October 1, 2026 • 30 mins
With the 2026 midterm elections approaching, Lisa Boothe is joined by Sentinel Action Fund President Jessica Anderson for a state-by-state look at the races shaping the battle for control of Congress.
Anderson explains why she believes national polling doesn't necessarily capture what Republican campaigns are seeing on the ground, while acknowledging that several traditionally Republican Senate seats have become increasingly competitive. She discusses the GOP's turnout challenge, President Donald Trump's campaign strategy and the importance of low-propensity voters in determining the outcome.
The conversation dives into some of the biggest Senate contests, including Mike Rogers versus Abdul El-Sayed in Michigan, Jon Husted versus Sherrod Brown in Ohio, Susan Collins' race in Maine and Dan Sullivan's battle in Alaska. Anderson also examines Texas, Iowa and New Hampshire and explains why independent voters could behave very differently from state to state.
Plus, Lisa and Jessica discuss affordability, gas prices, the Iran conflict, President Trump's influence on turnout and the closing arguments Republicans are making to voters. The episode provides an inside look at the electoral strategy and ground game behind some of the most consequential races of the 2026 midterms.
Recent reporting also shows Republicans directing significant attention and resources toward competitive Senate races in states including Alaska, Iowa and Ohio, underscoring how broad the 2026 battleground has become.
Follow Clay & Buck on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/c/clayandbuck
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Listen
Watch
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:04):
Welcome to The Truth with Lisa Booth, where we get
to the heart of the issues that matter to you.
Speaker 2 (00:09):
Today, we're talking midterms. We're talking politics. You know, if
you look at the overall political environment, it looks a
little depressing for Republicans. I'm not going to lie. You
look at the real clear politics, generic ballot, Democrats are
up by more than eight points.
Speaker 1 (00:25):
But is that the full story? What's really happening? Particularly
when you break it down on some of these key states,
these key.
Speaker 2 (00:33):
Senate races that are ultimately going to determine the balance
of power in Congress. We're going to talk to someone
who is running a year-round ground game in the key
battleground states. She's looking at data on a daily basis.
She sees what's really happening beyond the headlines, behind the
media news polls, seeing what's actually happening.
Speaker 1 (00:56):
The real data.
Speaker 2 (00:57):
Her name is Jessica Anderson, and she is the president
of the Sentinel Action Fund. Today, we're going to get
to the truth about the midterm elections. Well, Jessica Anderson,
it's great to have you back on the show. I
know you have a little bit of a cold, but
I appreciate you for doing this even while sick.
Speaker 1 (01:14):
So I appreciate you taking the time.
Speaker 3 (01:15):
Yeah, thanks for having me.
Speaker 2 (01:18):
So we were talking and you feel a little bit
more optimistic about the midterms than I have been feeling.
Speaker 1 (01:24):
Which is great news. I love that. I want that
to be the case. So, okay. So walk me.
Speaker 2 (01:32):
Through what gives you optimism about the midterms? Yeah.
Speaker 3 (01:37):
So the reason I have optimism is honestly because this
is the point of the cycle. We see it every
cycle where silly season begins and people start to over-inflate
the polling. They over-inflate the prediction markets. And they think
all hope is lost. And I just don't think that's
the case. Now, I don't think Republicans can take anything
(02:00):
for granted when it comes to the Senate. And I
think a lot of Senate races have popped online in
the last 15, 30 days, like Kansas and Alaska, that
we didn't think we were going to have to spend
money there. But now Republicans will have to spend money
there to defend those seats. So we can't take anything
for granted. But at least the Maine Senate battleground races
(02:23):
that we look at at Sentinel Action Fund, they are
all winnable. Maine, Ohio, Michigan is a big flip opportunity,
New Hampshire to flip, Iowa. These are all states that
really just need to close strong. And I think the
polling that we see nationally really doesn't capture what's going
on on the ground. And the polls themselves, as we know,
(02:46):
you're calling in the middle of a day, well, who's
most likely to answer that call, right? Someone that is
probably out of work or who's able to be home
in the middle of the day, right? And so I
think when you take that into consideration, coupled with the
reality of how the feedback has been on the ground
(03:07):
with door-to-door efforts, Republicans have a fighting chance I think,
not only to keep the Senate majority, but to keep
it at 52. I don't think we're growing the Senate
majority to 55 or anything like that. And I don't
think Republicans are losing it to drop down to 47
or 49, like I've seen some on cable news talk about. Now,
(03:27):
the House is a different story, Lisa, I'll tell you that.
I think the House is a nail biter. And the
House tracks very closely to the president's numbers. And I
think we'll come down to about five seats that could
swing either way. And it's going to be a nail-biter.
Speaker 2 (03:44):
I think it kind of worries me that President Trump's
going to be spending time in places like Oklahoma or
Alabama and, you know.
Speaker 1 (03:52):
Some of these more red states. I think Ohio was
on the list as well.
Speaker 3 (03:58):
Well, we definitely need him in Ohio.
Speaker 1 (03:59):
No, Ohio makes sense.
Speaker 3 (04:01):
Yeah, we need him in Ohio for the Senate. You know,
Sherrod Brown.
Speaker 2 (04:05):
Iowa, Nebraska, like states that, you know what I mean,
like should not be Ohio for sure. But, you know,
some of these states that like, you know, if we're
feeling good about things heading into the midterms, he would
not be spending time in those states.
Speaker 3 (04:24):
I think he's not taking anything for granted. Oklahoma on
that list was a little bit of a surprise to me.
But the others, I think he's trying to get his
base out. He's trying to get the Republican working class
voter to show up. And the Dems are running real races.
I mean, you look at Kansas, they're putting up a
real challenger, Alaska, a real challenger. So they took Republican
(04:46):
stronghold states serious. And I think the president is trying
to match that moment by being there. And the best
way that he can help is to show up with rallies.
I think it's just as interesting, though, of where he's
not going, which is he's not going to Maine. And
that's a big Senate race. But he knows that strategically
(05:09):
for Senator Susan Collins to win, she's got to be
able to do what she needs for the state to
make it about Maine and less about the party. And
so I think in that regard, the president's being actually
pretty savvy to go in places where his brand is
most helpful to get the working class and his Trump
base out to vote.
Speaker 1 (05:31):
So you think it's more of a reflection? I mean, obviously,
I agree with you.
Speaker 2 (05:35):
Going to Maine, you know, is not helpful for Susan
Collins and nor do they really have like a super,
you know, I mean, I think their relationship's fine, but
probably more, more, you know, who knows how, what it's
like really behind the scenes versus, you know, sort of
some of the more public aspects of it. So yeah,
(05:56):
I hear what you're saying about, so you think it's more,
you know, obviously going to Maine is not going to
be beneficial for him. So you think he's more going
to the states, avoiding states where he could end up,
you know, negatively impacting the candidate. That's why you're, is
that your read about why he's going to some of
these red states then?
Speaker 1 (06:16):
That's right.
Speaker 3 (06:16):
He's going to the states where his base is most
prolific and will turn out in real ways. And it's
a mix of red states, And then some battlegrounds, like
I love that he's going to Ohio. We need him
in Michigan. I mean, Iowa, those are good places for
him to go to bring forward the working class voter
that he uniquely can unlock and ask them to really
(06:38):
do their civic duty for President Trump. They support President Trump.
Please support, you know, his preferred Senate candidate in the state.
And so I think his travel schedule reflects that probably
with some personal favors and relationships along the way that,
you know, I'm sure are sprinkled in as well.
Speaker 2 (06:55):
You know, because right now they're real clear politics average
has Democrats up by eight on the generic ballot. Obviously,
that's going to be different from state to state, as
you mentioned, and also in some of these House races.
So you're not, so you think the, you know, that
is not reflective of what you're saying in sort of
(07:18):
some of these internal state specific polls? Yeah.
Speaker 3 (07:21):
The reason is, is because the macro is always going
to be the macro. But when you look at that
in the state itself, you have to take each state
at face value. So, you know, go back to... You
go back to Maine, for instance, and you look at
where Susan Collins is running next to Jackson. Well, they're 48, 47.
(07:42):
And so they're within one point of each other and 5%
is undecided. And so that's well within the margin of error,
irregardless of the national ballot being at eight. And so,
you know, I think that that tells a different story
about how voters are reacting to their Senate candidates. Same
(08:03):
thing you could say in Ohio. Husted Senator going against
Sherrod Brown, that race is 44 to 41, 10% still undecided.
And so you've got a huge 30 days ahead of
Senator Husted to be able to go to that 10%
of undecideds and bring those voters home In addition to
(08:29):
shoring up his base, you know, I look at the
Ohio numbers. We were looking at them this morning. There's
about one and a half million what's called low propensity voters.
So these are registered Republicans that don't vote consistently. So
they've maybe only voted one of the last four elections,
maybe two. Of this million and a half that are
in the state of Ohio, only 533,000 of them voted
(08:50):
in 2024 and then did not vote in 2022. So
that that's half a million voters that don't normally vote
on a midterm year that Husted's going to have to
go and entice them to turn out, not to stay home,
that it's worth defeating Sherrod Brown. They likely voted in 2024.
(09:13):
Like I just said, they already voted to, you know,
to to go after Brown and to retire him now
that he's asking him to come out again. That sort
of message is delivered, I think, best through a really
robust and targeted ground game where Husted, Sentinel Action Fund,
others are going door to door and talking directly with
those voters and explaining the significance of this race. And
(09:37):
if those numbers prevail, then Husted closes his gap, right?
He closes his gaps kind of irregardless of what the
independents in the state of Ohio do, because there's just
not as many swing voters in the state. So to me,
it's all a math. It's all a math project looking
at state by state. Where's the polling? What's the feedback
on the ground and kind of what's being done in
(09:58):
the next 30 days? know, the next 40 days or so,
less than 40 days, which is really going to matter
and make a difference for these Senate races.
Speaker 2 (10:06):
You look at Mike Rogers, LCA creates an opening for
him because he is obviously very flawed. You know, Mike
Rogers has a great line about, what is it, like
him representing Palestine, you know, sort of outside of the
norm for Michigan voters.
Speaker 1 (10:25):
Yeah.
Speaker 2 (10:25):
But that being said, you know, the math is tough
statewide for Republicans in Michigan, particularly in midterm elections. You know,
President Trump's been able to win in 2016 and 2024,
but that's looked different in midterm elections for statewide candidates.
So there's a little bit of like a math problem
for Mike Rogers trying to get.
Speaker 1 (10:46):
Those voters out.
Speaker 2 (10:48):
How do you see this race breaking down? I mean,
do you think Mike Rogers can pull it off there?
Speaker 3 (10:55):
I do. I think Mike Rogers is in the best
position of any Republican candidate in this type of position
in Michigan in recent history. Way better than where he
was sitting at this point when he was in the
race actually in 2024. And It's a dead heat. This
race is within the margin of error. I do think
it could go either way. But I think Rogers is
(11:18):
in the best position possible to actually pick up the
W and flip the seat. And here's why. Right now,
when you look at the polls, you know, the polling
average has El-Said up three. But to your point earlier
about the macro, Rogers is actually running nearly six points
ahead of a generic Republican. And so once voters hear
(11:41):
Al-Said's extreme positions, they move over. And so the way
Rogers wins is it's kind of like less about Mike
Rogers and it's more about Al-Said. And it's showing the
contrast in what he would do for everything from the
economy to health care to foreign policy to state and
(12:03):
local issues. And then showing al-Said's extreme positions. And when
you look at that, 53% of independents consistently say they're
more likely to support him. I also think the Jewish
vote in Michigan is one that I'm keeping an eye on.
My understanding is there's a universe of about 100,000 to
125,000 Democrats that are registered Democrats in the state that
(12:25):
are Jewish. And they are looking very, very closely at Rogers,
not because they're all of a sudden going to be
a Republican, but as a protest vote against al-Said. Rogers
(12:45):
would never have access to those 100,000 to 125,000 Jewish
voters in the state had it not have been al-Said.
So I think it's a very unique situation where a
lot of things are lining up right, where you have
the low propensity voter being positioned to turn out for
Mike Rogers. He is actively courting the Jewish vote, specifically
(13:09):
the Jewish Democrat vote, to take a look at him,
vote against Al-Said, vote for Mike Rogers, and then the
Black vote. Rogers cannot win if he doesn't take some
parts of the Detroit suburbs. So he has to have
a big dent in that universe. And he's doing what
he needs to do to be in those communities and
(13:30):
outreach to them. So I think All of those elements
are the types of things that I look at 30
days before an election to see are things starting to
line up when you have a dead heat margin of
error race like you have in Michigan.
Speaker 1 (13:44):
No, I find him impressive.
Speaker 2 (13:45):
I've interviewed him a couple of times while co-hosting on Fox,
and he's very message disciplined. and I've been impressed with him.
It's just the math can be tough in a state
like Michigan statewide outside of, you know, a presidential election
when you've got Trump at the top of the ticket.
You know, sort of how much of the national environment,
(14:06):
I mean, obviously we're talking state-specific, so they're tailoring messaging
for the states that they're running in, but, you know, is.
Speaker 1 (14:13):
The national environment.
Speaker 2 (14:15):
I mean, look, just by nature of Republicans holding the
House and the Senate and the White House, like the
midterms are historically going to be tough for those reasons alone. But,
you know, how much of the national environment is weighing
down Republicans? Do you think that angle is being overplayed
in the media or sort of, I guess, what are
(14:36):
the factors that you see playing out in terms of
like the issues that voters face?
Speaker 1 (14:43):
About and are impacting the overall electorate?
Speaker 3 (14:48):
So I do think the historical knowledge and the historical
trend line of whoever is in office, that the midterm
is kind of the repudiation of that party is really
hard to break, right? That's a really hard historical pattern
to break. If anyone can do it, I think President
(15:09):
Trump can. and I've said that for over a year now,
I think that he defies a lot of odds and
he certainly defies a lot of the- Constantly. I mean,
in some ways it's like kind of crazy because the
people that are betting against him, I'm like, what are
you doing?
Speaker 1 (15:25):
Yeah.
Speaker 3 (15:26):
You know, what are you doing here? Just give him
your money at that point. So I think there's that.
I think that feels good to me. You know, the
national trend line is interesting because- there's so much talk
on affordability and the economy and what the Iran war
has done to gas prices and is the trade-off worth it?
(15:48):
We've talked about this, Lisa. That is a long-term conversation.
The pivot that I've been seeing on the ground is
one that's not denying the realities of our economic situation.
It's saying we need more time. And I think that
that pivot is really being honest with voters, which is
(16:09):
to say President Biden handed over a mess and economic
inflation was at all-time highs, price of goods were at
an all-time high. These are things that are not going
to be fixed overnight. The president has taken tremendous strides.
Congress has taken tremendous strides with the big, beautiful bill
to go after these exact issues. I mean, look at
(16:33):
what they've done on the deregulatory front and how that's
brought additional dollars back into households' pockets. Same with tax cuts.
So it's not that there hasn't been an effort to
get the economic agenda back on the right side of
the ledger. It's that voters want to see more is coming.
And I think you can make the point that if
(16:54):
you hand the reins over to Democrats, it's not going
to get better. It's going to either stay the same
or get worse because you're then interrupting a process or
a plan or a program midway through without it completing.
And everyone knows that a project halfway done fails. And
so I think the arguments that we can make directly
(17:14):
to voters of Republicans have done good stuff. They need
to build on it and do more. And by the way,
let us remind you of what has been good the
last two years, right? Like that has to be part
of the pitch. I think that that's going to work.
I think that in some ways it's the closing salvo. Yes,
(17:34):
is the Iran.
Situation in Iran, does it complicate things?
Speaker 1 (17:40):
Absolutely.
Speaker 3 (17:41):
But the more that the president, I think, and all
of the candidates that are in the field in the
House and Senate acknowledge that and say, well, the tradeoff
is worth it because Iran won't have a nuclear weapon,
and here's why that's important. And by the way, we're
still going to work on gas. We're still working on
the price of eggs and groceries and bread and cattle
and beef.
Speaker 1 (18:00):
So I.
Speaker 3 (18:02):
I think if we can, I think if Republicans can
do that well, the next 35, 40 days, then that's
the closing salvo. And that puts us in the strongest
position possible for election day. And I just point out
early voting in some of these key states starts next week.
So we're going to start seeing returns. Michigan starts on
(18:23):
the 5th. Ohio's the 6th, I believe. We're going to
start seeing returns coming in. And there's still time to
adjust things. you know, the closing pitch if it needs
to be adjusted in the last 15 days.
Speaker 1 (18:35):
Oh, I agree with you that it's never good to deny,
you know, reality.
Speaker 3 (18:40):
Yeah.
Speaker 2 (18:40):
You know, because people are just like, you know, don't
pee on my leg and tell me it's raining.
Speaker 1 (18:45):
You know what I mean? Totally. What are you saying
in terms of.
Speaker 2 (18:51):
Because you're... You know, you're going to have better information
than what a lot of us are getting from like
the media and some of these media polls are just
not as good as they used to. You know, polling's
not as effective as it used to be for a
variety of reasons. But in terms of motivation, are you seeing,
(19:13):
are Republicans motivated to turn out this cycle? You know,
I know Democrats have a reason to turn out.
Speaker 1 (19:19):
You know, they're frustrated.
Speaker 2 (19:19):
They want Republicans out of office. But are you seeing
motivation from Republicans as well?
Speaker 3 (19:25):
Yeah, we're seeing it. And we're seeing it in some states,
we're seeing it as the contrast vote or the protest
vote against the Dem, right? And then in other states,
we're seeing it because they're excited about their senator, right?
The support and enthusiasm for Senator Collins in Maine, for instance,
is probably where I see more just homegrown Republican enthusiasm
(19:45):
because Mainers in the state, they know that Susan Collins
delivers for them. There's not a road, bridge, you know,
some hospital, something in the state that she hasn't had
her fingerprint on or hand involved in in some way.
And Mainers know that. And so I think some states
it's like that where the enthusiasm is homegrown for the Republican.
(20:08):
In other states, the enthusiasm is in opposition to, you know,
a very extreme Democratic candidate. And I would point to
James Tallarico in Texas. I'd put him in that bucket.
I would put Al-Said in Michigan in that bucket. And
there are others too. I mean, even Chris Pappas in
New Hampshire is trending in that line of the first,
(20:29):
you know, it's only been two, what, two weeks since
the New Hampshire Senate primary and Pappas is already going
further and further and further to the left, which makes
no sense to me. In a year where contrast between
the extreme positions of the Democrats versus common sense Republicans,
that is what's going to win this ballot. I would
(20:51):
not trend more leftward. You're better off taking the moderate
route as a Democrat, like a Roy Cooper in North
Carolina and splitting down the middle. And whether that's true
or not, you know, time will tell, but that's how
he's campaigning. And that's how he might win because of
that sort of positioning.
Speaker 2 (21:11):
Well, so Roy Cooper is former governor. So, you know,
he's got statewide name ID.
Speaker 1 (21:16):
So that's tough.
Speaker 2 (21:18):
Also in Maine, if you don't vote for Susan Collins,
you're voting for a guy who had kids with a
second cousin, Troy Jackson.
Speaker 1 (21:25):
So that's weird. You don't want to send her from
your state with that.
Speaker 3 (21:29):
So, but that's what I mean. It's like, it's like,
you hear this and you're like, you're like, what?
Speaker 1 (21:35):
You hear that?
Speaker 3 (21:36):
You hear, you know, God is non-binary and has six genders.
Speaker 1 (21:39):
You're like, what? This stuff is weird.
Speaker 3 (21:42):
And then, and then it's like, well, this is hurtful, right?
When you look at Al-Said and his relationship with Hasan Piker, like,
then it's like, it goes from weird to dangerous within
like 30 seconds.
Speaker 2 (21:53):
Yeah.
Speaker 1 (21:54):
How are you feeling about Texas?
Speaker 2 (21:56):
Are you, I mean, obviously Texas is like Lucy in
the football for Democrats.
Speaker 1 (22:00):
They always say this is the year, this is the year.
And then, you know, they lose.
Speaker 2 (22:05):
But, you know, so far the numbers are showing a
tighter race than obviously Republicans would like in the state.
Speaker 3 (22:13):
It's definitely tighter than Ken Paxton wants it to be.
That's for sure. You know, Governor Abbott's on the ballot there, too,
in Texas. I will say, you know, to the governor's credit,
he has a really fantastic crown game. Mays, who is
running for attorney general, is self-funding. He's bringing in a
lot of new money to the state. And then Leader
(22:34):
Thune's effort with Senate Leadership Fund has invested over $ 100
million and climbing towards this race. So I think there's
going to be a lot of money spent on that ballot.
It's going to help all parts of the ballot. I
think Abbott definitely helps And the fact that, you know,
Tallarico has become a nationalized household name, that's going to
(22:58):
put a lot of eyeballs on this race. And usually
the eyeballs translate to money. And that's and Texas is
a big state. So it's going to cost a lot
for Paxton to pull out the win here.
Speaker 2 (23:07):
I think the Republicans will end up just voting down
ballot and we'll bring him like, you know, obviously he's
going to underperform here. Abbott, but I think he will
end up pulling it off. And then before we go,
what are you seeing with independence? This election cycle?
Speaker 3 (23:24):
Gosh, I feel like I feel like every answer I've
had for you today is it depends on the state.
Speaker 2 (23:30):
But I mean, that's what you're being real with me,
you know, like, that's why we're having this conversation is because,
you know, you're getting data and real time information that.
Speaker 1 (23:42):
You know, most people aren't getting, right? From multiple states.
Speaker 2 (23:46):
Even if I were just to interview people working on
a specific campaign, they're just going to be able to
speak to that state. Whereas, you know, you're looking at
multiple states on any given day. Totally. That's why your
insight is so valuable in this conversation, you know? Well,
so you're very smart, but you know what I mean.
Speaker 1 (24:04):
Oh, thank you. Yeah, no, thank you. Information most people
aren't privy to, so it's important.
Speaker 3 (24:08):
Totally. So, I mean, Independents are acting like independents, but
it really depends on the state. So in a state
like Iowa, I think Ashley Hinson's running a great race,
but her effort to pull over independents I think might
be out of reach, right? The independents in Iowa are
(24:29):
not excited about the president. They're disappointed from the tariffs
and the price of diesel in particular. And so in
some ways, Ashley Hinson doesn't actually need independents to win
in Iowa because there's more registered Republicans than Democrats. She
just needs 15 percent of them to cross over. So
(24:49):
it's less of a problem for her. But if the
Republican base were to fall out in Iowa and then
she has to go find new voters, she'd have to
go to those independents. And those independents are not excited
about voting Republican in the climate and the state because
of how it's affected parochial issues like diesel in particular.
So Iowa, I think, is a tough place to be
(25:11):
an independent. The inverse of that, though, is actually New Hampshire.
where independents in that state are trending more towards Sununu
because of the family name. He's got a great brand.
You know, his family has run for office before. He's well-known.
But also, independents really, really love and support the New
(25:32):
Hampshire governor, Governor Ayotte. And she is up, like, plus 20.
Speaker 2 (25:37):
So.
Speaker 3 (25:39):
In a state like New Hampshire, the independents could actually
swing the race over because of their support for AOT.
They could swing Sununu over. The more heat is tied
to AOT and the more they hug each other and
kind of cross arms and go around the state and
campaign together and fundraise together and talk to voters together.
So I give those both examples because they're kind of
(26:02):
both polar extremes. I'll tell you in a state like Michigan,
independents are definitely going to matter. Rogers can't win without
at least 25 to 35 percent of them showing up
for him. He's also going to need some crossover Dems,
like I was saying, from the Black community and the
Jewish communities. So they're definitely going to matter there. And
(26:23):
on the issues, you know, independents are very in tune
with cost of living, price of goods. And then they
kind of want to feel good about their vote. They
want to feel like they're making a difference, that their
vote matters. And you can't really put a polling number
on that, but it's a feel that we'll start getting back. Really,
(26:48):
once people start early voting here this next week, if
we start seeing independents actually show up early, if they're
showing up earlier, that will trend more Republican. If they're
waiting and showing up later, that will trend more Democrats.
Speaker 2 (27:02):
And then the very last question before we go. So,
I mean, it seems like this could be like a
funky election night.
Speaker 1 (27:08):
Yes.
Speaker 3 (27:09):
Great word.
Speaker 1 (27:10):
Yeah.
Speaker 2 (27:15):
Is there a race that could surprise us for Republicans
where you think a candidate is going to pull it
off that is maybe outside of the norm or is
not one that people are foreseeing at the moment?
Speaker 3 (27:31):
Well, I think Mike Rogers in Michigan fits that fits
that mold just because of all the headwinds against a
Republican winning in Michigan, but then being able to pull
it off. I think that will bust open the mold.
I think, you know, what John Hughes said in Ohio
is interesting to me because even though he's ran statewide
(27:52):
before as a as the lieutenant governor, he's never had
a Senate race. And so he's having to kind of
reintroduce himself to voters. And I think people are cautious
about whether or not he can pull it off. And
I think he can. And I think that's one that
will surprise. I don't think anyone will be surprised when
(28:12):
Susan Collins wins. I think people will say, well, she's
a killer. You know, she's defied the odds before. She's
going to do it again. So I think if she
banks the win, that's a little bit more expected. And
the last race, you know, we didn't talk too much
about this, but I think the last race that I
want to see the Republican pull it off and kind
(28:34):
of surprise everyone is Dan Sullivan in Alaska. And that's
a tight race, too, for various reasons, mainly ranked choice voting.
And there's a second Dan Sullivan, as you know, that's
on the ballot, which is crazy. And so if he
pulls that off, I think people are going to breathe
a sigh of relief and be quite surprised that he
was able to do it. despite really the stack of
(28:56):
cards being rigged against him with ranked choice voting.
Speaker 1 (28:59):
And it can take a while to get the election results.
Speaker 2 (29:03):
And I worked on his first Senate race as part
of his general consulting team. And it can take a
while to get results there. So we might not know
the balance of power on election night.
Speaker 1 (29:16):
Yes.
Speaker 2 (29:16):
I guess we're kind of getting used to these days, unfortunately. Totally.
Speaker 3 (29:20):
Totally.
Speaker 2 (29:22):
All right. Well, you know, the House is going to
be tough, I think, because I think there's only four
seats that Dems need to pick up. But the Senate
sounds like it's going to be a dogfight and might
not be a foregone conclusion right now.
Speaker 1 (29:35):
That's right.
Speaker 3 (29:36):
I would say the House is your jump ball and
the Senate is the insurance.
Speaker 1 (29:40):
Policy. All right. We'll take that. We'll take it. Jessica Anderson,
appreciate your time. and always breaking this down for us.
Thank you so much. Awesome.
Speaker 3 (29:51):
Thanks for having me.
Speaker 2 (29:52):
That was Jessica Anderson, president of the Sentinel Action Fund.
Speaker 1 (29:55):
Appreciate her for making the time to come on the show.
Speaker 2 (29:57):
Appreciate you guys at home for listening every Tuesday and Thursday,
but you can listen throughout the week.
Speaker 1 (30:03):
Also, thank John Cascio, my producer, for putting this show together.
Until next time.
Welcome to The Truth with Lisa Booth, where we get
to the heart of the issues that matter to you.
Speaker 2 (00:09):
Today, we're talking midterms. We're talking politics. You know, if
you look at the overall political environment, it looks a
little depressing for Republicans. I'm not going to lie. You
look at the real clear politics, generic ballot, Democrats are
up by more than eight points.
Speaker 1 (00:25):
But is that the full story? What's really happening? Particularly
when you break it down on some of these key states,
these key.
Speaker 2 (00:33):
Senate races that are ultimately going to determine the balance
of power in Congress. We're going to talk to someone
who is running a year-round ground game in the key
battleground states. She's looking at data on a daily basis.
She sees what's really happening beyond the headlines, behind the
media news polls, seeing what's actually happening.
Speaker 1 (00:56):
The real data.
Speaker 2 (00:57):
Her name is Jessica Anderson, and she is the president
of the Sentinel Action Fund. Today, we're going to get
to the truth about the midterm elections. Well, Jessica Anderson,
it's great to have you back on the show. I
know you have a little bit of a cold, but
I appreciate you for doing this even while sick.
Speaker 1 (01:14):
So I appreciate you taking the time.
Speaker 3 (01:15):
Yeah, thanks for having me.
Speaker 2 (01:18):
So we were talking and you feel a little bit
more optimistic about the midterms than I have been feeling.
Speaker 1 (01:24):
Which is great news. I love that. I want that
to be the case. So, okay. So walk me.
Speaker 2 (01:32):
Through what gives you optimism about the midterms? Yeah.
Speaker 3 (01:37):
So the reason I have optimism is honestly because this
is the point of the cycle. We see it every
cycle where silly season begins and people start to over-inflate
the polling. They over-inflate the prediction markets. And they think
all hope is lost. And I just don't think that's
the case. Now, I don't think Republicans can take anything
(02:00):
for granted when it comes to the Senate. And I
think a lot of Senate races have popped online in
the last 15, 30 days, like Kansas and Alaska, that
we didn't think we were going to have to spend
money there. But now Republicans will have to spend money
there to defend those seats. So we can't take anything
for granted. But at least the Maine Senate battleground races
(02:23):
that we look at at Sentinel Action Fund, they are
all winnable. Maine, Ohio, Michigan is a big flip opportunity,
New Hampshire to flip, Iowa. These are all states that
really just need to close strong. And I think the
polling that we see nationally really doesn't capture what's going
on on the ground. And the polls themselves, as we know,
(02:46):
you're calling in the middle of a day, well, who's
most likely to answer that call, right? Someone that is
probably out of work or who's able to be home
in the middle of the day, right? And so I
think when you take that into consideration, coupled with the
reality of how the feedback has been on the ground
(03:07):
with door-to-door efforts, Republicans have a fighting chance I think,
not only to keep the Senate majority, but to keep
it at 52. I don't think we're growing the Senate
majority to 55 or anything like that. And I don't
think Republicans are losing it to drop down to 47
or 49, like I've seen some on cable news talk about. Now,
(03:27):
the House is a different story, Lisa, I'll tell you that.
I think the House is a nail biter. And the
House tracks very closely to the president's numbers. And I
think we'll come down to about five seats that could
swing either way. And it's going to be a nail-biter.
Speaker 2 (03:44):
I think it kind of worries me that President Trump's
going to be spending time in places like Oklahoma or
Alabama and, you know.
Speaker 1 (03:52):
Some of these more red states. I think Ohio was
on the list as well.
Speaker 3 (03:58):
Well, we definitely need him in Ohio.
Speaker 1 (03:59):
No, Ohio makes sense.
Speaker 3 (04:01):
Yeah, we need him in Ohio for the Senate. You know,
Sherrod Brown.
Speaker 2 (04:05):
Iowa, Nebraska, like states that, you know what I mean,
like should not be Ohio for sure. But, you know,
some of these states that like, you know, if we're
feeling good about things heading into the midterms, he would
not be spending time in those states.
Speaker 3 (04:24):
I think he's not taking anything for granted. Oklahoma on
that list was a little bit of a surprise to me.
But the others, I think he's trying to get his
base out. He's trying to get the Republican working class
voter to show up. And the Dems are running real races.
I mean, you look at Kansas, they're putting up a
real challenger, Alaska, a real challenger. So they took Republican
(04:46):
stronghold states serious. And I think the president is trying
to match that moment by being there. And the best
way that he can help is to show up with rallies.
I think it's just as interesting, though, of where he's
not going, which is he's not going to Maine. And
that's a big Senate race. But he knows that strategically
(05:09):
for Senator Susan Collins to win, she's got to be
able to do what she needs for the state to
make it about Maine and less about the party. And
so I think in that regard, the president's being actually
pretty savvy to go in places where his brand is
most helpful to get the working class and his Trump
base out to vote.
Speaker 1 (05:31):
So you think it's more of a reflection? I mean, obviously,
I agree with you.
Speaker 2 (05:35):
Going to Maine, you know, is not helpful for Susan
Collins and nor do they really have like a super,
you know, I mean, I think their relationship's fine, but
probably more, more, you know, who knows how, what it's
like really behind the scenes versus, you know, sort of
some of the more public aspects of it. So yeah,
(05:56):
I hear what you're saying about, so you think it's more,
you know, obviously going to Maine is not going to
be beneficial for him. So you think he's more going
to the states, avoiding states where he could end up,
you know, negatively impacting the candidate. That's why you're, is
that your read about why he's going to some of
these red states then?
Speaker 1 (06:16):
That's right.
Speaker 3 (06:16):
He's going to the states where his base is most
prolific and will turn out in real ways. And it's
a mix of red states, And then some battlegrounds, like
I love that he's going to Ohio. We need him
in Michigan. I mean, Iowa, those are good places for
him to go to bring forward the working class voter
that he uniquely can unlock and ask them to really
(06:38):
do their civic duty for President Trump. They support President Trump.
Please support, you know, his preferred Senate candidate in the state.
And so I think his travel schedule reflects that probably
with some personal favors and relationships along the way that,
you know, I'm sure are sprinkled in as well.
Speaker 2 (06:55):
You know, because right now they're real clear politics average
has Democrats up by eight on the generic ballot. Obviously,
that's going to be different from state to state, as
you mentioned, and also in some of these House races.
So you're not, so you think the, you know, that
is not reflective of what you're saying in sort of
(07:18):
some of these internal state specific polls? Yeah.
Speaker 3 (07:21):
The reason is, is because the macro is always going
to be the macro. But when you look at that
in the state itself, you have to take each state
at face value. So, you know, go back to... You
go back to Maine, for instance, and you look at
where Susan Collins is running next to Jackson. Well, they're 48, 47.
(07:42):
And so they're within one point of each other and 5%
is undecided. And so that's well within the margin of error,
irregardless of the national ballot being at eight. And so,
you know, I think that that tells a different story
about how voters are reacting to their Senate candidates. Same
(08:03):
thing you could say in Ohio. Husted Senator going against
Sherrod Brown, that race is 44 to 41, 10% still undecided.
And so you've got a huge 30 days ahead of
Senator Husted to be able to go to that 10%
of undecideds and bring those voters home In addition to
(08:29):
shoring up his base, you know, I look at the
Ohio numbers. We were looking at them this morning. There's
about one and a half million what's called low propensity voters.
So these are registered Republicans that don't vote consistently. So
they've maybe only voted one of the last four elections,
maybe two. Of this million and a half that are
in the state of Ohio, only 533,000 of them voted
(08:50):
in 2024 and then did not vote in 2022. So
that that's half a million voters that don't normally vote
on a midterm year that Husted's going to have to
go and entice them to turn out, not to stay home,
that it's worth defeating Sherrod Brown. They likely voted in 2024.
(09:13):
Like I just said, they already voted to, you know,
to to go after Brown and to retire him now
that he's asking him to come out again. That sort
of message is delivered, I think, best through a really
robust and targeted ground game where Husted, Sentinel Action Fund,
others are going door to door and talking directly with
those voters and explaining the significance of this race. And
(09:37):
if those numbers prevail, then Husted closes his gap, right?
He closes his gaps kind of irregardless of what the
independents in the state of Ohio do, because there's just
not as many swing voters in the state. So to me,
it's all a math. It's all a math project looking
at state by state. Where's the polling? What's the feedback
on the ground and kind of what's being done in
(09:58):
the next 30 days? know, the next 40 days or so,
less than 40 days, which is really going to matter
and make a difference for these Senate races.
Speaker 2 (10:06):
You look at Mike Rogers, LCA creates an opening for
him because he is obviously very flawed. You know, Mike
Rogers has a great line about, what is it, like
him representing Palestine, you know, sort of outside of the
norm for Michigan voters.
Speaker 1 (10:25):
Yeah.
Speaker 2 (10:25):
But that being said, you know, the math is tough
statewide for Republicans in Michigan, particularly in midterm elections. You know,
President Trump's been able to win in 2016 and 2024,
but that's looked different in midterm elections for statewide candidates.
So there's a little bit of like a math problem
for Mike Rogers trying to get.
Speaker 1 (10:46):
Those voters out.
Speaker 2 (10:48):
How do you see this race breaking down? I mean,
do you think Mike Rogers can pull it off there?
Speaker 3 (10:55):
I do. I think Mike Rogers is in the best
position of any Republican candidate in this type of position
in Michigan in recent history. Way better than where he
was sitting at this point when he was in the
race actually in 2024. And It's a dead heat. This
race is within the margin of error. I do think
it could go either way. But I think Rogers is
(11:18):
in the best position possible to actually pick up the
W and flip the seat. And here's why. Right now,
when you look at the polls, you know, the polling
average has El-Said up three. But to your point earlier
about the macro, Rogers is actually running nearly six points
ahead of a generic Republican. And so once voters hear
(11:41):
Al-Said's extreme positions, they move over. And so the way
Rogers wins is it's kind of like less about Mike
Rogers and it's more about Al-Said. And it's showing the
contrast in what he would do for everything from the
economy to health care to foreign policy to state and
(12:03):
local issues. And then showing al-Said's extreme positions. And when
you look at that, 53% of independents consistently say they're
more likely to support him. I also think the Jewish
vote in Michigan is one that I'm keeping an eye on.
My understanding is there's a universe of about 100,000 to
125,000 Democrats that are registered Democrats in the state that
(12:25):
are Jewish. And they are looking very, very closely at Rogers,
not because they're all of a sudden going to be
a Republican, but as a protest vote against al-Said. Rogers
(12:45):
would never have access to those 100,000 to 125,000 Jewish
voters in the state had it not have been al-Said.
So I think it's a very unique situation where a
lot of things are lining up right, where you have
the low propensity voter being positioned to turn out for
Mike Rogers. He is actively courting the Jewish vote, specifically
(13:09):
the Jewish Democrat vote, to take a look at him,
vote against Al-Said, vote for Mike Rogers, and then the
Black vote. Rogers cannot win if he doesn't take some
parts of the Detroit suburbs. So he has to have
a big dent in that universe. And he's doing what
he needs to do to be in those communities and
(13:30):
outreach to them. So I think All of those elements
are the types of things that I look at 30
days before an election to see are things starting to
line up when you have a dead heat margin of
error race like you have in Michigan.
Speaker 1 (13:44):
No, I find him impressive.
Speaker 2 (13:45):
I've interviewed him a couple of times while co-hosting on Fox,
and he's very message disciplined. and I've been impressed with him.
It's just the math can be tough in a state
like Michigan statewide outside of, you know, a presidential election
when you've got Trump at the top of the ticket.
You know, sort of how much of the national environment,
(14:06):
I mean, obviously we're talking state-specific, so they're tailoring messaging
for the states that they're running in, but, you know, is.
Speaker 1 (14:13):
The national environment.
Speaker 2 (14:15):
I mean, look, just by nature of Republicans holding the
House and the Senate and the White House, like the
midterms are historically going to be tough for those reasons alone. But,
you know, how much of the national environment is weighing
down Republicans? Do you think that angle is being overplayed
in the media or sort of, I guess, what are
(14:36):
the factors that you see playing out in terms of
like the issues that voters face?
Speaker 1 (14:43):
About and are impacting the overall electorate?
Speaker 3 (14:48):
So I do think the historical knowledge and the historical
trend line of whoever is in office, that the midterm
is kind of the repudiation of that party is really
hard to break, right? That's a really hard historical pattern
to break. If anyone can do it, I think President
(15:09):
Trump can. and I've said that for over a year now,
I think that he defies a lot of odds and
he certainly defies a lot of the- Constantly. I mean,
in some ways it's like kind of crazy because the
people that are betting against him, I'm like, what are
you doing?
Speaker 1 (15:25):
Yeah.
Speaker 3 (15:26):
You know, what are you doing here? Just give him
your money at that point. So I think there's that.
I think that feels good to me. You know, the
national trend line is interesting because- there's so much talk
on affordability and the economy and what the Iran war
has done to gas prices and is the trade-off worth it?
(15:48):
We've talked about this, Lisa. That is a long-term conversation.
The pivot that I've been seeing on the ground is
one that's not denying the realities of our economic situation.
It's saying we need more time. And I think that
that pivot is really being honest with voters, which is
(16:09):
to say President Biden handed over a mess and economic
inflation was at all-time highs, price of goods were at
an all-time high. These are things that are not going
to be fixed overnight. The president has taken tremendous strides.
Congress has taken tremendous strides with the big, beautiful bill
to go after these exact issues. I mean, look at
(16:33):
what they've done on the deregulatory front and how that's
brought additional dollars back into households' pockets. Same with tax cuts.
So it's not that there hasn't been an effort to
get the economic agenda back on the right side of
the ledger. It's that voters want to see more is coming.
And I think you can make the point that if
(16:54):
you hand the reins over to Democrats, it's not going
to get better. It's going to either stay the same
or get worse because you're then interrupting a process or
a plan or a program midway through without it completing.
And everyone knows that a project halfway done fails. And
so I think the arguments that we can make directly
(17:14):
to voters of Republicans have done good stuff. They need
to build on it and do more. And by the way,
let us remind you of what has been good the
last two years, right? Like that has to be part
of the pitch. I think that that's going to work.
I think that in some ways it's the closing salvo. Yes,
(17:34):
is the Iran.
Situation in Iran, does it complicate things?
Speaker 1 (17:40):
Absolutely.
Speaker 3 (17:41):
But the more that the president, I think, and all
of the candidates that are in the field in the
House and Senate acknowledge that and say, well, the tradeoff
is worth it because Iran won't have a nuclear weapon,
and here's why that's important. And by the way, we're
still going to work on gas. We're still working on
the price of eggs and groceries and bread and cattle
and beef.
Speaker 1 (18:00):
So I.
Speaker 3 (18:02):
I think if we can, I think if Republicans can
do that well, the next 35, 40 days, then that's
the closing salvo. And that puts us in the strongest
position possible for election day. And I just point out
early voting in some of these key states starts next week.
So we're going to start seeing returns. Michigan starts on
(18:23):
the 5th. Ohio's the 6th, I believe. We're going to
start seeing returns coming in. And there's still time to
adjust things. you know, the closing pitch if it needs
to be adjusted in the last 15 days.
Speaker 1 (18:35):
Oh, I agree with you that it's never good to deny,
you know, reality.
Speaker 3 (18:40):
Yeah.
Speaker 2 (18:40):
You know, because people are just like, you know, don't
pee on my leg and tell me it's raining.
Speaker 1 (18:45):
You know what I mean? Totally. What are you saying
in terms of.
Speaker 2 (18:51):
Because you're... You know, you're going to have better information
than what a lot of us are getting from like
the media and some of these media polls are just
not as good as they used to. You know, polling's
not as effective as it used to be for a
variety of reasons. But in terms of motivation, are you seeing,
(19:13):
are Republicans motivated to turn out this cycle? You know,
I know Democrats have a reason to turn out.
Speaker 1 (19:19):
You know, they're frustrated.
Speaker 2 (19:19):
They want Republicans out of office. But are you seeing
motivation from Republicans as well?
Speaker 3 (19:25):
Yeah, we're seeing it. And we're seeing it in some states,
we're seeing it as the contrast vote or the protest
vote against the Dem, right? And then in other states,
we're seeing it because they're excited about their senator, right?
The support and enthusiasm for Senator Collins in Maine, for instance,
is probably where I see more just homegrown Republican enthusiasm
(19:45):
because Mainers in the state, they know that Susan Collins
delivers for them. There's not a road, bridge, you know,
some hospital, something in the state that she hasn't had
her fingerprint on or hand involved in in some way.
And Mainers know that. And so I think some states
it's like that where the enthusiasm is homegrown for the Republican.
(20:08):
In other states, the enthusiasm is in opposition to, you know,
a very extreme Democratic candidate. And I would point to
James Tallarico in Texas. I'd put him in that bucket.
I would put Al-Said in Michigan in that bucket. And
there are others too. I mean, even Chris Pappas in
New Hampshire is trending in that line of the first,
(20:29):
you know, it's only been two, what, two weeks since
the New Hampshire Senate primary and Pappas is already going
further and further and further to the left, which makes
no sense to me. In a year where contrast between
the extreme positions of the Democrats versus common sense Republicans,
that is what's going to win this ballot. I would
(20:51):
not trend more leftward. You're better off taking the moderate
route as a Democrat, like a Roy Cooper in North
Carolina and splitting down the middle. And whether that's true
or not, you know, time will tell, but that's how
he's campaigning. And that's how he might win because of
that sort of positioning.
Speaker 2 (21:11):
Well, so Roy Cooper is former governor. So, you know,
he's got statewide name ID.
Speaker 1 (21:16):
So that's tough.
Speaker 2 (21:18):
Also in Maine, if you don't vote for Susan Collins,
you're voting for a guy who had kids with a
second cousin, Troy Jackson.
Speaker 1 (21:25):
So that's weird. You don't want to send her from
your state with that.
Speaker 3 (21:29):
So, but that's what I mean. It's like, it's like,
you hear this and you're like, you're like, what?
Speaker 1 (21:35):
You hear that?
Speaker 3 (21:36):
You hear, you know, God is non-binary and has six genders.
Speaker 1 (21:39):
You're like, what? This stuff is weird.
Speaker 3 (21:42):
And then, and then it's like, well, this is hurtful, right?
When you look at Al-Said and his relationship with Hasan Piker, like,
then it's like, it goes from weird to dangerous within
like 30 seconds.
Speaker 2 (21:53):
Yeah.
Speaker 1 (21:54):
How are you feeling about Texas?
Speaker 2 (21:56):
Are you, I mean, obviously Texas is like Lucy in
the football for Democrats.
Speaker 1 (22:00):
They always say this is the year, this is the year.
And then, you know, they lose.
Speaker 2 (22:05):
But, you know, so far the numbers are showing a
tighter race than obviously Republicans would like in the state.
Speaker 3 (22:13):
It's definitely tighter than Ken Paxton wants it to be.
That's for sure. You know, Governor Abbott's on the ballot there, too,
in Texas. I will say, you know, to the governor's credit,
he has a really fantastic crown game. Mays, who is
running for attorney general, is self-funding. He's bringing in a
lot of new money to the state. And then Leader
(22:34):
Thune's effort with Senate Leadership Fund has invested over $ 100
million and climbing towards this race. So I think there's
going to be a lot of money spent on that ballot.
It's going to help all parts of the ballot. I
think Abbott definitely helps And the fact that, you know,
Tallarico has become a nationalized household name, that's going to
(22:58):
put a lot of eyeballs on this race. And usually
the eyeballs translate to money. And that's and Texas is
a big state. So it's going to cost a lot
for Paxton to pull out the win here.
Speaker 2 (23:07):
I think the Republicans will end up just voting down
ballot and we'll bring him like, you know, obviously he's
going to underperform here. Abbott, but I think he will
end up pulling it off. And then before we go,
what are you seeing with independence? This election cycle?
Speaker 3 (23:24):
Gosh, I feel like I feel like every answer I've
had for you today is it depends on the state.
Speaker 2 (23:30):
But I mean, that's what you're being real with me,
you know, like, that's why we're having this conversation is because,
you know, you're getting data and real time information that.
Speaker 1 (23:42):
You know, most people aren't getting, right? From multiple states.
Speaker 2 (23:46):
Even if I were just to interview people working on
a specific campaign, they're just going to be able to
speak to that state. Whereas, you know, you're looking at
multiple states on any given day. Totally. That's why your
insight is so valuable in this conversation, you know? Well,
so you're very smart, but you know what I mean.
Speaker 1 (24:04):
Oh, thank you. Yeah, no, thank you. Information most people
aren't privy to, so it's important.
Speaker 3 (24:08):
Totally. So, I mean, Independents are acting like independents, but
it really depends on the state. So in a state
like Iowa, I think Ashley Hinson's running a great race,
but her effort to pull over independents I think might
be out of reach, right? The independents in Iowa are
(24:29):
not excited about the president. They're disappointed from the tariffs
and the price of diesel in particular. And so in
some ways, Ashley Hinson doesn't actually need independents to win
in Iowa because there's more registered Republicans than Democrats. She
just needs 15 percent of them to cross over. So
(24:49):
it's less of a problem for her. But if the
Republican base were to fall out in Iowa and then
she has to go find new voters, she'd have to
go to those independents. And those independents are not excited
about voting Republican in the climate and the state because
of how it's affected parochial issues like diesel in particular.
So Iowa, I think, is a tough place to be
(25:11):
an independent. The inverse of that, though, is actually New Hampshire.
where independents in that state are trending more towards Sununu
because of the family name. He's got a great brand.
You know, his family has run for office before. He's well-known.
But also, independents really, really love and support the New
(25:32):
Hampshire governor, Governor Ayotte. And she is up, like, plus 20.
Speaker 2 (25:37):
So.
Speaker 3 (25:39):
In a state like New Hampshire, the independents could actually
swing the race over because of their support for AOT.
They could swing Sununu over. The more heat is tied
to AOT and the more they hug each other and
kind of cross arms and go around the state and
campaign together and fundraise together and talk to voters together.
So I give those both examples because they're kind of
(26:02):
both polar extremes. I'll tell you in a state like Michigan,
independents are definitely going to matter. Rogers can't win without
at least 25 to 35 percent of them showing up
for him. He's also going to need some crossover Dems,
like I was saying, from the Black community and the
Jewish communities. So they're definitely going to matter there. And
(26:23):
on the issues, you know, independents are very in tune
with cost of living, price of goods. And then they
kind of want to feel good about their vote. They
want to feel like they're making a difference, that their
vote matters. And you can't really put a polling number
on that, but it's a feel that we'll start getting back. Really,
(26:48):
once people start early voting here this next week, if
we start seeing independents actually show up early, if they're
showing up earlier, that will trend more Republican. If they're
waiting and showing up later, that will trend more Democrats.
Speaker 2 (27:02):
And then the very last question before we go. So,
I mean, it seems like this could be like a
funky election night.
Speaker 1 (27:08):
Yes.
Speaker 3 (27:09):
Great word.
Speaker 1 (27:10):
Yeah.
Speaker 2 (27:15):
Is there a race that could surprise us for Republicans
where you think a candidate is going to pull it
off that is maybe outside of the norm or is
not one that people are foreseeing at the moment?
Speaker 3 (27:31):
Well, I think Mike Rogers in Michigan fits that fits
that mold just because of all the headwinds against a
Republican winning in Michigan, but then being able to pull
it off. I think that will bust open the mold.
I think, you know, what John Hughes said in Ohio
is interesting to me because even though he's ran statewide
(27:52):
before as a as the lieutenant governor, he's never had
a Senate race. And so he's having to kind of
reintroduce himself to voters. And I think people are cautious
about whether or not he can pull it off. And
I think he can. And I think that's one that
will surprise. I don't think anyone will be surprised when
(28:12):
Susan Collins wins. I think people will say, well, she's
a killer. You know, she's defied the odds before. She's
going to do it again. So I think if she
banks the win, that's a little bit more expected. And
the last race, you know, we didn't talk too much
about this, but I think the last race that I
want to see the Republican pull it off and kind
(28:34):
of surprise everyone is Dan Sullivan in Alaska. And that's
a tight race, too, for various reasons, mainly ranked choice voting.
And there's a second Dan Sullivan, as you know, that's
on the ballot, which is crazy. And so if he
pulls that off, I think people are going to breathe
a sigh of relief and be quite surprised that he
was able to do it. despite really the stack of
(28:56):
cards being rigged against him with ranked choice voting.
Speaker 1 (28:59):
And it can take a while to get the election results.
Speaker 2 (29:03):
And I worked on his first Senate race as part
of his general consulting team. And it can take a
while to get results there. So we might not know
the balance of power on election night.
Speaker 1 (29:16):
Yes.
Speaker 2 (29:16):
I guess we're kind of getting used to these days, unfortunately. Totally.
Speaker 3 (29:20):
Totally.
Speaker 2 (29:22):
All right. Well, you know, the House is going to
be tough, I think, because I think there's only four
seats that Dems need to pick up. But the Senate
sounds like it's going to be a dogfight and might
not be a foregone conclusion right now.
Speaker 1 (29:35):
That's right.
Speaker 3 (29:36):
I would say the House is your jump ball and
the Senate is the insurance.
Speaker 1 (29:40):
Policy. All right. We'll take that. We'll take it. Jessica Anderson,
appreciate your time. and always breaking this down for us.
Thank you so much. Awesome.
Speaker 3 (29:51):
Thanks for having me.
Speaker 2 (29:52):
That was Jessica Anderson, president of the Sentinel Action Fund.
Speaker 1 (29:55):
Appreciate her for making the time to come on the show.
Speaker 2 (29:57):
Appreciate you guys at home for listening every Tuesday and Thursday,
but you can listen throughout the week.
Speaker 1 (30:03):
Also, thank John Cascio, my producer, for putting this show together.
Until next time.
The Clay Travis and Buck Sexton Show News
Hosts And Creators
Clay Travis
Buck Sexton
Show Links
WebsiteNewsletterPopular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
The Joe Rogan Experience
The official podcast of comedian Joe Rogan.