I still think that Rodgers gets way too much credit for far too little substance. Everyone (at least in this subreddit) talks about how progressive she supposedly is, but her actual policy positions are far and few between, and the ones that do exist have little depth to them.

She just seems to be Progressive Vibes ™ : The Candidate. At best, she seems incompetent for entering races at a significant disadvantage, as you mention, and for not listing policy positions on her website, like any other damn candidate does.

For the record, I don't think that there was a good candidate in this race. Bagby takes far too much corporate money for my liking. Rodgers was a 'no' from me for the reasons I just described, and Adams is, well, Adams. She had the staffer scandal and, while she's no Bagby, she's taken a few corporate bucks here and there. Ultimately, I was one of the 464 to vote for Adams, but I wasn't particularly happy about it. She also comes across as incompetent, but at least she has tangible policy positions.

I'm really glad that this election is about as low-stakes as it gets since the districts will be redrawn in November, because hoo boy, I think we can do better.