this post was submitted on 12 Jul 2026
762 points (99.0% liked)

politics

30421 readers
2845 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. 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:

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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.
  4. 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.
  5. 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

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] bdonvr@thelemmy.club 112 points 4 days ago (4 children)

Actually this is massive, massive news. The republican primaries are already over in SC. Given his sudden death likely nobody was prepping a campaign (Graham was already running for re-election). They're gonna have to have a special primary in just a few weeks, and only a few months to build and win a campaign.

Huge huge opportunity for Dems.

[–] SailorFuzz@lemmy.world 142 points 4 days ago (5 children)

never underestimate the dems ability to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.

[–] bdonvr@thelemmy.club 36 points 4 days ago

Oh I said it was an opportunity for them, certainly not that I expected them to capitalize upon it lmao

[–] TheMadCodger@piefed.social 11 points 4 days ago (1 children)

If the Dems found a lamp and got three wishes, they'd negotiate down to one wish, and then wish for something they thought the Republicans would want.

Leftists would fight with the genie for not being left enough for them.

[–] Microtonal_Banana@lemmy.zip 6 points 4 days ago

His opponent was already doing really well.

Given enough time. The short timeframe could actually be a boon.

[–] Sabrinamycarpet@sh.itjust.works 0 points 4 days ago (1 children)
[–] SailorFuzz@lemmy.world 1 points 4 days ago (1 children)

awwww, did baby learn a new word and uses it to describe everything now?

cynicism != doomerism

And pedantic to boot. 👍

[–] jordanlund@lemmy.world 23 points 4 days ago (3 children)
[–] bdonvr@thelemmy.club 39 points 4 days ago (2 children)

Lindsey Graham only got 54% last go... It's far from impossible.

[–] halcyoncmdr@piefed.social 30 points 4 days ago (1 children)

It's unlikely... But given the negativity across the board for Trump's shit this year resulting in massive shifts in previously pretty strong Trump districts, combined with a baseline of only 54%... It's not an impossibility at all.

[–] arrow74@lemmy.zip 8 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago)

Trump helped turn Georgia blue in 2020 and has made it a senatorial swing state. He's more unpopular now

[–] jordanlund@lemmy.world -1 points 4 days ago

This will be the best opportunity, but the last time was a Presidential election, not a mid term. Voter turnout is not the same.

Look at the last mid term election:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2014_United_States_Senate_election_in_South_Carolina

672,942 - 54.27%
480,933 - 38.78%

[–] arrow74@lemmy.zip 11 points 4 days ago

The latest election in 2020 per your source was 54.44% for Graham and 44.17% for his opponent.

That is not an impossible margin. The Republicans will not benefit from running an incumbent, and the Republican party has never been more unpopular. This is a very good chance.

Just look at Georgia until Osoff and Warnock Georgia had been red for a very very long time. Just as long as South Carolina.

Past elections don't predict future elections. They are certainly indicators, but there's way more to it.

[–] Zedstrian@sopuli.xyz 4 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (1 children)

Fritz Hollings, a conservative Democrat (and therefore not far off from being a Republican), was a senator of South Carolina until 2005.

i mean back in the day (when i was young and naive. i swear things were really different then though!) conservatives from liberal states and liberals from conservative states had a lot in common. a hell of a lot more than they do now at least.

[–] aproposnix@piefed.social 9 points 4 days ago

Huge potential for the DSA.

[–] wonderingwanderer@sopuli.xyz 2 points 4 days ago

And after all that effort to cover up Mitch's death, too.

Republicans in shambles!