• Strongly Dem (42)
  • Likely Dem (3)
  • Barely Dem (2)
  • Exactly tied (0)
  • Barely GOP (1)
  • Likely GOP (3)
  • Strongly GOP (49)
  • No Senate race
This date in 2022 2018 2014
New polls:  
Dem pickups : (None)
GOP pickups : (None)
Political Wire logo Trump Moves to Expand Access to IVF
Judge Refuses to Block Elon Musk from 7 Agencies
A Head-Spinning Shift in Relations
FDA’s Food Safety Chief Quits
RFK Jr. Says Nothing ‘Off Limits’ in His Health Agenda
Trump’s Cuts Could Make National Parks Less Safe
TODAY'S HEADLINES (click to jump there; use your browser's "Back" button to return here)
      •  Adams Administration in Crisis
      •  DOGE May Have Penetrated the IRS, SSA
      •  Today's Crazypants Roundup
      •  Trump May Want to Think Twice Before He Crosses the E.U.
      •  Resistance Report

Adams Administration in Crisis

The ongoing soap opera in New York City delivered another oh-so-exciting episode yesterday, as four high-ranking members of the city government tendered their resignations.

Stepping down are First Deputy Mayor Maria Torres-Springer, Deputy Mayor for Health and Human Services Anne Williams-Isom, Deputy Mayor for Operations Meera Joshi and Deputy Mayor for Public Safety Chauncey Parker. That is half the city's deputy mayors, including the most significant among them, as the first deputy mayor is responsible for day-to-day administration of the city. The four resignees, while being appropriately polite and formal, made clear that they are quitting because they want no part of a (possibly illegal) quid pro quo on immigration policy with the Trump administration.

Adams, for his part, offered the usual "thanks for your loyal service" pleasantries, and pledged that his administration will keep on keepin' on. He can, of course, appoint new deputy mayors—and this time around, perhaps choose people who are going to be more... morally pliable, for lack of a better term. And while we do not know the man all that well, since we are not residents of New York City or State, he seems like he is exactly the type to hold on until there's nothing left to hold on to. And even if that were not his natural inclination, his powers as mayor are the only real leverage he has when it comes to persuading Donald Trump to protect Adams from a trial and a very probable prison sentence. (And, by the way, prison inmates just LOVE former cops.)

What it amounts to is that the ball is almost certainly in the court of Gov. Kathy Hochul (D-NY). Here is a list of some of the varied, and often conflicting, things she undoubtedly has on her mind as she considers whether to exercise her power to remove Adams:

  • She and Adams have generally worked well together; there's no guarantee the Governor will have a harmonious relationship with the person elected as Adams' successor.

  • Adams has the same basic base as... Andrew Cuomo, who would almost certainly jump in if there's a special election for a new mayor, and who may well win, simply because other candidates would have less time to build name recognition. Presumably, the working relationship between Hochul and the guy she replaced as governor would be awkward, to say the least.

  • Hochul, who is not popular, is up for reelection next year. If she alienates Black voters, who are also a part of Adams' base, she could be done for.

  • Democrats in New York State government largely want Adams gone. That includes Hochul's handpicked lieutenant governor, Antonio Delgado (D). For some, this is a question of ethics. For others, they don't want an Adams-shaped anchor around their necks heading into an election year. For most, it's probably both things.

  • Trump very much wants Adams to stay in power because the White House is not going to have de facto kompromat on the person who might replace Adams. For at least 80 days, that would be Public Advocate Jumaane Williams, who is pro-Gazans and is definitely not anti-immigrant. He would definitely give Trump an earful.

    In order to keep Adams firmly in place, Trump might turn the screws on Hochul. In particular, the President has already been carping about New York City's new congestion pricing. He could kill that initiative by yanking the federal permits that allow New York to charge the extra tolls, which would hurt Hochul and would give him a "win" he could brag about. Alternatively, he could withhold federal highway funding from New York State. Or he could do both things. These courses of action, whether the former, the latter, or both, could deprive New York of billions of dollars the state needs for infrastructure. This would not be helpful for the Governor's reelection bid.

At the moment, given the different directions in which she is being pulled, Hochul is playing things very close to the vest. She hasn't yet thrown Adams under the bus (the subway?), but she also refuses to commit to keeping him in office.

Ultimately, a resolution here is likely going to come down to two things. The first is the decision that will be made by Judge Dale Ho. As long as there is a possibility of Adams being put on trial, then Hochul can punt by saying "we have to let the process play out." If and when it becomes clear there will be no trial, then the pressure on Hochul to step in and make sure some measure of justice is meted out will be intense.

The second consideration is the posture that will be adopted by key Black leaders in New York City. Already, some prominent members of that community have turned against Adams, seeing him as a Trump flunky. However, there are three key Black residents of New York City who have yet to call for Adams' ouster: House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries and Rep. Gregory Meeks (both D-NY), and Rev. Al Sharpton. If circumstances leave Hochul in a position where she is under a hundred atmospheres' worth of pressure to cashier Adams, she will speak to that trio and ask them to support her play. If at least two of them agree, Adams' goose is definitely cooked. (Z)

DOGE May Have Penetrated the IRS, SSA

The war that Elon Musk and DOGE are waging against Americans' data privacy has opened two new fronts: the Internal Revenue Service and the Social Security Administration.

Keep in mind that DOGE operates in secret, and so it is very hard to know exactly how much "progress" Musk & Co. have made in breaching the various systems they want to breach. However, there is general agreement that the IRS' systems have already fallen to Elon and the Muskrats. If so, that would give DOGE a vast amount of information about Americans' assets, tax liabilities, bank accounts, and the like.

Inasmuch as Co-Presidents Musk and Donald Trump do not bother to explain themselves, even when they hold the occasional bizarro Oval Office press conference, it's not entirely clear why the two men want this information. Maybe it's just a case of "the more information we collect, the better." Perhaps they want to use the information to blackmail or punish political enemies. Perhaps they want to alter their own records, so as to reduce their personal tax bills. Or it could be chaos and "breaking things" for the sake of chaos and "breaking things." Any or all of these things are possible.

On the other hand, with the Social Security Administration, things are at least a little bit clearer. Once Musk turned his greedy little eyes on the SSA, interim administrator Michelle King, a nonpolitical appointee with 30 years of public service, resisted as long as she could, and then was compelled to resign. Not unlike the search for a government lawyer who would actually file a dismissal request in the Eric Adams case, it took some time to find someone in the SSA hierarchy willing to be a loyal lackey. The administration finally found that person by searching—wait for it—eX-Twitter, looking for a user who was both an SSA staffer and had written pro-DOGE tweets. The new interim administrator is a fellow named Leland Dudek. In an e-mail announcing his new (if temporary) promotion, Dudek promised "transparency." It is not clear if he's already given Musk the keys to the kingdom, or if that will happen sometime later this week.

Musk's play here is pretty obvious. If he's actually going to cut government spending by hundreds of billions of dollars (say, to allow for tax cuts for billionaires), he has to take a hatchet to either military spending or to spending on social welfare programs. Since cutting the military budget is a non-starter for Republicans, that means social welfare, and the two biggest outlays in that area are Social Security and Medicare/Medicaid. Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) is currently at work on the latter, and Musk is now working on the former. All of his talk about fraud and inefficiency in Social Security payments (like the ridiculous claim that some people are being paid benefits until their 150th birthday) is clearly meant to give him cover to start hacking away.

Whether Musk is actually able to slash Social Security spending, or Johnson is able to cut spending on Medicare/Medicaid, remain up in the air. There is the possibility of lawsuits, of course, particularly in terms of anything Musk might do with the SSA. Meanwhile, it may eventually occur to someone in a position of power that if the Republicans take an axe to the most popular federal program (Social Security) or the second most popular federal program (Medicare/Medicaid), the GOP will reap the whirlwind. We'll see. (Z)

Today's Crazypants Roundup

There are some machinations by the current administration that are so egregious they merit their own items. But there's also an unbelievable wave of lesser machinations that deserve at least some attention, even if it's not practical to give them the full treatment. We very much look forward to a week when there aren't enough of those under-the-radar stories to justify a roundup like this. But that week is not this week, that is for sure. Here's (some of) the latest:

  • You're Fired, Part I: This is the latest object lesson showing that Elon Musk, DOGE, and the Trump administration have no idea what they are doing as they fire federal employees willy-nilly in the name of "efficiency" or "cost savings" or whatever. As we mentioned in passing yesterday, roughly 300 staffers of the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) were given their walking papers on Thursday of last week. Somehow, none of the people who approved the firings (which, let's be honest, was probably just one junior tech bro and one senior tech bro) knew what the NNSA does, despite it being right there in the name. As it turns out, it's probably best to have experts keeping an eye on the nation's nukes, to make sure they're all properly maintained, still stable, still there, etc. That lesson is underscored when, just an hour or so after you fire the NNSA folks, Russia bombs Chernobyl.

    So, DOGE tried to reverse the terminations. However, because many of the employees had been cut off from their government e-mail accounts, and because they weren't exactly keeping an eye out for a "Ha! Just kidding! You're not fired!" message, the administration had trouble reaching many of the NNSA folks. Reportedly, enough of them are back on the job now to keep NNSA running. However, they have been given very clear notice that their jobs aren't really safe, especially once Co-President Musk figures out a way for AI to keep an eye on the nuclear arms. So, quite a few of the re-hired staffers told reporters (off the record) that they are putting résumés out there, and will be departing as soon as they land a non-government job.

  • You're Fired, Part II: On Friday, Trump ordered the firing of 18 immigration judges. Thirteen of them had not even been sworn in yet. Immigration judges are not Article III judges, who have lifetime tenure. They are civil servants who are appointed by the AG and serve at her pleasure.

    The immigration courts currently have a backlog of 3.7 million pending cases. Firing immigration judges will not speed up processing all the cases, but it is possible that Trump will appoint new judges who promise to reject every applicant and take no more than 1 minute per case. That way, in an 8-hour work day, a judge could reject 480 asylum seekers (or 2,400 per week). That works out to 120,000 per judge-year. If 31 judges could keep up the pace of one rejection per minute, the whole docket could be cleared by March 2026, well before the midterms.

    Of course, Trump may have reasons other than immigration ones for the mass firing. It could be to send judges across the spectrum a message that they could be next. After all, the Constitution is just a musty old piece of paper stored in the National Archives somewhere. This could make some of them afraid to issue rulings he won't like and he could try to fire them, just to see what will happen. Constitution or no Constitution, Trump can order Elon Musk to find their entry in the OPM database and just hit the DEL key. Poof! Gone! Alternatively, Trump could try to have lackeys in Congress impeach one or more "unfriendly" judges (see below for more). Such efforts won't succeed, since there's no way that 14 Democrats will vote for a politically motivated impeachment. But it would still drag a judge's name through the mud, and would also be useful for fundraising.

  • You're Fired, Part III: And here is yet another entry for the "It's a sh**show" file. Also on Friday, around the same time the immigration judges were fired, the Trump administration sent termination notices to 950 employees of the Indian Health Service (IHS). Because if there's anyone who's had it too good, too long, at the hands of the U.S. government, it's the Native Americans.

    The IHS was already understaffed, and Native Americans already have the lowest life expectancy of any ethnic group in the United States. So, firing a bunch of IHS employees is inherently pretty cruel. But beyond that, the administration completely botched the terminations, sending out a bunch of notices, and then announcing that nurses and doctors are exempt. So, there are multiple hundreds of people who don't quite know if they are fired or not (especially since there are several different kinds of nurses in the medical profession).

  • Speaking of Quid Pro Quos (Quids Pro Quo?): You could make a pretty good argument that this story is about as corrupt as what's happening with Eric Adams. However, it almost entirely escaped everyone's attention, because there's just so much crazypantsery going on (yes, it's gotten so bad that we just coined a brand new word).

    As we reminded readers on Friday, Donald Trump is a WWE Hall of Famer. He was chosen for that "honor," and inducted, by former WWE CEO Vince McMahon. The reason that McMahon is the former CEO is that he was the target of a federal investigation into allegations of sexual misconduct. Like former senator Bob Menendez, this was the second go-round for McMahon, which is why he became too radioactive for the WWE to tolerate anymore.

    However, McMahon is not the target of a federal investigation anymore, as the investigation has been dropped. McMahon's attorney says that decision was made months ago, and it just so happened to become official after Donald Trump became president. If you believe that... well, you also probably believe that professional wrestling is real. In any event, Trump and the McMahon family have had a cozy relationship for a very long time, as the McMahons like his politics and his showmanship and he likes the McMahons' money.

  • Profiles in Brownnosing, Part I: Recognizing that Donald Trump would like to fire a few shots across the bows of various federal judges, and seeing an opportunity to get in good with the Dear Leader, Rep. Andrew Clyde (R-GA) filed articles of impeachment against Judge John J. McConnell Jr., who ordered the White House to lift its federal spending freeze. This caused Rep. Eli Crane (R-AZ) to kick himself for not thinking of this idea first; he is going to make up for lost time by filing articles of impeachment against Judge Paul Engelmayer, who blocked DOGE from accessing the Treasury Department's secure computers. Crane says more such articles are coming, as soon as he can figure out which judges to target.

    As we note above, there is zero chance these efforts go anywhere. Senate Democrats aren't going to impeach a judge for doing his job, and Mike Johnson is not likely to want the embarrassment of tilting at stupid windmills. So, the Clyde and Crane bills are just political theater, for benefit of an audience of two—i.e., the Co-Presidents.

  • Profiles in Brownnosing, Part II: Rep. Claudia Tenney (R-NY) calls the phony impeachments of Clyde and Crane, and raises them a phony federal holiday. Yes, she has just introduced a bill to make Donald Trump's birthday a national holiday, "recognizing him as the founder of America's Golden Age." Just remember, it's not a cult.

  • Newspeak, Part I: Stonewall is a national monument. That means it has a webpage run by the National Park Service. Until last week, that webpage recognized June 28, 1969, as an important day in the quest for LGBTQ civil rights. Now, the webpage advises that it was an important day in the quest for LGB civil rights. On the orders of someone in the Trump White House, transgender and queer people have been scrubbed from the story. Presumably, the next update will rechristen it as the Stonewall Jackson national monument. Though note, that's the Stonewall Jackson who served in Patton's Third Army as a janitor, not any other Stonewall Jackson you might have heard of.

  • Newspeak, Part II: The White House is also hard at work on lists of banned books. The administration can't quite reach into schools run by the states, but it can dictate rules for federal schools (e.g., those on military bases). Among the recent bans are No Truth Without Ruth, Becoming Nicole, and Freckleface Strawberry.

    No Truth Without Ruth is about Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, while Becoming Nicole is about trans actress and activist Nicole Maines, so it's easy enough to figure out how those ended up in the crosshairs. However, Freckleface Strawberry, written by actress Julianne Moore, is about a 7-year-old girl who doesn't like her freckles, but then... learns to be happy about them. Very subversive stuff. Of course, her hair IS red, and we know what the message is there. Just wait until someone in the White House realizes that the book Robin Hood is about a fellow who takes from the rich and gives to the poor.

  • Adventures in Stupidity, Part I: We're not sure who the dumb one is here—Trump, or his audience. However, apparently in service of his Canada annexation plans, the President has been obsessing over the 1908 treaty between Canada and the U.S. Well, actually, it was between the U.K. and the U.S., since the Brits handled diplomacy for the 'Nades back then.

    It's possible readers are not familiar with the Canada-U.S. treaty of 1908. If so, then they have something in common with 99.99999% of the population. Heck, when Trump started prattling on about it, even the Canadian government didn't quite know what he was talking about. It turns out it's one of several diplomatic agreements that clarified relatively small matters related to the U.S.-Canada border. There were seven other treaties on that subject negotiated in the 19th century, and two others in the 20th century, in 1910 and 1925.

    At the moment, nobody knows exactly why Trump has decided this particular treaty is so important. Maybe he just read the title (or had someone read it to him)—Concerning the Boundary Between the United States and the Dominion of Canada From the Atlantic Ocean to the Pacific Ocean—and did not move beyond that, enough to realize it's a relatively trivial document. Maybe someone actually convinced Trump there's some deeply meaningful dimension to this very obscure agreement. Maybe Trump thinks that by waving it around, he can scare the Canadians (unlikely) or impress the Fox crowd (more plausible). You never know with him.

  • Adventures in Stupidity, Part II: Ok, sometimes you do know with him. Several times this week, Trump has sent out fundraising e-mails imploring his supporters to send him money, so he can... fight off Democratic efforts to impeach him. That's right, if you don't send your money RIGHT NOW, he warns, "Democrats could be impeaching me tomorrow."

    Obviously, that won't be happening, as the Democrats do not have a majority in the House. We are certain Trump knows that—he's got extensive experience in being impeached, after all. But he's hoping the rubes are not as knowledgeable.

And there you have it, at least for now. The damnable thing is that we actually had so many stories that might appear in this space that we simply could not include them all. Not only because of time and length constraints, but also because we just can't dump that much stuff on readers all at once. So, look for another crazypants item later this week—maybe tomorrow, maybe Friday. (Z)

Trump May Want to Think Twice Before He Crosses the E.U.

When he is acting in his capacity as a businessman, Donald Trump can bully pretty much everyone he deals with by virtue of being the boss, or else having lots of money and lawyers. When he is acting in his capacity as a politician, at least domestically, he retains the same power because he commands the fanatical loyalty of the base.

Because he meets so little resistance in most areas of his life, Trump might forget there are some circumstances where bullying might not work. We will have an item about the (increasingly shaky) diplomatic relationship between Trump and the leaders of Europe tomorrow. Today, however, it's a briefer item about the risks of slapping tariffs on the European Union.

If Trump does try to hit the E.U. with new duties—which he has certainly promised to do—the impact in the U.S. will be felt very unequally. Here is a list of the 20 U.S. states who rely the most on E.U. products, with: (1) what percentage of the state's total imports come from the E.U.; (2) the total value of the goods the state imports from the E.U.; and (3) whether the state has a Senate race scheduled for 2026:

State Pct. Imports Total Value Senate?
Indiana 46.21% $58,696,886,377 No
North Carolina 45.19% $43,190,299,106 Yes
Rhode Island 38.76% $4,811,129,055 Yes
New Hampshire 34.34% $4,210,174,126 Yes
Maryland 33.38% $16,922,259,371 No
South Carolina 32.49% $22,516,150,106 Yes
Kentucky 31.45% $34,508,188,293 Yes
Pennsylvania 29.92% $48,948,155,420 No
Arkansas 29.26% $2,347,996,891 Yes
New Jersey 26.71% $60,043,736,742 Yes
Wisconsin 26.33% $11,291,219,102 No
Connecticut 25.08% $7,733,489,979 No
Massachusetts 24.53% $14,854,690,324 Yes
Virginia 23.00% $12,617,378,403 Yes
Kansas 22.73% $3,815,663,236 Yes
Florida 22.65% $33,055,394,955 Yes
Georgia 21.87% $38,709,201,060 Yes
Alabama 21.84% $9,572,045,837 Yes
Iowa 21.63% $3,234,515,753 Yes
Ohio 20.46% $20,713,680,097 Yes

Putting a tariff on imports from the E.U. makes their products more expensive for consumers. Economists call it "inflation." As a general rule, consumers (some of whom are also voters), tend not to like this inflation-thingie.

As you can see, there are a lot of red states on that list. There are a lot of purple states. And there are a whole lot of states with Senate elections next year. Meanwhile, the states that do not trade all that much with the E.U. are mostly, as you might guess, the ones that are farthest away from the E.U. In other words, the states that will be least affected by reciprocal tariffs from the Europeans are mostly commie pinko states like California, Oregon, Washington and Hawaii.

It remains the case that Trump is personally convinced that tariffs are magical, and will fix... stuff? Further, he has promised bigly tariffs, including on the E.U., over and over. However, whenever it comes time for the rubber to hit the road, he wilts, presumably knowing that he'll have to own the consequences. What this means is that we haven't the faintest idea how this will actually play out. (Z)

Resistance Report

A couple of weeks ago, we asked readers if they would like us to add a weekly feature about people fighting the good fight for democracy, at a time when democracy is under attack.

Before we report the results, we will explain that when we ask readers "Should we do [X]?," a baseline result is something like 65% yes, 35% no. Put another way, people who like the idea are considerably more likely to click through and vote, whereas people who dislike the idea are less likely to do so. Consequently, we would only give serious consideration to the idea if support was substantially north of 65%. As it turns out, we need not have concerned ourselves with handicapping the results. Support for the idea was... quite substantial. That is to say, the "ayes" were... 97.6% of the vote. That's really a staggering result. Almost as lopsided as a Russian election.

That means that we need to pick a name for the new feature. We went through the multiple thousands of suggestions, picked the ones that we liked, added some that were clearly popular, and then added a couple ideas of our own. Here are the 25 finalists that this process produced:

  • A Republic, if You Can Keep It
  • Daily Constitutional
  • Democracy Dies in Darkness
  • Don't Tread on Me
  • Fight the Power
  • Good Trouble
  • Inglourious Basterds
  • Looking for the Helpers
  • Nevertheless, They Resisted
  • Profiles in Courage
  • Rage Against the Machine
  • Resistance Is Utile
  • SÍ Se Puede
  • The Fifth Column
  • The Good Fight
  • The Loyal Opposition
  • The Ohm Meter
  • The Patrick Henry Files
  • The Rebel Alliance
  • The Revolution Will Not Be Televised
  • The White Rose
  • This Feature Kills Fascists
  • Twilight's Last Gleaming
  • Vox Populi
  • We the People

If you would care to vote for your favorites, the survey is here.

And as long as we are on the subject, some of the small minority who opposed this idea left messages like this one:

Many, many years ago (during the Obama years), you made at least some attempt to be somewhat down the middle, and fair and balanced. But Trump broke you guys when he was first elected in 2017. It's a damn shame, as I would say you were the first site to use the electoral college maps to show who was winning. Now, everyone does that. I read you less and less, as you have minimal objectivity. I'm sure you don't care that I barely read your site anymore, but there you go.

When Barack Obama and John McCain were facing off against each other in 2008, they were playing by the same rules, and they both adhered to the same basic standards of both propriety and decency. Recall, for example, McCain's famous remarks about how Obama is a decent man, just one who has different ideas. When politics is simply a contest of different ideas and of different strategies, it is very plausible to be "fair and balanced." It is very easy to say, "This candidate has adopted this position, and they are doing so to appeal to this constituency" and "That candidate has made that strategic choice, and that might not work out for this reason."

However, Trumpism is not just about different ideas and different strategies. It's that, too, but it's also about a fundamental lack of respect for half the people in the country (or more), for democracy, and for the rule of law. It's about demagoguery, and corruption, and selfishness. Writing pieces that look askance at those behaviors is not about Democrats vs. Republicans, it's about democracy and decency vs. autocracy and indecency. The rule of law is not partisan. Sometimes people with a (D) are on the wrong side of the law. Eric Adams is a corrupt sleazeball, and the party with which he is registered does not change that. Bob Menendez (D) and Rod Blagojevich (D) are also Democrats we have hounded endlessly in the past for their corruption.

Sometimes people with an (R) are on the right side of the law. Liz Cheney (R) and Adam Kinzinger (R) leap to mind, and we've written about them many times. Or, if you would like a more recent example, Danielle Sassoon. She is not an elected politician, but she is definitely a Republican who called her former boss and idol, Antonin Scalia, "the real deal." We commended her bravery earlier this week—that's not partisan.

When a political faction is quite clearly doing things that are wrong, and lawless, and immoral, then a "neutral" posture isn't actually neutral, it's a posture of passive acquiescence to the wrongdoers. At a certain point, there were not two valid points of view in pre-World War II Germany, or the Civil Rights-era South, or South Africa during apartheid. It is clear to us that we have arrived at that point in 21st century American history, and so we must adjust. Anyone who thinks it's actually possible to give both sides of the story, these days, should take a long look at The Washington Post or The Los Angeles Times. How's that working out for them?

Or, let's put it this way: We would love NOTHING more than to do the site the way we did it back in 2004 or 2008. We do not like writing items like "Today's Crazypants Roundup." Nonetheless, write them we do. And we do so in hope that we can contribute, in some small way, to getting the U.S. political system back on track. If that somehow happens, then we can go back to doing the site we used to do. But at the moment, we are in a political context where that bygone version of Electoral-Vote.com literally cannot exist. At this point in history, Democrats have more respect for the rule of law than Republicans. That's the Trumpers' fault, not ours. But we will do our best, especially in the new feature, to highlight Republicans who when faced with a choice between right and wrong choose right, even if that is not the party line. (V & Z)


If you wish to contact us, please use one of these addresses. For the first two, please include your initials and city.

To download a poster about the site to hang up, please click here.


Email a link to a friend.

---The Votemaster and Zenger
Feb17 Calls for Adams to Resign or Be Removed are Growing Louder
Feb17 People Will Soon See the Effects of the Government Layoffs
Feb17 It's Open Season on Musk
Feb17 Sometimes the Battles Are Personal
Feb17 U.S. and Russian Officials to Meet on How to End the War in Ukraine
Feb17 Ukraine Rejects Trump's Offer on Minerals
Feb17 Trump's Media Company Lost over $400 Million Last Year
Feb17 It's Going to Be a Measle-y Future
Feb16 Sunday Mailbag
Feb15 Saturday Q&A
Feb15 Reader Question of the Week: Cult-ure Shock
Feb14 Tariffs: Trump Acts Like the WWE Hall of Famer That He Is
Feb14 Federal Workforce: A Lot of People Will Soon Be Office Packers
Feb14 Trump and Adams: A Corrupt Relationship Blossoms
Feb14 In Congress: RFK Jr. Approved, Cassidy, McConnell Can't Find the Special Sauce
Feb14 Jockeying for Position: 2026 Races Continue to Heat Up
Feb14 I Read the News Today, Oh Boy: Eddie Murphy Is "The Nutty Professor"
Feb14 This Week in Schadenfreude: Tesla Starts the Year in a Hole
Feb14 This Week in Freudenfreude: Time to Head to the Beach, Boys
Feb13 It's Official, Musk is Now the Senior Co-President
Feb13 Senate and House Are Now on a Collision Course
Feb13 Split Decision in the Appeals Courts
Feb13 Trump's Next Target: (Non-)Regulation of the Banks
Feb13 Inflation Keeps Rising
Feb13 Voting Rights Battles to Watch
Feb13 Other Countries May Refuse to Share Intelligence with Gabbard
Feb13 The Billion-Dollar Senate
Feb13 Democrats Should Send Joe Manchin a Valentine's Day Card
Feb12 Musk, Trump Speak to America
Feb12 Trumpy Fuel Thrown on Gaza Fire
Feb12 Reproductive Choice Remains Under Attack
Feb12 In Congress
Feb12 Haaland Jumps in on New Mexico Governor's Race
Feb12 Democrats Unveil Battle Plan for State Legislatures
Feb11 Today's Crazypants Roundup
Feb11 Welcome to New Denmark
Feb10 Judges Start Making Rulings
Feb10 Russell Vought Has a Mission: Burn It to the Ground...
Feb10 ...And Vought Is Not the Only One
Feb10 New York Democrats Are Starting to Play Hardball
Feb10 Senate Leapfrogs the House on the Budget
Feb10 Trump to Impose More Tariffs
Feb10 Another One of Musk's Merry Band of Hackers Is a White Supremacist
Feb10 Abigail Spanberger Should Send Elon Musk a Thank You Card
Feb09 Sunday Mailbag
Feb08 Saturday Q&A
Feb08 Reader Question of the Week: Rally 'round the Flag
Feb07 MuskWatch: Pushing All the Wrong Buttons?
Feb07 Pam Bondi: Bill Barr, the Sequel
Feb07 Donald Trump: He Was Nailed to the Cross for Me