politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:

- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
Be careful putting all your hope on this campaign. Kat's tied for second, not a distant second, but a solid second. She's well ahead (90%+) with 18-35's. But I do think she's a long shot after looking into the polling (the only polling on this race). I'd put the probability of Kat victory at 20%.
Poll was conducted via
It was about 22% land line, 77% text to web. Now I'm always a bit dubious of "polls of likely voters", because they almost exclusively rely on whatever cohort voted last election. But we work with the data we've got, not the data we want.
Something striking is that Biss is not as far ahead as we might expect them to be. I think its going to be tight on election day, tighter than what this poll suggests.
If you look at the cross tabs, Basically, Biss voters split between Kat and Fine as second choice, and all Fine voters break to Biss, and all Kat voters also break to Biss.
Basically, the least popular candidate to Fine voters is Kat, and the least popular candidate to Kat voters is fine. The electorate is very split in this race, and Biss is the benefactor of this. Likewise, there is substantial splitting on the DSA vote. Bushra got the DSA endorsement, not Kat, and that might have been the killer. There is clearly some local infighting happening here, where DSA leadership didn't like Kat or some such (maybe they view her as a primadonna). Regardless, almost all Bushra voters break to Kat, and they are one of the only candidates where most of their voters break in such a specific way.
If this were typical times and typical campaigns, i'd say Kats done and Biss is going to win this. However, key issue I identified early: this is a poll of "likely voters". Polling based on this kind of sampling suffers from a "the past is the future" assumption. One thing has been clear about Kat's campaign is that its not traditional. If Kat has been focusing on building votership into the primary, as in, recruiting unlikely voters to engage, then these results are actually very positive for her, because polling will always underestimate that strategy.
https://evanstonroundtable.com/2026/02/24/roundtable-poll-biss-leads-by-single-digits-over-abughazaleh-fine-in-congressional-primary/
No no. She's an outside long shot on a good day. I've seen the polls. But the Iran War puts some of her most popular issues at the forefront of the race.
With some enormous undecides floating in the wind. It's absolutely Biss's race to lose. But as Fine gets more money and support to challenge Kat and Biss, she's defining herself more strictly as a pro-Hasbara candidate. And she's doing it in a race where Israel is a highly polarizing issue.
Like with Mamdani, a big turnout spike would favor the more progressive primary challengers simply because the high profile issues favor Kat's campaign.
But also, it's Chicago Politics and that shit's cutthroat. Rahm Emanuel could jump out from behind a bush and just stab a bunch of candidates, idfk.
Yeah I'd need to look closely at the districts demographics and citing characteristics. Seeing Kat on stage for the debate, I think she came across as a little green. Which doesn't bother me, but there was a defensiveness in their tone that neither of the other top candidates had.
I might dig into the district a bit further later to look at the districts demographics. Ill ping you if I get around to that.