Boris Sanchez & Brianna Keilar: Pollster Shares Prediction For Race That He Thinks Could Send 'Shockwaves'

"Ahead of crucial off-year elections, in places like California, New York, New Jersey, and Virginia, pollster and communications strategist Frank Luntz joins CNN's Boris Sanchez and Brianna Keilar to share his predictions and discuss what he believes is at stake for voters nationwide." 

Source:CNN talking to Republican pollster Frank Luntz.

From CNN

So I just want to hit on one solid point (not that he only had 1 solid point) that Frank Luntz said here. And then we're going to go back in time to 2006 and I'm going to give a flashback about the political scene then and how that relates to 2025-26. 

So Brianna Keilar asked Republican pollster Frank Luntz a typical, mainstream media question: 

"OK Frank - what do you think tomorrow votes will say about the state of the political situation and how Americans feel about President Trump?" (Not her exact words. But very close) 

And Luntz responded with a very intelligent answer and said: 

"Tomorrow, the people won't decide what this means for President Trump and the Republican Party. The media will do that instead. Tomorrow, there are 3 local elections: 

A mayoral race in New York City 

Governors race in New Jersey and Virginia". (Again, not his words exactly. But very close) 

And before I give you the political flashback... before I got back to my desk today, a caught a CNN panel discussion with Kasie Hunt's show. And they were basically talking about the same thing. And it's not that they all agreed, but even a left-wing Democrat (Ashley Allison) and Republican pollster David Urban (who was MAGA before MAGA was cool in the Republican Party) agreed on this key point: tonight's election results are all local. 

In the Democratic Party, tonight's election results won't decide the debate between mainstream liberalism (or real liberalism) versus socialism. (Which is what some people call progressivism) These contests will decide New York City, New Jersey, and Virginia. NYC tends to be to the left of everyone east of the West Coast anyway, by-in-large. 

Tonight, assuming Democrats win all 3 races, all 3 elections will be local. With the winner of those races (assuming Democrats) running the race that's best for them and their community. Not trying to force mainstream liberalism (the real liberalism) or socialism, down the throats of the rest of the Democratic Party. 

And to give you the political flashback I was talking about... go back 15 years and it was either right before the 2010 mid-terms, or right after them and I was watching a C-SPAN panel discussion and they were talking about the impact of those mid-terms. And they had former U.S. Representatives Tom Davis (Republican, Virginia) and Martin Frost (Democrat, Texas) on that panel. 

And Representative Frost talked about the 2006 mid-terms where Democrats won back the House and Senate that year. And he was involved in the House Democrats effort to win back the House. He handled the recruiting for the Democrats. And he was basically making the same point that Frank Luntz made, but put it differently. He said the reason why Democrats won the House back in 06, is because they were able to target about 60 (give or take) House Republican seats, when they only needed to pick up 15 to win back the majority. And they made all of those races local. 

In 05-06, Democrats recruited candidates to fit the districts that they would run in. Instead of trying to find the most left-wing candidates they could find to win every race. Or the most mainstream Democrats that they could find to win each race. They picked and choose based on who was the best candidate to run in each race, based on the particular district, the incumbent they were running against, the issues the district were dealing with, etc. House Democrats didn't make the 2006 mid terms national and neither did Senate Democrats. They made every race that they won in that cycle, local. 

20 years ago, the way American voters tend to feel about Democrats, is not that different from today: 

Democrats are too left-wing or socialist 

Soft on defense, soft on crime, won't protect the streets and the country, etc. 

But Democrats won back Congress and a majority of the governorships, anyway. Why? Because the candidates that won, who defeated Republican incumbents, weren't seen as too far-left, too elitist, out-of-touch, soft on everything important, etc. 

The mainstream media like to say that Zohran Mamdani or Alexandria O. Cotez, or some other Socialist, is the future of the Democratic Party, because they're popular in their own communities, they're young, are hip, relate extremely well in pop culture, etc. But Democrats won't win back he House in 06 with Socialists running everywhere. Won't matter how cool young people think they are. They're just too out-touch for too many American voters, win everywhere where Democrats will have to win to take back the House and even come close to winning back the Senate. 

But Democrats make every district and state race local next year and run candidates that fit that district, whether it's a Socialist or mainstream Liberal, (you know, real Liberals) and they could have a great year next year. And a great year, or blue wave, is not about just winning back the House and picking up 5-10 seats. But picking 15-20-25 House seats and even winning back the Senate, or at least getting very close, with a 2-3 seat pickup. And you do that with candidate quality, not trying to turn the Democratic Party into a socialist party, or a just for Liberals party. 

You can follow me on Facebook, and Threads.

You can also see this post on WordPress.