very cool that you got to do this for a SoS site. and looks great too

counting independents who caucus with democrats, it's eight www.politico.com/news/2025/11...

save your eyes, read elsewhere

popularism, except when it's democrats i like taking unpopular positions — then it's all progressives' fault

crazy for you to spin this and imply that 'm supporting paul lepage

you don't think it hurts golden in a general election to be very publicly tied to a president with a -10 to -20 approval rating **in his district?** come on

i think when an incumbent congressperson is very publicly pro-trump and pro-tariffs, including giving lots of interviews on this stuff, when those things are unpopular positions AND high salience in his seat, that matters.

it seems very obvious to me here that the story is that golden made political and policy decisions that hurt him, not that progressives drove him out. pro-tariffs is a losing gambit when cost of living anxiety is high. pro-trump is a losing stance when the president's approval is -10 in your seat.

'take positions that are popular in your district even if progressives don't like them' is potentially good general election advice, but not if the position you're taking is dramatically unpopular with he median voter in the district

not at all what I said. what I said was that one of golden's key positions over the last year is dramatically unpopular with _all_ the voters in ME-2, not just progressives, so blaming his retirement on progressives is dubious at best. I was responding to Matt's claim

if the argument from the "dems should be more moderate" crowd boils down to "dems should take positions that are popular with the median voter" (setting aside problems with this), then they should be criticizing golden for not doing that, not trying to blame his retirement on progressive organizing

is he a good fit for his district if he can't run for office successfully anymore?

he _was_ previously a good fit for his district, but that doesn't mean he would be forever