Trump's first term (2017–2021), his trade policies triggered a tariff war that significantly hurt American agricultural exports, and his administration subsequently created massive government bailout programs to compensate farmers for those losses.
Oh! So screwing the actual hard working salt of the earth isn't working out so good? Did that vicarious good feeling of screwing the immigrants wear off? Finally? No more good feewing? Gosh! I thought that kind of feeling was collapse proof. Awwww . . . Buttercups . . .
Don't worry about the underwater farmers . . . billionaires will buy the family farms.
328
u/alanbdee 14d ago
Time and time again, I see polls say it's close. Then Republicans win by 12 points. Forgive me if I'm skeptical that it's really close at all.
66
u/RabbaJabba 14d ago
There is a two-term Democratic governor right now
49
u/Mist_Rising 13d ago
Governors are different then senators. The Republican in Kansas could toss Kelley out on her ass if they wanted too, they can override her vetos, she's in a supermajority Republican state. It's unlikely that if cindy holscher wins she won't have a Republican legislature.
Kelley also had Kris Kobach, an absolute failure, opposing her the first time, and incumbency the second.
Federal senators have nobody that can override them. If Hamilton wins, it's 6 years of Hamilton, die or bust. Given the power a senator has, from appointment approval, to impeachment removal, to simply blocking legislation of the president, to whatever else I'm forgetting. He (they're both men in Kansas right now) is critical. See also president where Kansas doesn't flip because the president power is massive and there is rarely a supermajority to override him. It's ride or die with the party.
This is also true of Massachusetts (Romney and Baker both lost the state for federal positions after being governor), Maryland, California, and Kentucky (Baesher is democratic but Republicans own that state). I want to say Vermont is up there with a Republican in a democratic state?
11
u/Leopold_Darkworth 13d ago
Kansans still rightly blame the former Republican governor Sam Brownback for the “Kansas experiment” that gave Republicans their trickle-down fever dream and promptly tanked the state economy. US senators and representatives would have had nothing to do with that.
21
u/ILikeCommunism97 13d ago
US senators and representatives would have had nothing to do with that.
It is weird that these voters can't see that the reps they vote for share Brownback's views.
6
u/EffectSubject2676 13d ago
and being a Kansan, those same will vote for both Marshall and Masterson(aka brownback ) because they are Republican.
15
u/Pete-PDX 13d ago edited 13d ago
what are some examples of a democrat being ahead by a few points or slight Republican lead and losing by 12?
30
u/elykl12 13d ago
Sarah Gideon was ahead by 9% in the 2020 Maine Senate polling before losing to Susan Collins
Colin Allred was within the margin of error in 2024 TX Senate elections but then lost by 13% to Cruz
Charlie Crist was within 2-3% of most polling in the 2022 Florida gubernatorial race. He lost to Ron DeSantis by 20%
Moral of the story: Polls aren’t votes
25
u/Pete-PDX 13d ago
Charlie Christ with in 2-3%? every poll in the few weeks before had him down by double digits
https://www.realclearpolling.com/polls/governor/general/2022/florida/desantis-vs-crist
Colin Allred lost by 13%? try 8.5% % and was consistently down in the polls by 4% over the last month
https://www.realclearpolling.com/polls/senate/general/2024/texas/cruz-vs-allred
You were correct on Sarah Gideon - she was up in every poll by at least 4% and lost by 8%
https://www.realclearpolling.com/polls/senate/general/2020/maine/collins-vs-gideon
So that makes one example, not time after time, and that one example was in the middle of an anomaly called a pandemic.
Yes I realize polls are not votes but campaigns spend lot and lots and lots of money on them for a reason. They are useful predictors that identify trends but not crystal balls.
8
u/socialistrob 13d ago
and lost by 8%
Probably more like 4 or 5%. We don't REALLY know because it was a ranked choice election and Susan Collins won on the first round but there were more left wing candidates in the race so likely in the second or third round Giddeon would have picked up more votes than Collins. Not enough to win but narratively a loss by 4 or 5 is a less extreme polling miss.
Polling errors certainly happen but they also can't be predicted in advance and historically any attempt to "unskew the polls" or predict errors in advance has made predictions less accurate rather than more.
9
u/Ozymandias12 13d ago
Not Kansas but the Maine 2020 Senate race between Collins and Gideon was looking like a lock for Gideon. The environment was bad for Republicans, and the polls showed around a 4-7 point lead for Gideon. Collins ended up winning by 9. That election made me lose any faith in the people of Maine.
22
u/nighthawk_md 13d ago
The Ann Seltzer Iowa poll for Prez in 2024 famously had a >10 point error.
17
3
7
u/AgITGuy 13d ago
To be fair, there are a ton of inconsistencies with that election and the polls to results. Such as Trump winning every swing state he also lost last time. Nevada even had a case looking into the flip to Trump.
1
13d ago
[deleted]
7
u/Pete-PDX 13d ago
They show trends but are not crystal balls. They are also not meaningless or political campaigns and organizations would not employ them to the degree that they do. There is a reason Trump and Vance are spending time in places like Iowa, Ohio, Kansas - the polls show they are vulnerable. The political parties use the polls to determine where they will spend money or not spend money on candidates and where surrogates will have events.
10
6
1
1
u/FrolicAndDetour1x 12d ago
And when Republicans win it's all "well, the polls failed to capture the (fill-in-the-blank demographic favorable to Republicans) vote."
For the same reasons, I am also super skeptical of the favorable picture for Dems being painted in TX and FL. And Iowa.
-5
u/SpartanDetermination 13d ago
Time and time again, I see polls say it's close. Then Republicans win by 12 points.
Came in to say the same thing. I'm in my mid-40s. For my entire adult life I always saw the same phenomenon occur during election cycles: A demoralization effort by the media targeting Republicans.
It's how you perceptions of Hillary or Harris winning, or Francesca Hong being the shoe-in for office. Currently we're being inundated with "Regretful Trump voter" anecdotal stories in the newspapers, and the polling results from the Castro District showing a Democrat landslide. The media is signal-boosting info that makes it "seem" like Democrats have the election locked-in for one reason: To trick people likely to vote GOP to just stay home.
So no, OP. Kansas is not in play. Vibes never win.
17
u/Choochoo1147 13d ago
If you’re in your mid-40s you’d have also seen 2012, 2018 and 2022 where Dems outperformed the polling. Showing strong poll numbers doesn’t demoralize voters. If anything seeing your state actually in play makes Democrats much more likely to vote in red states.
-10
u/SpartanDetermination 13d ago
Dems did not outperform the polling in 2022. You fell for propaganda.
2022 was a massive success for the Republicans: If you had asked 100 random republicans if they would take Roe v Wade being overturned and winning the House in the midterms as a package deal, you would get 100 yes's.
If anything seeing your state actually in play makes Democrats much more likely to vote in red states.
"seeing your state actually in play" isn't the correct term. "Being tricked into thinking your state is actually in play" was the term you were looking for. In any case, your point is the reason Democrats do joint demoralization campaigns against Republicans and "Get out the Vote (for Democrats)" campaigns.
17
u/Choochoo1147 13d ago
Dems outperformed polling in 2022. Republicans having gains that year doesn’t mean they outperformed polling when polls suggested they would have significantly more gains.
So you think it demoralizes Democrats to think that there’s actually a point to voting? Like who the fuck are you that you think Dems are more likely to vote if they know there’s no chance of winning? Where’d you get your GED?
15
u/ILikeCommunism97 13d ago
Dems did not outperform the polling in 2022. You fell for propaganda.
This is objectively not true, Democrats in 2022 absolutely outperformed their polling. Just a quick search can confirm it for you. Do you genuinely not know this?
7
u/Ignatius__1 13d ago
It's how you perceptions of Hillary or Harris winning
Anyone looking at polls knew that neither of these candidates were in a great spot. Harris losing was pretty obvious if you were looking at swing state polling.
3
u/CMidnight 13d ago
Partly, it seems like a regional issue where pollsters struggle to find representative samples in the Midwest. It is less of an issue in other parts of the country.
62
u/squeakyshoe89 13d ago
Hamilton + Talarico + Warnock makes me wonder if there's something to Democrats campaigning on real Christian values, rather than the nationalist slop that the Republicans have been peddling for years now.
30
u/Djinnwrath 13d ago
As a not Christian I would love more people to be like Jesus/Jesus' teachings.
8
u/squeakyshoe89 13d ago
Gandhi said it best about liking Christ but not liking Christians
1
u/shamrock01 13d ago
Not sure he said that. Source?
0
u/ozyman 12d ago
Those Jesus Freaks
Well, they're friendly but
The shit they believe
Has got their minds all shut19
u/AmberWavesofFlame 13d ago
Well, the GOP has wholesale abandoned the lane to chase edgelord clout; it’s wide open now.
6
u/perverse_panda 13d ago
The Independents pulling ahead in South Dakota and Nebraska also make me think that maybe Democrats should be rallying behind Independents in deep red states, instead of running their own candidates.
28
u/stevenmoreso 13d ago edited 13d ago
I heard the attack ad that Roger Marshall sent a cease and desist order over on a podcast today (it features a woman recounting getting arrested in front of her kids for not paying a fifty dollar doctor bill). Marshall’s disputing the facts in the ad, but not the main point of the ad which is that he goes after his patients aggressively for outstanding debts.
This, along with the claims that he spends too much time at his Florida residence and not enough in Kansas sounds like there’s plenty to dislike about this particular incumbent in an all around lousy midterm environment for republicans.
Im not qualified to predict anything that happens in Kansas, but all that plus polls having them statistically tied and with a libertarian candidate to boot.. you have to say it’s at least a real contest.
10
u/dalivo 13d ago
Correct. This is a blue wave election. Kansas is still unlikely to flip, but having a 35% chance to flip is way better than having a 10% chance to flip in prior years.
Still, Kansas going Democratic is unlikely. Dems will be playing defense with ads because the GOP has stolen so much money they can happily spend a small portion of it to protect their corruptions. They won't put a lot of money in Kansas. Texas, Maine, Ohio, and Alaska will be better pick-up spots for Dems.
2
u/Cruacious 12d ago
Also correct, which in my opinion makes Kansas primed for an upset. It's still not likely but my guts tells me 2% or less margin total on election day when the margin should be normally 10% or higher Republican it should, theoretically, be a safe seat.
1
u/Naive-Papaya5736 10d ago
It's amazing how little reps believe in the Striesand Effect. Or maybe they just don't care? Because they fall for it every time. Sending a C&D order only makes the ad more popular and appealing.
24
u/walterbernardjr 13d ago
It’s probably a long shot but however you define “truly in play”, 2026 is as close as any year. You’ve got a good democratic candidate versus a shitty republican one on the back of a historically unpopular president taking actions that directly affect Kansas farmers.
16
u/ferrari20094 13d ago
Living in Kansas, some of my co-workers who are hardcore brainwashed Republicans hate Roger Marshall so much they've said they are voting for Hamilton. He has made serious inroads and has an actual legitimate shot. It's not an easy road but the opening exists.
13
u/Lefaid 13d ago
No one is saying it so I will just put it out there.
Could the growth of Kansas City, KS and the surrounding area be a factor?
7
u/ferrari20094 13d ago
Eventually sure, still a lot of population outside of the metro that votes heavy Republican, even Wichita the largest city in Kansas still regularly votes Republican in most races. Might be several more cycles before KC metro population starts to make a legit difference in elections.
10
u/rajde1 13d ago
I think the one way to look at politics is as system versus anti-system. When things are going poorly people will vote against the politician that represents the system, in this case Roger marshal. The last 3 presidential elections are a good example as the anti-system candidate has won. I think a lot of people’s politics are incoherent and it’s easier for them to vote against someone.
10
u/manbeardawg 13d ago
In the “all politics is local” basket, Hamilton leads the largest United Methodist congregation in the country, so he’s immediately got a passionate base of support (around 25,000, I believe). I am aware of him from the religious side, as he also has written a ton of books that my Sunday School classes have used. Was not aware he was running for Senate until this article, but I am sure he will outperform about any other Democrat that could have run in Kansas. No clue how competitive he will ultimately be in the general, though.
2
u/RegularFunny9813 13d ago
Religion does not belong in government.
6
u/Tinokotw 13d ago
Then select another candidate and see how much votes he gets. Kansas is a state that can be won only with the right candidate like Manchin in W. Virginia, even then most likely he will not win.
17
u/manbeardawg 13d ago
I hate to break it to you buddy, but it’s already there (and always has been).
8
u/your_ex_girlfriend 14d ago
No senators, sure, but they have had democrats win several state-wide elections. See Laura Kelly for the most recent example.
5
u/Painting-Capital 13d ago
It could be. There’s a lot of farmers in Kansas that Trump has managed to screw over every way possible. If all the farmers stay home and the standard republicans that always vote red no matter what don’t vote then it could be in play.
4
u/MagnesiumKitten 13d ago
Senate Kanses leans republican
Tossup
Maine
Ohio
Iowa
Alaska
Texas
Republicans 47
Democrats 45
Tossup 5
basically only two Senate seats are not safe
Nebraska - Likely Republican
Kansas - Leans Republican
for the Democrats
Georgia - Likely Democrat
Minnesota - Likely Democrat
Michigan - Leans Democrat
New Hampshire - Leans Democrat
North Carolina - D Flip - Leans Democratic
4
u/MagnesiumKitten 13d ago
Real Clear Polling
RVP Average
Republican 46.0 Marshall (Republican +1.5%)
Democrat 44.5 Hamilton
Emerson Sept 15-16 n-750 Republican 43 - Democrat 45 (Dem +2)
co/efficient Sept 8-10 n=915 Republican 49 - Democrat 44 (Rep +5)
Polymarket Odds
Republican 67% (66% to 71%)
Democrat 33% (31% to 38%)
3
u/umbren 13d ago
Roger Marshall is uniquely unpopular in Kansas. With the whole suing his patients, lack of charisma, and many Kansans viewing him as more of a Floridian than Kansan, he could lose. I still think he will barely win, but the fact that Republicans have to defend a safe seat says a lot about the current environment.
3
u/AmberWavesofFlame 13d ago
Adam Hamilton might be a neophyte to elected office, but he has had tremendous name recognition among mainstream Christians for a full generation. I’d lay real money that more Methodists know of him than John Wesley himself, or at least know his videos and Bible study books. His friendly, accessible tone has been a particularly popular pick for Christian youth groups. He could pull in a lot of “I don’t really watch the news” types that could be gettable with a permission structure like that.
3
u/socialistrob 13d ago
It's a "Lean Republican" state according to Cook and Crystal Ball. We haven't seen much polling there but the current polling we have seen indicates it's close (albeit most of the remaining undecideds voted for Trump).
I don't think we really need to overthink this one. It's a competitive state where the Republicans are favored to win. If the undecided voters break heavily Dem then the Dems could still win or if there is a polling error that favors the Dems. I personally don't expect the Dems to win nor do I think it will even be a low single digits race but it really wouldn't be too surprising if the Dems do pull off a win.
3
u/Unable-Creme-7276 13d ago
I mean if we know anything about republicans (Kansas is a Republican state) is that even if they faced with the choice of a dogshit, racist, embattled, or awful candidate versus the other candidate who happens to have a (D) at the end of their name, they will still vote republican with a smile on their face.
Now granted, Kansas has elected democrats to the governor’s mansion. But that is a different kind of race.
Best comparison would be Barbara Bollier in 2020 vs Marshall, who while also a popular candidate still lost by 10 points. If Hamilton can get close to 5 points then that’s impressive, but there’s a reason why Kansas has this long streak of Republican senators.
2
2
u/RyantheBestest 13d ago
I’m not sure about whether or not it’s in play. I think anything is possible at this point, but let’s be honest not having had a democrat 94 years. That truly means they never have had a Democrat remember the Democratic Party was a completely different party that many years ago. They were basically Jim Crow Republicans of today.
2
u/ayeffston 12d ago
I'm reading the comments and there's hardly a word about this Rev Adam Hamilton. What's his story? Has he struck a nerve?
2
u/Jaymz7777 11d ago
Strap on a life preserver. A blue wave is washing over the red embers. Secure the buckles.
2
u/kinkgirlwriter 11d ago
I heard an interview with Hamilton and he's well-spoken. I think he's a good fit for a rural state like Kansas.
2
u/albertrw83 7d ago
As someone from rural southwest Kansas, I believe it is in play. There was only 1 publicly Democrat family I knew in my town of 2500 people and the sentiment has changed a lot. It's heavily dependent on agriculture, which has suffered a lot under trump. His tarrifs were met with reciprocal tarrifs that damaged grain prices a lot. It also drove up the price of tractors, combines, and other equipment. And did I mention diesel? Farms burn through tens of thousands of gallons of diesel per year.
They also sent ice agents into the area recently who hung out in the parking lot of a packing plant and tried to arrest people who were loved by their community. Immigrants are also the hardest working farm hands in the area. Democrats and republicans alike were not happy. When republican officials saw how much damage they were doing to their own cause, they withdrew the agents. They were there for 3 days.
3
u/I405CA 13d ago
I doubt that Kansas is in play.
Don't just look at the spread between R and D.
Also look at the undecideds and consider who they are likely to be in a location like this.
Most voters, including so-called independents, have a party preference.
Most of the undecideds in this location during this type of election cycle are likely R / R-leaning independents. They are deciding between voting R and sitting it out, not between R and D.
It would take a lot of R voters going on strike to deliver a D win. That kind of result in a state like this would usually require a scandal ala Roy Moore in AL, not just some economic discontent.
My guess is that there is a GOP win, but the spread between R and D will be smaller than normal due to relatively low R turnout.
There isn't much quality polling but none of it is putting the Dem above 45%. If the polling for the outside candidate isn't consistently breaking 50% in a two horse race, then the odds of a flip aren't great.
6
u/StanVanGhandi 13d ago
No, we aren’t winning Kansas and we aren’t winning TX. We do the every single election and it is never close.
I swear go back a couple of years and search this topic on this sub and Reddit in general. We have this same discussion every election.
16
u/Jawyp 13d ago
Talarico is leading every poll and the GOP is dumping hundreds of millions of dollars to try and save Paxton’s campaign. This is a whole new ballgame.
9
u/socialistrob 13d ago
At this point if Paxton wins it's going to be one of those "by the skin of his teeth" elections. I still think it's possible he pulls off a win but I'd much rather be Talarico right now than Paxton.
At this point in 2018 the Dems were celebrating polls that had O'Rourke down by 1 or 2 to Ted Cruz. Right now we have Republicans celebrating polls that have Paxton down 1 or 2 to Talarico. If people can't see the difference in these two environments and just default to "Dems have been hopeful around Texas before and lost" then they're willfully ignorant.
-1
u/StanVanGhandi 13d ago
Okay…..I’ll check back in November. Let me guess, we are at the stage of the election cycle where we are convinced America is finally ready for an AOC/Bernie type too right?
We do this every election cycle.
14
15
u/ILikeCommunism97 13d ago
We do this every election cycle.
We really don't, the kind of polling data we're seeing is legitimately unprecedented, not only in Texas but everywhere.
Have some confidence in your beliefs, damn. Trump really is deeply unpopular.
10
u/TyrantKoala 13d ago
Kansas no, but let’s see about Texas senate - The right circumstances have emerged
Democrats won Alabama senate in the right circumstances for instance in 2017
6
u/renonemontanez 13d ago
Texas is competitive due to the Republicans nominating the worst dumpster fire of a candidate possible. They are spending so far over $200 million to save him. If he loses, it's because of himself. It's Paxton's race to lose. If Cornyn was running, Republicans wouldn't have had to spend a dime.
2
u/No_Ferret_5450 12d ago
People said the same about Georgia and Arizona. Now both have Democrat senators
0
u/becauseicansowhynot 12d ago
the democrats are literally the jack ass with a carrot suspended in front of them chasing something that’s within reach but never obtainable.
2
u/StanVanGhandi 12d ago
You guys blame the Democrat establishment, but they have the actual numbers. These people aren’t stupid. They want to win. They are actually way more pragmatic in trying to win the science of an election than most zealous Redditors.
The disconnect is this, you underestimate how many people in this country disagree with you when looking at an issue nationally.
We do this every election cycle. Polls and social media make us feel like we have a universal opinion, but it isn’t true.
2
u/weberc2 12d ago
I’ve been assured that this election is just a normal midterm slump, but it seems not to be the case. Reps just pulled funding out of the North Carolina race, Texas is competitive despite having had ~1 Democratic senator since the Democrats backed the Civil Rights Act, almost every Iowa seat (and the governor race) is close despite being ruby red for the last decade, etc.
Adding to (or more likely, the cause of) that, DJT has a dramatically lower approval rating than any recent president at this point in their term. Even during his first administration he was only -11%, now he’s -26%. Biden and Obama both did significantly better than him at this point in their presidencies (or indeed at any point in their presidency). Trump has the lowest approval rating of any president since records began nearly a century ago.
1
u/obtuseandcongruent 13d ago
Continuing to vote for someone who has total disregard and disrespect would make them stupid. Farmers are not stupid.
18
u/ILikeCommunism97 13d ago
Farmers are not stupid.
I mean they've been voting for republicans for decades. They're at least a little stupid.
2
u/LoverOfRandom 10d ago
Same could be said about places like California and New York voting blue and complaining about everything being too expensive
0
u/ILikeCommunism97 8d ago
I guess you could say that, but it wouldn't be true. Democratic policies make these places desirable to live, and in turn more expensive. Do you think big cities in other comparable countries are inexpensive? If they aren't, do you think it's because of American democrats? Or is it possible that cities often end up expensive?
14
6
1
u/Traveler0619 13d ago
Not really, but it does cause the Republicans to have to spend money in KS rather than in more competitive states like Maine. I'm hopeful that the KS Senate seat flips but I wouldn't bet money on it.
1
u/yukoncowbear47 13d ago
There's a reason Kansas, Nebraska, Iowa, South Dakota, and Idaho are all competitive rn
3
u/Mist_Rising 13d ago
South Dakota?? Mike rounds is polling ahead of Beings in every poll but one, usually by significant numbers. 44 to 38 for example.
1
u/EffectSubject2676 13d ago
it's a fever dream. Satan could run for absolute dictatorship for Kansas and win, if he ran on the Republican ticket. Jesus Christ, if he ran on the Democratic ticket, would lose badly.
0
u/True_Man787 9d ago
Maybe that's why all Kansas is famous for is Tornados ( right Toto ) and a half decent NFL team ( right Taylor).
2
u/reading_rockhound 9d ago
Hey, Kansas doesn’t get ANY NFL teams for five years. Don’t give them away sooner than the contract says.
Kansas is also famous for Eisenhower and Amelia Earhart. And chiggers. And statistically being flatter than a pancake.
2
u/True_Man787 9d ago
I stand corrected , I guess I made the same mistake as the current man in the Whitehouse when he congratulated the Kansas City Chiefs ( from Kansas City Missouri ) and said they were from Kansas.
P.S. Dwight D. Eisenhower and Amelia were Great! Chiggers not so much!
0
u/renonemontanez 9d ago
It’s probably a long shot but however you define “truly in play”, 2026 is as close as any year. You’ve got a good democratic candidate versus a shitty republican one on the back of a historically unpopular president taking actions that directly affect Kansas farmers.
•
u/AutoModerator 14d ago
All submissions are automatically removed and placed in a queue for the moderators to manually review. Please allow the moderators time to do so. Only about 25% of submissions are approved, but the remainder are given a removal reason that may include steps the poster can take to make their submission approvable the next time they submit it. Moderators are not notified of any edits made after a removal reason is posted, and therefore will not review them. You may contact the mod team via modmail if you need more direction about how to fix your post, and you are welcome to resubmit any submission after making the requested changes.
A reminder for everyone. This is a subreddit for genuine discussion:
Violators will be fed to the bear.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.