what are people's motivations for running in lost cause seats?

[freepcrusher]

It seems that even in the reddest districts, it's rare for the incumbent to run unopposed. If you're the person who runs against them - what's the point. You're just wasting time and money. On the off chance you manage to win - you probably end up in Doug Jones territory (i.e. losing by twenty the next time).

[Ferguson97]

1. A 1% chance at victory is still better than a 0% chance.

2. It can help downballot party members in local races.

3. It can raise their name recognition for future races.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

It's a 304 map we all know that, but you never know what will happen, D's can still retain the Trifecta in a midterm, the same seats are gonna be contested in 2024 midterms and D's absolutely need to hold the S heading into 2024, a little wave insurance in OH and NC Sen won't hurt to help Brown out in 2024, it out never know

[If my soul was made of stone]

I'd rather have every safe seat in the House be full of grifters like the folk lining up to challenge Marjorie Taylor Greene than have half of the seats in the legislature completely uncontested like it were the Alabama House of Representatives. Even if it's only nominal, the presence of any opposition is healthier than nothing.

[Buffalo Mayor Young Kim]

1) Attention
2) It can help you build up your name in the party for either local offices or consulting work
3) Sense of civic duty that voters should have a choice

Of course, probably all of them convince themselves if they just do everything right they can win

[Del Tachi]

Something like 750k people live in the average congressional district, so it's not like there'd be a shortage of local people looking to run for some esoteric reason or another. 

[Motorcity]

You never know if the incumbent will be caught with a live boy/dead girl

Nationally, you never know when a "October Surpise" will happen. Maybe the economy will tank or a war starts. This could cause a blue wave. Look at the 2008 election. The housing crash and wall street bailout probably made Democrats win a lot more seats.

But for most, its the thrill of running and civic duty. Its also the chance to do well and raise job prospects, as well as force republicans to divert funds from other more imporant races.

Jaime Harrison was never going to win his senate race, but how many millions did Republicans spend there instead of Arizona?

[GP270watch]

Political organization and activism shouldn't revolve around winning or losing elections. How do you build a network of sympathetic individuals into a collective that can actually make change if you don't engage everywhere.

[Mercenary]

Elections need to be competitive. If a reasonable moderate cannoy win in the district then its too one sided and needs to be redrawn.

[Crumpets]

I think it sounds fun. Just yell about stuff you believe in, you spend some time traveling around the state/district, and nobody blames you when you lose. What's not appealing?

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

With 500 days left and 1500 days left the Senate map is the same in 2022/2024 making OH, NC WI, PA, Must wins for D's if they want DC Statehood to ensure we have a majority to counter the R attacks forthcoming to get Trump or DeSantis elected Prez

There aren't any lost cause seats because we are working with identical maps

[Badger]

1) Attention
2) It can help you build up your name in the party for either local offices or consulting work
3) Sense of civic duty that voters should have a choice

Of course, probably all of them convince themselves if they just do everything right they can win

Correct answers.

[Secretary of State Liberal Hack]

Reliving boredom, also politicans by nature have a huge ego and it's easy to be overly optimistic/delusional about your chances.

[Indy Texas]

1. A 1% chance at victory is still better than a 0% chance.

2. It can help downballot party members in local races.

3. It can raise their name recognition for future races.

The third is generally a poor rationale. British political parties have a tradition of up-and-comers running as sacrificial lambs in unwinnable seats as a way to "pay their dues" and if they conduct themselves well and overperform the low expectations, they get the opportunity to run in a constituency where the party is favored or competitive. But no such system exists in the Democratic or Republican parties, in part because the parties themselves have relatively little control over who their nominees are.

I would say they're either:

1. Zealots and ideologues who relish the battle

2. Grifters out to bilk hardcore partisans who live outside the district out of money by saying and tweeting controversial things that the party base loves but is going to do nothing but alienate people in that district; a lot of overlap between this category and the one above

3. Party men/institutionalists who are involved in the local party organization and are running mainly out of a sense of duty to ensure that the party is running as full of a slate as possible (this type of Republican was very common in the days of the Solid South)

4. Political neophytes who aren't fully cognizant of how stacked the deck is against them, earnestly want to try their best and, who knows, maybe if there's a landslide they actually get lucky (Nancy Boyda in 2006 seems like a good example)

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Occasionally a lost cause candidate wins, like Audie Bock.

[Secretary of State Liberal Hack]

Occasionally a lost cause candidate wins, like Audie Bock.

Bock announced her run against Barbara Lee in the 2002 primary as a Democrat, arguing that Lee's vote against the war in Afghanistan was unpatriotic.[4] She later withdrew from the race before the filing deadline.[4]

The highest ranking Green Party every elected, ladies and gentelmen.

[Pericles]

Even the most lopsided seats have quite a lot of people who don't like the dominant party and they should have someone to vote for.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Occasionally a lost cause candidate wins, like Audie Bock.

Bock announced her run against Barbara Lee in the 2002 primary as a Democrat, arguing that Lee's vote against the war in Afghanistan was unpatriotic.[4] She later withdrew from the race before the filing deadline.[4]

The highest ranking Green Party every elected, ladies and gentelmen.

Ironic, but they had a good politician with former Richmond mayor Gayle McLaughlin. Richmond had success fighting crime by paying people to stay out of trouble.

[Gary JG]

I have contested a lot of local elections in the British town I live in. I hold the all time record for the most losing races in the area. I can say that as I researched local elections back to the formation of the Local Board of Health in 1863, which developed into an Urban District in 1894, a Municipal Borough in 1938 and is currently a Borough with unitary council status.

I never came close to winning an election or ran the sort of campaign which might win.

I was trying to provide added credibility to other members of my party, some of whom did win in other parts of the Borough. It also provided an opportunity for people to vote for my party in the wards where I stood, which might have slightly increased the vote in parliamentary elections. The more active a party is, the more credible it becomes to the electorate.

[longtimelurker]

It seems that even in the reddest districts, it's rare for the incumbent to run unopposed. If you're the person who runs against them - what's the point. You're just wasting time and money. On the off chance you manage to win - you probably end up in Doug Jones territory (i.e. losing by twenty the next time).

The Republican Party in the south ran candidates for governor, senator, and congress for decades (~1900 - 1950) that were doomed to fail.  Until they didn't.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

I'm moving to the Albany area in about a month and if I end up staying there for a few years I'm considering mounting a quixotic run against Stefanik 1. on principle, 2. because I enjoy getting to know localities and their cultures, which is most of what a House campaign is about, and 3. to be immortalized in Ballotpedia article form.