Nine years ago today, then-North Carolina Governor Roy Cooper signed a bill that repealed a law meant to keep gender-confused men out of women’s bathrooms, a policy he called “mean spirited” and “a stain” on the state’s reputation. 
While Cooper, currently running for U.S. Senate, now <a href="https://x.com/townhallcom/status/1949831222382715262?s=20">dodges</a> questions about his positions on transgender ideology, a new ad from the National Republican Senatorial Committee wants to make sure voters don’t forget how passionately he fought to allow transgender-identifying men in women’s bathrooms back in 2017. The ad, first shared with The Daily Wire, compiles Cooper’s numerous comments attacking North Carolina House Bill 2, a GOP-backed measure that required people to use the bathroom corresponding with their birth certificate at government buildings and public schools.  
“It&#8217;s important that we remove this horrible requirement that transgender people had to go to the restroom of their birth certificate,” Cooper previously said, as highlighted in the ad. “It is a stain on our great state&#8217;s reputation, and it&#8217;s got to be wiped out.” 
Cooper also called the provision “one of the most discriminatory laws in the country, and it is wrong, period” and that it “created a misguided, unworkable, and unnecessary requirement that individuals use the bathroom that matched the gender on their birth certificate.”
The Senate hopeful campaigned on repealing the measure, saying that he could “not tolerate it” being the law of the land in North Carolina. 
<iframe loading="lazy" title="YouTube video player" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/rv8-EFPesss?si=5RksHCwmiYHAyMZg" width="560" height="315" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen"></iframe>
&#8220;For nearly 40 years, Roy Cooper has fought to transition North Carolina to Democrats&#8217; woke agenda,&#8221; NRSC Regional Press Secretary Nick Puglia told The Daily Wire. &#8220;Cooper promised the radical left he would ensure men could use women&#8217;s bathrooms, and he delivered for they/them.&#8221;  
The North Carolina bathroom bill, which was signed by GOP Governor Pat McCrory in 2016, ignited a firestorm after major corporations like Salesforce started <a href="https://www.wsj.com/articles/salesforces-marc-benioff-has-kicked-off-new-era-of-corporate-social-activism-1462201172">pressuring</a> the state over the law. Cooper’s gubernatorial deputy campaign manager told The Wall Street Journal that he “looked to Salesforce because he wanted them to know that this is not who North Carolina is, and that we are fighting against this discriminatory law.”
In response to the law, the NBA yanked the 2017 All-Star game out of Charlotte, because of “the climate created” by the legislation. 
After he was elected governor, Cooper signed a bill to repeal the bathroom bill, <a href="https://governor.nc.gov/documents/files/house-bill-2-repeal-fact-sheet/download">saying</a> that it “immediately removes mean-spirited restrictions on public facilities that mandate North Carolinians use the public facility matching the gender on their birth certificate.”
During his second term in office, Cooper would <a href="https://www.acluofnorthcarolina.org/press-releases/governor-cooper-vetoes-anti-transgender-legislation/">veto bills</a> to shield kids from transgender procedures on minors and keep boys of girls sports teams. 
Cooper is looking to succeed outgoing GOP Senator Thom Tillis. The GOP candidate is former Republican National Committee Chair Michael Whatley. 
While he campaigned on the bathroom issue heavily while running for Congress, Cooper has rarely touched on transgender issues while on the Senate campaign trail. In August, he <a href="https://www.nrsc.org/uncategorized/wapo-he-became-governor-supporting-trans-rights-now-its-seen-as-a-liability-2025-08-18/">declined</a> an interview with the Washington Post on transgender issues.

MixCollage-28-Mar-2026-08-55-AM-2082

Brutal Ad Hits Dem Senate Hopeful Over Defense Of Men In Women’s Bathrooms

2026 Midterms

Michael Whatley

North Carolina

Roy Cooper

Senate

While the nation focuses on Congress and the fierce debate over the SAVE America Act, a critical lawsuit is playing out in the United States Supreme Court. This week, the Justices heard oral arguments in <a href="https://www.scotusblog.com/cases/case-files/watson-v-republican-national-committee/">Watson v. RNC</a>. The central question: Can states count mail ballots that arrive days — even weeks — after polls close? According to the law, history, and common sense, the answer must be no.
For most of American history, states required that ballots be received by Election Day. Congress acted as early as 1845 to set a uniform election date, and until the last few decades it was well understood that states cannot unilaterally extend voting beyond it.
Yet, that is exactly what 14 states and the District of Columbia are doing. Mississippi’s law offers a five-day grace period, while others range from as few as one day to two weeks or more. But the exact length of these periods is not important. Historically, a ballot has not been considered “cast” until it is in the hands of an election official. By extending their deadlines, states are illegally extending the election itself. As the Secretaries of State of Louisiana and Wyoming point out in a <a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/24/24-1260/396453/20260217143551649_24-1260_Brief.pdf">brief</a> to the Court, this scheme risks delays and public spectacles where late ballots flip results after voting is over, both of which sap trust from the system.
Most states require ballots be received by Election Day, and that <a href="https://www.ncsl.org/elections-and-campaigns/table-11-receipt-and-postmark-deadlines-for-absentee-mail-ballots">list is growing.</a> Last year, Kansas, Ohio, Utah, and North Dakota all set Election Day deadlines. The public overwhelmingly supports this. A new <a href="https://honestelections.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/03/Watson-v-RNC-Polling-Memo.pdf">poll</a> by Honest Elections Project shows that 83% of Americans agree that every ballot should be received by Election Day, while 78% say Election Day deadlines make voting more secure. Nearly 60% say they would not trust election results if late ballots are counted, with Democrats evenly split — clear evidence of deep, bipartisan distrust.
Despite this, the (mostly blue) states with late deadlines argue they are crucial to ensure that “every vote counts.” Yet most sprang up in just the last few years; <a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/24/24-1260/396356/20260217101242321_Amicus%20Brief%20Merits.pdf">seven</a> states only <a href="https://www.ncsl.org/elections-and-campaigns/the-evolution-of-absentee-mail-voting-laws-2020-through-2022">adopted</a> them in the COVID era. If they were not necessary in 1900, 2000, or even 2018, how can they be indispensable now?
With more people voting by mail, critics claim extended deadlines guard against postal delays and ballot rejection. U.S. Election Assistance Commission <a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/24/24-1260/396356/20260217101242321_Amicus%20Brief%20Merits.pdf">data</a> show otherwise. Massachusetts established a three-day grace period and rejected as many late ballots in 2024 as it did in 2016 under the old rules. Nevada rejected more in 2024 than in 2016 after adopting a four-day grace period and all-mail elections.
These states ignore an easy alternative: encourage mail-in voters to request and mail their ballots earlier. When Ohio moved from 10 days to just four, rejections declined. The same is true in Iowa under its new Election Day deadline. Clearly, voters adapt when laws change. When states move deadlines up, voters act sooner. When they push deadlines back, voters delay.
That sets them up for failure. Ballots frequently miss even extended deadlines due to mail delays. There are other obstacles, too: states typically require that late ballots be postmarked, but postmarking is inconsistent. Many ballots are never postmarked, or their marks are smudged or illegible. A new USPS <a href="https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2025/11/24/2025-20740/postmarks-and-postal-possession">rule</a> means that ballots may not be postmarked the day they are mailed. In other words, late ballot laws leave voters one bad postmark away from disenfranchisement.
The Post Office has long <a href="https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/7035581-USPS-General-Counsel-Letter-July-2020/">admonished</a> states to adjust their voting laws to fit the realities of today’s mail service. Many have refused. The Watson case could be the nudge they need to fix their broken systems.
With a ruling likely in June, critics are predicting chaos in the midterms. They ignore that states would have more than four months to adjust. They claim that military voters will be hard-hit but overlook that federal law requires overseas ballots be mailed 45 days before elections and specifically exempts them from the broader Election Day deadline.
Rather than stoking outrage, election officials in these states should focus on preparing for the change, or better yet, for legislatures to repeal their late ballot laws immediately. The public won’t look kindly on officials delaying action, especially if they aim to score points from entirely avoidable chaos.
For too many years, late ballot laws have turned elections into a guessing game while fueling doubt and distrust. Election Day deadlines are clear, simple to administer, and easy for voters to adjust to. With Watson v. RNC, the Supreme Court has a chance to end late ballots once and for all. Every voter should hope they do.
* * *
Jason Snead is the executive director of Honest Elections Project.

Pennsylvania Elections Officials Process Ballots On Election Day

You Can Kiss Republicans Goodbye If This Election Rule Doesn’t Change

You Can Kiss Republicans Goodbye If This Election Rule Doesn't Change

Election Laws

Elections

Mail-In Voting

Opinion

Supreme Court

Voter Integrity

Voting

Democrats would never win another majority in Congress if Americans knew where they stood on the issues. The Democratic Party supports and promotes positions opposite the views held by a large majority of Americans.
Democrats are against any form of verifiable voter identification or common-sense changes to promote honest elections. They promote gender surgeries on children, boys in girls’ bathrooms, and men in women’s sports. They support abortion until the day of birth. They celebrate aberrant lifestyles with parades and Pride Month. They are soft on crime and oppose adequate policing for safe communities. They support open borders and promote amnesty, citizenship, voting rights, and welfare benefits for illegal immigrants. They oppose school choice and support government-run healthcare. They support bigger government and higher taxes. And few Americans know that Democrats are the party of slavery, segregation, the Ku Klux Klan, Jim Crow laws, and they led the longest filibuster in Senate history to block the Civil Rights Act.
How do Democrats continue to get elected? Americans don’t know the truth because no one tells them the truth.
The most important part of any political campaign is to drive up the negatives of your opponent. The second most important part is to drive up your own positives. Republicans are counseled by their pollsters to campaign on issues voters agree with, so they run all around their districts and states criticizing their opponent and talking about border control, safe communities, voter identification, and the like. The problem is they rarely associate the wrong side of these issues with their real opponent — the Democratic Party.
Elections are between Republicans and Democrats. Over 95% of the voting decisions for the 2026 midterms have already been made based on perceptions of the two political parties. Even independents will vote based on whether they want Republicans or Democrats in power. Candidates and issues are secondary — they may change the perception of the parties, but the final decisions will be based on voter preferences for one of the two political parties. Trump changed the perception of both parties among some Black Americans when he challenged them with “what have you got to lose?” This question was a permission slip for a few Black voters to change their vote from Democrat to Republican. 
“Brand” is an odd term to use in politics, but it is the most important aspect of any election. There are only two relevant brands on the ballot: Republican and Democrat. For decades, Democrats have been denigrating the Republican brand with cries of racism, hate, bigotry, opposition to Social Security and Medicare, and support for the rich and big corporations. They’ve done a good job. Voters often agree with Republicans on almost every issue but still vote Democrat because they have been convinced Republicans are essentially evil.
Republicans and Republican-aligned organizations and media have been … well … stupid. You’ll hear them blame the Biden border, woke corporations, biased media, DEI hiring, Somali fraud, the Schumer shutdown, liberal politicians, and, far, far too often, they blame the Left. None of these will be on the ballot in November. Just listen to Republican leaders or any Republican aligned media, and you’ll likely hear them blame just about everything on the Left. They might as well blame everything on the boogeyman.
Trump’s recent State of the Union address should give all Republicans and Republican-aligned organizations a tutorial. He understands branding better than anyone in the world. Trump used most of his speech to set up and bash “crazy” Democrats while thanking Republicans for assisting his success.
Republicans only have a few months to drive up the negatives of the Democratic Party, but they have plenty of ammunition. Just remember it’s the Democrat open border, Democrat daycare fraud, Democrat shutdown, Democrat child mutilation, and all the rest. The Republican messaging strategy should not be to convince Democratic voters they have been wrong in the past, but to convince them the Democratic Party has changed: it is now controlled by radical progressive Democrats or crazy Democrat Socialists. Republicans should always put a negative word or phrase in front of Democrats to remind voters the Democratic party has left them — because it has.
* * *
Jim DeMint is a former Senator from South Carolina and a best-selling author. His latest book is &#8220;What the Bible Really Says about Creation, End Times, Politics and You.”
The views expressed in this piece are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.

New York Mayoral Candidate Zohran Mamdani Holds Election Rally With Bernie Sanders And Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez

The Quiet Disconnect Between Democrats And Voters That Could Decide 2026

Abortion

Democrats

Leftists

Republicans

Transgender

transgender surgery

Attacking Iran while pushing affordability at home has put President Trump in a tough spot, but this is the United States of America. We can shoot guns and churn butter at the same time.
So far, the President is making all the right moves. Releasing oil from the <a href="https://www.politico.com/news/2026/03/11/trump-strategic-petroleum-reserve-00823816">strategic reserve</a>, considering a temporary <a href="https://www.reuters.com/world/us/trump-administration-tells-oil-industry-prepare-jones-act-waiver-domestic-2026-03-12/">suspension of the Jones Act</a>, and offering tankers naval escorts and U.S.-backed insurance for their passage through the Strait of Hormuz will all help keep the oil flowing.
If he can wrap the war relatively soon, gas prices could be back to normal before the midterms. They might even be lower if he manages to arm-twist whoever ends up ruling Iran into redirecting their oil exports from China to the West.
In the meantime, Trump is <a href="https://www.socialnews.xyz/2026/03/12/trump-claims-economic-surge-in-ohio-speech/">traveling the country</a> to <a href="https://www.newsnationnow.com/politics/trump-affordability-kentucky-ohio-iran-war/amp/">tout</a> all the ways he’s already brought down the cost of living: no tax on tips and overtime, lower drug prices thanks to TrumpRx and most-favored nation pricing, mild inflation, lower mortgage rates, and trillions of dollars’ worth of job-creating investments in the American economy.
These are all huge wins, but this is no time for the Trump administration to rest on its laurels. It needs a forward-looking agenda that tells voters they’re nowhere near done saving them money and the best is yet to come.
These proposals should be easy to shape into compelling campaign messages and should address key sources of cost-of-living anxiety like housing, groceries, and childcare. Bonus points if they involve Congress, since they’re the ones who’ll actually appear on the ballot in November.
If Trump wants to preserve voters’ goodwill in the midst of the ongoing conflict, he should start by working with Congress to fix and then pass the <a href="https://www.banking.senate.gov/newsroom/minority/scott-warren-release-21st-century-road-to-housing-act-legislative-package-to-boost-housing-supply-and-bring-down-costs">21st Century ROAD to Housing Act</a>, which aims to bring down home prices by making it easier to build.
Letting this bill fail due to <a href="https://www.axios.com/2026/03/12/housing-affordability-bill-senate-passage">GOP opposition in the House</a> would make the party less credible as champions of affordability. Unfortunately, with the bill in its current form, that opposition is justified.
The bill would ban investors from constructing new “built-to-rent” (BTR) single-family homes, a key option for many families who long to live in a home as opposed to an apartment. This would remove a key <a href="https://eyeonhousing.org/2024/08/solid-levels-of-single-family-built-for-rent-construction/">source of new housing inventory</a> from the market at a time when overall home construction is <a href="https://katv.com/news/connect-to-congress/limits-on-build-for-rent-homes-in-housing-bill-draws-industry-pushback-21st-century-road-to-housing-act-institutional-investors-housing-supply-home-affordability">dropping sharply</a>.
If the bill is supposed to increase housing supply and lower costs, it should do that, not give with one hand and take with the other.
It’s true that BTRs don’t satisfy the dream of home ownership. They could, however, help millions of young couples afford the space they need to start families now instead of putting it off for years while they save for a down payment.
Second, Trump should find a way to put money in parents’ pockets as soon as possible. Trump accounts will pay off “bigly” in 18 years or so — especially if more billionaires follow <a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/articles/2025/12/landmark-dell-gift-supercharges-trump-accounts-for-americas-kids/">Michael and Susan Dell’s example</a> — but families with young children are struggling right now.
There is a proposal floating around among conservative family policy experts that would accomplish this goal. It’s called the <a href="https://americancompass.org/the-family-income-supplemental-credit/">Family Income Supplemental Credit (or FISC)</a>, and it would essentially increase the Child Tax Credit and distribute it as series of monthly cash payments: $800 a month for the second half of pregnancy, $400 a month from birth through age six, and $250 a month from ages 6 to 18.
In the 2024 election, parents with minor children at home <a href="https://catholicvote.org/parents-of-minor-kids-voted-for-trump-by-wide-margin-after-backing-biden-harris-in-2020/">voted for Trump</a> by a nine-point margin after breaking for Biden four years earlier. If they’d all stayed home, Harris would’ve won the popular vote 50-48 (and possibly the Electoral College too). Rewarding this key group of swing voters for producing the next generation of Americans would pay huge dividends for Republicans in the 2026 midterms and beyond.
Finally, Trump could rack up an easy and immediate win without help from Congress by simply ending his predecessor’s war on bulk pricing.
Lina Khan, the radical progressive Biden chose to run the Federal Trade Commission, spent four years trying to punish American companies for the crime of success.
Two of her lawsuits, against Pepsi and alcoholic beverage distributor Southern Glazer’s, used an obsolete Depression-era law to argue that suppliers cannot offer bulk discounts to their largest customers. If either of these lawsuits were to succeed, it would drive up prices at some of Americans’ favorite retailers, including Walmart and Costco.
The FTC <a href="https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/news/press-releases/2025/05/ftc-dismisses-lawsuit-against-pepsico">dismissed</a> the Pepsi lawsuit last May, but the other is <a href="https://www.ftc.gov/legal-library/browse/cases-proceedings/2110155-southern-glazers-wine-spirits-llc-ftc-v">still pending</a>. Trump should put this question to bed once and for all by urging his FTC Commissioner, Andrew Ferguson, who has already slammed the suit as government overreach, to drop the case. There’s no better way to win the working family vote than to get up on stage and declare, “I saved Costco!”
The war with Iran is a complication few political strategists would have wished for this close to the midterms. But if President Trump can keep the oil flowing, end the war quickly, and demonstrate his continued commitment to affordability, voters will happily forgive a little temporary pain at the pump, especially when it creates more world peace.
* * *
Jason Chaffetz served as a member of the U.S. Congress from 2009 to 2017. He chaired the House Oversight Committee.
The views expressed in this piece are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.

US-POLITICS-TRUMP

Yes, Trump Can Fight Iran And Save American Families Money At the Same Time

affordability

Congress

Donald Trump

Economy

Gas Prices

Iran

A Lutheran minister looking for a promotion to Congress once claimed that challenges to the traditional definitions of men and women are “very threatening” to white men and downplayed concerns about the dangers of transgender ideology for women. 
Sarah Trone Garriott, a Democrat candidate for Iowa&#8217;s 3rd Congressional District, claimed that Evangelical Christians oppose “GLBTQ” ideology not because of theology, but racial angst, according to an October 2023 speech uncovered by The Daily Wire. Trone Garriott, a former state senator and minister in the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, hopes to unseat incumbent Republican Rep. Zach Nunn.
During her <a href="https://www.iaumc.org/newsdetail/sen-rev-sarah-throne-garrett-encourages-laity-to-confront-christian-nationalism-18119210">speech</a> on &#8220;Christian Nationalism&#8221; at Ames First United Methodist Church, Trone Garriott argued that Evangelical Christians needed “threats” to react against to maintain their identity. 
“A new threat that we see today is the GLBTQ movement,” she said. “It&#8217;s a challenging of that status quo, of the way that things have been, of who&#8217;s a man and who&#8217;s woman and how relationships are. It&#8217;s very threatening to the idea of the white male, powerful figure, because it muddies the waters and makes things ambiguous and confusing.”
<div style="max-width: 728px; margin: 0 auto;">
<iframe style="aspect-ratio: 16/9; max-width: 100%; width: 100%; margin: 20px auto 5px; border: 0;" src="https://player.mux.com/lMLDZ9vvCDBzGB3j3HUW8yTYObDTTif7?metadata-video-content-type=embed_video&amp;metadata-video-id=5399ab90-7bc5-41da-96a7-a5dacadb390d&amp;metadata-video-stream-type=on-demand&amp;metadata-video-title=2026-03-13%3A%20Iowa%20Pastor's%20Speech%20On%20Christian%20Nationalism&amp;poster=https%3A%2F%2Fdailywireplus-v2.imgix.net%2Fimages%2Fembedded-videos%2F4a34e6b4-8679-4471-8eed-665a7de8e203.png&amp;autoplay=false&amp;accent-color=%23DB3D3B&amp;primary-color=%23ffffff&amp;secondary-color=%23000000" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen"></iframe>
Credit: Iowa Conference United Methodist Church
</div>
“We see all kinds of responses happening in legislation and in community conflicts … a lot more emphasis on, you know, really funding and supporting the separation, the private schools, the parents&#8217; rights,&#8221; she said. &#8220;And within that, the parents&#8217; rights piece is used to enact book bans, sports bans about who can play and who can compete,” she said. 
Trone Garriott then suggested that laws to keep males out of female sports or protect kids from sexually explicit books were motivated by a misguided belief that “white men” are “responsible” for protecting women. 
“It&#8217;s really couched in the language of there&#8217;s a threat against women and white men are responsible to protect women from threats. So a lot of the legislation is about we&#8217;re going to protect these feminine, fragile, weak women and girls from a threat to their bodies, their persons, their identity in this way.”
During her time in the State Senate, Trone Garriott <a href="https://www.legis.iowa.gov/docs/publications/SJNL/20220302_SJNL.pdf#page=4">voted against</a> a bill to keep boys out of girls’ sports and <a href="https://www.legis.iowa.gov/docs/publications/SJNL/20230307_SJNL.pdf#page=26">opposed</a> a bill shielding children from transgender procedures. 
Republican spokesman Zach Kraft told The Daily Wire that Trone Garriott’s positions were out of step with Iowans. 
&#8220;Sarah Trone Garriott is a preacher of the woke gospel,” he said. “It is sickening to see her twist Christianity as a justification to force sex changes on young children. That may have been popular with her friends at Harvard, but Iowa voters will reject this radical lunatic.&#8221; 
Trone Garriott spent much of her speech attacking “white Christian men” and “white evangelical leaders,” an aggressive strategy in a state where white evangelicals compose a major voting bloc. She even attacked famed evangelist Billy Graham for having an “attractive, strong, macho guy persona.” 
She also challenged traditional Evangelical Christian understandings of Jesus Christ and the Bible. Her denomination, the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, is much more liberal than its counterpart, the Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod. 
 “There&#8217;s a lot of different ways to think about what Christ did on the cross,” she said during the speech. “There&#8217;s not just one way. It makes us wonder, well, who is this Christ?”
Trone Garriott said the Evangelical understanding of the Gospel was tainted by the “white patriarchy.” 
“What we see more and more is that the good news that a specific variety of Christianity is professing in the world is white patriarchy,” she said. “So white masculine power, violence, dominance, over and against.”
She also downplayed biblical writings of the Apostle Paul, calling  him a “great guy and all” but “a product of his time.”

MixCollage-13-Mar-2026-01-34-PM-4592

WATCH: Democrat Candidate Says Christians Who Oppose Trans Ideology Are Racist

Christianity

Democrat

Racism

Wokeness

Editor’s note: this piece was adopted from remarks delivered to the House GOP Members&#8217; Issues Conference in Doral, Florida. 
***
With a Right made up of podcasters, who needs the Left?
At a time when conservative new media figures should be rallying the troops to win in November, the podcasters have proven themselves incapable of getting along, intent on clutching defeat from the jaws of victory, and more interested in pursuing petty grievances than advancing the common good.
One hesitates even to call them “new media” at this point. Twitter has been around for twenty years. Facebook is two years older than that. The first podcast launched in 2003 on RSS technology invented in 2001. So podcasts and social media are “new” in the same way the telephone is new — that is, only relatively new compared with radio and TV or the telegraph.
And just as radio and TV developed certain ticks, opportunities, and pitfalls over time, so too have podcasts. One might liken the development of media to the development of a man as he ages. Those who have taken care of an elderly parent or grandparent know that, as people age, their personality traits don’t change so much as they intensify. Whatever the trait or habit, good or bad, grandma seems to exhibit it more and more year after year. The same principle holds true for the media.
As network television matured into cable news, political debates became sharper. Interviews became tighter. Perspectives became more nakedly partisan or even outright factional. Broadcast personalities became more defined.
As the cable news cycle gave rise to conservative talk radio, those inclinations were magnified. As talk radio gave way to podcasting, those traits intensified even further.
This process, like growing up, has produced both benefits and downsides. When you turn 21 you get to drink, but you also need to get a job. When you’re 61, you get to play with your grandkids, but your back hurts.
As old media have matured into new media, conservatives have had marvelous opportunities unthinkable in the days of newspapers, network TV, and the early days of cable news.
But it’s not all upside. As the new media have developed, they have also cultivated particular vices. The on-demand nature of podcasts has created incentives for broadcasters to become more niche, sensational, radical, and insular.
The local grounding of radio and television incentivized broadcasters to appeal to broad swaths of natural political communities. From dawn to dusk, broadcasts had to cater to relatively normal audiences in order to survive. The wacky shows only aired in the middle of the night.
In the new media, those geographic and linear constraints disappear. Every podcast has a potentially global audience that can listen at any time of the day. A podcast that appeals to a niche interest or ideological hobbyhorse will amass a much larger audience than the radio or TV host who appeals to the plurality or majority of any real political community.
Tune into a right-wing podcast today — including and especially the most popular right-wing podcasts — and you notice that the only thing the podcasters want to talk about is other podcasters.
This is all particularly disappointing because, as I mentioned, the new media are no longer new. Podcasts are now the main source of news in the United States. That’s why the 2024 election came to be known as “the podcast election.”
Two years ago, podcasters propelled President Trump back to the White House with the popular vote. Today, podcasters are stoking a “right-wing civil war” six months before already-challenging midterm elections.
I don’t mean to be too harsh to my fellow podcasters. I’ve done my best to avoid counterproductive infighting and frivolous digressions, but I recognize that these are simply facts and foibles of the medium. It’s no use moving to Mississippi and complaining about the heat. If you’re going to survive and thrive in that environment, you need to accept the facts as they are and learn to adapt.
Still, I can’t help but notice that the supposed “conservative civil war” has almost nothing to do with actual politics. Virtually everyone involved in the conflict supports the Trump administration. Virtually everyone agrees on policy — particularly immigration and crime.
Polls show that Americans still care a lot about those issues, and they generally trust Republicans over Democrats on both fronts. If Republicans can offer voters a coherent policy vision grounded on issues where we have a clear record of success. And if conservative podcasters can help tell that story — or at least get out of the way — the GOP may still have a fighting chance come November.

knowles sisson mowrey

KNOWLES: Do Right-Wing Podcasters Want To Lose The Midterms?

Conservative Media

Michael Knowles

Podcast

House Speaker Mike Johnson defied the naysayers on Thursday, telling Daily Wire host Michael Knowles that Republicans will expand their majority in the 2026 midterm elections.
“I’m very bullish about the midterms,” Johnson said during the interview. “I’m absolutely convinced we are going to win the midterms and grow the majority. It will defy historic trend.”
Johnson acknowledged that such a result would break a longstanding pattern. “It’s only twice in the last 90 years that a sitting president has picked up seats in that first two-year cycle,” he said.
Still, Johnson argued the political landscape favors Republicans, pointing to fundraising advantages and Democratic struggles to define a clear agenda.
“We have a fundraising advantage right now because the stakes are so high — Republicans over Democrats for the first time in 10 years,” Johnson said. “Democrats are at historic lows in approval ratings. They have no leadership, no message, no vision for where they’re going.”
“Their whole platform is they hate Donald Trump,” he added. “Well, good luck with that. That’s not exactly something to sell to constituents.”
Of all the issues Republicans are leading on, Johnson stressed election integrity, noting that the House has already passed the SAVE America Act, which would require proof of citizenship and identification to vote in federal elections. Johnson told Knowles the problem is the Senate, where the legislation has been held up.
“We passed the SAVE Act twice, the previous Congress and this Congress,&#8221; Johnson said. &#8220;Now we pass the Save America Act because now it’s voter ID and proof of citizenship together.&#8221; He added that Trump has recently pushed for additional provisions to strengthen the bill, calling the package the “greatest hits” of election integrity measures.
Johnson said the bill now faces a complicated path in the Senate, where Majority Leader John Thune must decide whether to attempt moving the legislation despite procedural hurdles. According to Johnson, Senate rules could allow Democrats to stall the process with a flood of amendments.
“They’re concerned that if they open the talking filibuster … Democrats could flood the field with thousands of amendments,” Johnson said. “There’s no germaneness limitation. They can add any crazy Democrat policy they want.”
He warned that under Senate rules, each amendment must be read into the record in full, which could tie up the chamber. “They could file 1,400-page amendments and tie the Senate floor up for months,” Johnson said. “That’s what they’re concerned about.” 
Johnson said he has discussed the issue directly with Trump and that the president believes Republicans should move forward despite the risks. “Desperate times call for desperate measures,” Johnson said. “I talked to the president about the risks versus the benefits, and he said, ‘Let’s risk it. Go for it.’”
Johnson argued that voter ID and citizenship verification requirements enjoy broad public support and are necessary to restore trust in elections.
“You can’t have a constitutional republic if people don’t have faith in the election system,” Johnson said. “These are basic requirements.”
Johnson also addressed the challenges of managing the razor-thin Republican majority in the House, which has forced leadership to carefully balance competing factions inside the conference.
“I mean, we have the smallest margin in U.S. history,” Johnson said. “I have a one-vote margin. Which means I have to get unanimity because the aforementioned colleague of mine votes no almost every day.”
The comment was in reference to Rep. Thomas Massie (R-KY), who is in the midst of a feud with President Trump and frequently breaks with party leadership on spending and foreign policy issues.
Johnson pushed back on the notion that internal disagreements reflect a broader ideological divide over the party’s direction on foreign policy, insisting Republicans are not pursuing an interventionist approach.
“We are not in the nation-building business,&#8221; Johnson said. &#8220;We are not interventionists. We are not out trying to be the world’s policemen.&#8221;
He added that fiscal realities also limit America’s ability to pursue large-scale overseas commitments. “In reality, because of our financial situation, we don’t have the ability to do those things even if someone wanted to,” Johnson said.

Speaker Johnson And Leader Jeffries

Mike Johnson Is ‘Absolutely Convinced We Are Going To Win The Midterms’

Mike Johnson

Thomas Massie

At The Daily Wire, we strive to provide our audience not just with accurate reporting and insightful commentary, but with the tools they need to parse the issues of our time. That’s why we’re thrilled to partner with our friends at Manhattan Institute to bring you exclusive commentary and research from their world-class team of scholars.
Each week, Manhattan Institute scholars will bring their analysis right here to The Daily Wire — from insights into politics and hot-button cultural issues to original research on everything from education and race to public safety and the economy.
You’ll hear from Manhattan Institute scholars you know and love, like Christopher Rufo and Heather Mac Donald, as well as scholars you’ve not encountered before. But no matter the scholar or the subject, these pieces will be as engaging as they are informative. They’ll also highlight what Daily Wire editor emeritus Ben Shapiro <a href="https://www.city-journal.org/article/ben-shapiro-city-journal-award-remarks" target="_blank" rel="noopener">called</a> Manhattan Institute’s “unwavering optimism about America.”
We’re excited to launch this series with a piece from Manhattan Institute president Reihan Salam. In it, Reihan looks past the 2026 midterms to the 2028 presidential election and offers a roadmap for how Republicans might win in their first-ever post-Trump race. We hope you enjoy. – The Editors
***
Since he came down the golden escalator in 2015, President Donald Trump has been at the center of American public life. It’s strange, therefore, to realize that the Trump era is slowly but inexorably drawing to a close.
Republicans <a href="https://kalshi.com/markets/controlh/house-winner/controlh-2026" target="_blank" rel="noopener" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://kalshi.com/markets/controlh/house-winner/controlh-2026&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1773343420068000&amp;usg=AOvVaw3i1aLo6xywbQb9qJXblVaN">look likely</a> to lose the House of Representatives in November, which will almost certainly bog down the rest of Trump’s administration in interminable impeachment hearings. And the president is increasingly sustaining attacks from within his own party, whether that be from the <a href="https://www.thedailybeast.com/gop-rebel-humiliates-trump-white-house-with-brutal-new-nickname/" target="_blank" rel="noopener" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://www.thedailybeast.com/gop-rebel-humiliates-trump-white-house-with-brutal-new-nickname/&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1773343420068000&amp;usg=AOvVaw2OBjzgfHnIcK1MekNIkR7s">Epstein-obsessed fringe</a> or from <a href="https://www.axios.com/2026/02/06/tim-scott-trump-obama-ape-video" target="_blank" rel="noopener" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://www.axios.com/2026/02/06/tim-scott-trump-obama-ape-video&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1773343420068000&amp;usg=AOvVaw0KmNWdRSf_oZaz5th4kTiZ">those unhappy with</a> his social media presence.
All of this raises the question that has for years felt unthinkable: what comes after Trump? To an increasingly loud faction on the online right, the answer is a noxious blend of extreme ideologies. But that would be a mistake. Keeping the Trump Train going means embracing Trump’s 2024 strategy: playing to the majority of Americans on issues on which the right can win.
For the past decade, Trump has been the glue that binds together an otherwise fractious — or perhaps incoherent — GOP. What, besides Trump, does the party stand for? Free enterprise or organized labor? Isolationism or peace through strength? Controlling illegal immigration or prohibiting all immigration? Trump kept these divisions suppressed through his charisma, but they are likely to spring to the fore when he is gone.
One group has a vision for what comes next — the online Right, also sometimes called the “woke Right” or, as Daily Wire editor emeritus Ben Shapiro recently <a href="https://www.city-journal.org/article/ben-shapiro-city-journal-award-remarks" target="_blank" rel="noopener" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://www.city-journal.org/article/ben-shapiro-city-journal-award-remarks&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1773343420068000&amp;usg=AOvVaw2pm3ebJXqsJnidS2nZweuX">labeled them</a>, the “horseshoe Right.” This loose collection of podcasters, posters, and fringe politicians are mobilized around a clear policy platform: skepticism of business and earned wealth; opposition to all immigration; a preference for isolationism and sometimes even open kowtowing to Russia and China; and in general, a politics powered by resentment.
The online right has a clear thesis. To them, Trump’s success was based on his willingness to break taboos and — by implication — to move toward their preferred policy positions. If the GOP wants to hold on to the Trump magic, they argue, then it needs to veer even more towards their particular brand of rightism.
As Trump’s era ends, this argument seems increasingly appealing to his would-be inheritors. In Florida, former debate coach and<a href="https://freebeacon.com/america/florida-gubernatorial-candidate-accused-of-grooming-minor-may-not-even-be-eligible-for-election/" target="_blank" rel="noopener" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://freebeacon.com/america/florida-gubernatorial-candidate-accused-of-grooming-minor-may-not-even-be-eligible-for-election/&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1773343420068000&amp;usg=AOvVaw1XUZ5lpLWhy2aDba3BopTg"> Washington, D.C., resident</a> James Fishback is running a <a href="https://www.city-journal.org/article/florida-governor-race-james-fishback-trump" target="_blank" rel="noopener" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://www.city-journal.org/article/florida-governor-race-james-fishback-trump&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1773343420068000&amp;usg=AOvVaw2s2BWbwK-Z9yz3GAsv2uK_">very online campaign</a> for the governorship. Republican dissenters like Rep. Thomas Massie (KY) and former Georgia Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene have embraced the online right’s love of conspiracy and its skepticism towards an assertive foreign policy. Even Vice President JD Vance, perhaps anxious about keeping Trump’s coalition intact, seems wary of provoking the online right.
<h3 dir="ltr"><a href="https://manhattan.institute/subscribe?utm_source=DailyWire&amp;utm_medium=referral&amp;utm_campaign=reihan">Click here for more Manhattan Institute content.</a></h3>
It is easy to be seduced by loud voices on X, especially between elections. But the online right’s theory of the electorate doesn’t match up with reality. Nearly 80% of Americans <a href="https://news.gallup.com/poll/692522/surge-concern-immigration-abated.aspx" target="_blank" rel="noopener" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://news.gallup.com/poll/692522/surge-concern-immigration-abated.aspx&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1773343420068000&amp;usg=AOvVaw2XSEFKKy_xUKU3boGFckLU">believe</a> immigration is a “good thing” for America. They don’t back open borders, but they’re also not in favor of halting immigration outright. Americans are nearly <a href="https://today.yougov.com/politics/articles/53429-isolationism-is-minority-opinion-in-united-states-america-foreign-policy-november-15-17-2025-economist-yougov-poll" target="_blank" rel="noopener" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://today.yougov.com/politics/articles/53429-isolationism-is-minority-opinion-in-united-states-america-foreign-policy-november-15-17-2025-economist-yougov-poll&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1773343420068000&amp;usg=AOvVaw1uVsesFrU2M1zTU_49zDHq">twice as likely</a> to say America should take an “active part” in world affairs as they are to say it should “stay out.” It really is possible to oppose forever wars while supporting the judicious use of force to defend American interests. And while economic nihilism is trending online, a majority of Americans <a href="https://news.gallup.com/poll/694835/image-capitalism-slips.aspx" target="_blank" rel="noopener" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://news.gallup.com/poll/694835/image-capitalism-slips.aspx&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1773343420068000&amp;usg=AOvVaw3r2Gm7EpYG4YZDfu5WmUe1">view free enterprise positively</a>, even in the face of relentless doom-mongering.
Nor does the online right’s theory of coalition-building make much sense. To state the obvious, the goal of a campaign is to attract more voters than you repel, not to boost social media engagement. Yet in the online right’s model, Republicans shouldn’t be fighting to consolidate the “normie” majority — the tens of millions of non-ideological voters who care about safe streets, good jobs, decent schools, low taxes, affordable homes, cheap groceries, and other unglamorous essentials. That would be too straightforward. Rather, the online right wants Republicans to lean into strident rhetoric on Wall Street, Israel, and other fixations of the campus Left. The goal is to pick up “populist” voters currently enchanted with the likes of Senator Bernie Sanders (I-VT), Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY), and New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani.
Is the idea that there are more Mamdani voters who would cross over to the GOP if the party were truly committed to siding with Hamas over Israel than there are, say, suburban swing voters who will support Republicans if they’re less likely to tank the economy than are the Democrats? Or is it that there are millions of Gen Z socialists clamoring for mass deportations? Let’s just say the political logic here isn’t airtight.
There’s an eerie similarity between the arguments advanced by the online right, in fact, and those preferred by portions of the radical activist left. Both insist that mobilizing the base — always composed of true believers — is more important than persuading marginal voters. Both enforce coalitional discipline through ideology, policing out anyone who disagrees with them. Both <a href="https://www.city-journal.org/article/democratic-party-transgender-ideology-gavin-newsom" target="_blank" rel="noopener" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://www.city-journal.org/article/democratic-party-transgender-ideology-gavin-newsom&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1773343420068000&amp;usg=AOvVaw3yOYYR8z7F5qh-EC44WK1a">exercise outsized power</a> despite their small share of the coalition. Both care more about the emotional satisfaction they derive from believing themselves to be edgy or interesting than they do about accomplishing real things in the real world. If Democrats lost in 2024 because they listened too closely to transgender activists, Republicans risk doing the same if they listen too closely to the online right.
What’s the better way forward? Simple: replicate Trump’s winning playbook from 2024.
Donald Trump secured an Electoral College landslide and popular-vote plurality in 2024 by pivoting toward the center, not away from it. He took advantage of Democrats’ unpopular positions on the border, gender, and runaway inflation, aligning himself with the median voter fed up with the status quo. That strategy dramatically widened the coalition, which is why he <a href="https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2025/06/26/behind-trumps-2024-victory-a-more-racially-and-ethnically-diverse-voter-coalition/" target="_blank" rel="noopener" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2025/06/26/behind-trumps-2024-victory-a-more-racially-and-ethnically-diverse-voter-coalition/&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1773343420068000&amp;usg=AOvVaw1NhJJnrCTqzLYyI8-3HGhU">overperformed</a> with the black and Latino voters Democrats have long thought of as “theirs.”
These voters didn’t vote for Trump to be radical; they voted for Trump because they were against radicalism. They support law and order, meritocracy, and the <a href="https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2025/04/trump-tariffs-supporters/682370/" target="_blank" rel="noopener" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2025/04/trump-tariffs-supporters/682370/&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1773343420068000&amp;usg=AOvVaw0BmzPmv_djpotvVAVf93Nm">opportunity to lead a decent middle-class life</a>. And while many of them are <a href="https://www.economist.com/interactive/trump-approval-tracker" target="_blank" rel="noopener" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://www.economist.com/interactive/trump-approval-tracker&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1773343420068000&amp;usg=AOvVaw14EOFauurFkelPa4HHLvCv">dissatisfied</a> with the direction the administration has gone, they’ve evinced a willingness to vote for these values again, especially as the left seems poised to run on an even more extreme platform than they did in 2024.
One of the open questions, of course, is who — if anyone — will champion this “popularist” lane in the 2028 primary. Whoever does will clearly have the winning strategy for the general: unite conservatives and moderates against the hard left. Just as importantly, he or she will be doing the most important thing for the next nominee: picking up Trump’s torch.
***
Reihan Salam is the president of the Manhattan Institute.
The views expressed in this piece are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.

Untitled design – 2026-03-11T213557.364

How (Not) To Win In 2028

2028 presidential election

Ben Shapiro

Gen Z

JD Vance

President Donald Trump said on Wednesday that Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-SD) must &#8220;be a leader&#8221; and take the SAVE American Act across the finish line as Senate Republicans face continued pressure from voters and the White House to pass the voter ID legislation before the midterm elections.
Asked about Thune on Wednesday, Trump made it clear that the SAVE America Act remains the single most important task for the GOP-controlled Senate.
&#8220;He&#8217;s gotta be a leader,&#8221; Trump said of Thune. &#8220;He&#8217;s a leader, he&#8217;s gotta get [the votes].&#8221;
&#8220;It&#8217;s the most popular bill put before Congress,&#8221; he added.
This week, Thune has poured cold water on a Trump-backed proposal to revert to the talking filibuster to pass the SAVE America Act. The talking filibuster would force Democrats who oppose the SAVE America Act to speak nonstop on the Senate floor if they want to block a vote, but according to Thune, a group of Republicans is not on board with changing Senate rules to meet Trump&#8217;s demand.
&#8220;The votes aren’t there, one, to nuke the filibuster, and the votes aren’t there for a talking filibuster,&#8221; Thune told reporters on Tuesday. &#8220;It’s just a reality. I’m the person who has to deliver sometimes the not-so-good news that the math doesn’t add up, but those are the facts, and there’s no getting around it.&#8221;
A <a href="https://x.com/MarkMeadows/status/2031779224470897145">list</a> put together by former White House Chief of Staff and North Carolina Congressman Mark Meadows shows that Senate Republicans are split down the middle on support for the talking filibuster. Senators who have signaled support for using the talking filibuster to pass the SAVE America Act include, Jim Banks (IN), Marsha Blackburn (TN), Ted Budd (NC), Katie Britt (AL), Bill Cassidy (LA), John Cornyn (TX), Ted Cruz (TX), Joni Ernst (IA), Bill Hagerty (TN), Josh Hawley (MO), Ron Johnson (WI), Mike Lee (UT), Cynthia Lummis (WY), Roger Marshall (KS), Dave McCormick (PA), Ashley Moody (FL), Bernie Moreno (OH), Markwayne Mullin (OK), Rand Paul (KY), Jim Risch (ID), Eric Schmitt (MO), Rick Scott (FL), Tim Scott (SC), Tim Sheehy (MT), Dan Sullivan (AK), and Tommy Tuberville (AL).
Sen. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska is the only Republican senator who has publicly opposed the SAVE America Act, and Sen. John Curtis (R-UT) has publicly voiced his opposition to using the talking filibuster. The remaining Republican senators have not said where exactly they stand on the talking filibuster.
Republicans who are wary of using the talking filibuster argue that it would allow Democrats to control the Senate floor and propose an unlimited number of amendments that could be tacked onto the SAVE America Act.
&#8220;I understand everybody feels— they&#8217;re really invested in this, but this particular approach, in terms of the process, is much more complicated and risky than people are assuming at the moment, which is why that the Democrats looked at doing it both under [Chuck] Schumer and [Harry] Reid when they were in the majority, and opted against it,&#8221; Thune told reporters earlier this week.
The SAVE America Act also contains provisions to keep men from competing in women&#8217;s sports and to protect children from gender procedures, key issues for Trump and Republicans.
&#8220;It&#8217;s the most popular bill I think I&#8217;ve ever put before Congress,&#8221; Trump reiterated.
Recent polls show that the vast majority of Americans support voter ID requirements similar to those put forward in the SAVE America Act. While 50 Republican senators have come out in support of the bill, Republicans would need to reach 60 votes to get past the filibuster and move the legislation to a vote. Democrats have remained united in their opposition to the SAVE America Act, effectively tanking the bill&#8217;s chances.
Many Republicans, however, believe they would have a chance to pass the bill if they instituted the talking filibuster, which could wear down Democrats who oppose the Trump-backed legislation. Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT) told The Daily Wire on Tuesday, &#8220;Voters across the nation are demanding the SAVE America Act. If we need a few more Senators to get on board to beat a Democrat standing filibuster, that’s not a reason to give up — it’s a reason to push even harder.&#8221;
&#8220;If Republicans don’t fight hard to deliver this wildly popular legislation that President Trump has specifically requested, how can we ask Americans to entrust us with both chambers of Congress in the future?&#8221; Lee added.

Donald Trump/John Thune

‘Be A Leader’: Trump Challenges John Thune As Save America Act Faces Uncertainty

Election

John Thune

SAVE America Act

Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-SD) said on Tuesday that there is not enough support for the talking filibuster pushed by President Donald Trump and some Republican senators, placing the SAVE America Act&#8217;s Senate chances further in doubt.
The talking filibuster, first suggested by Republican Sen. Mike Lee of Utah, would potentially clear a path for the GOP-controlled Senate to pass the legislation by forcing Democrats who oppose the SAVE America Act to speak non-stop on the Senate floor if they want to block a vote. Thune said the Republican-controlled Senate, however, doesn&#8217;t have enough support from his party to use the talking filibuster.
“The votes aren’t there, one, to nuke the filibuster, and the votes aren’t there for a talking filibuster,&#8221; Thune <a href="https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/5776860-thune-blocks-talking-filibuster/">told</a> reporters. &#8220;It’s just a reality. I’m the person who has to deliver sometimes the not-so-good news that the math doesn’t add up, but those are the facts and there’s no getting around it.”
Trump has ramped up the pressure on Senate Republicans to pass the SAVE America Act before the 2026 midterms, arguing that a law imposing strict voter ID requirements is vital for Republicans to perform well in the upcoming elections. The legislation would require voters to provide proof of citizenship before registration and would prohibit states from sending mail-in ballots to voters, with the only exceptions being illness, disability, military service, or travel.
Sen. Lee, who sponsored the legislation, told The Daily Wire that Senate Republicans need &#8220;to push even harder&#8221; to get the SAVE America Act across the finish line.
&#8220;Voters across the nation are demanding the SAVE America Act. If we need a few more Senators to get on board to beat a Democrat standing filibuster, that’s not a reason to give up — it’s a reason to push even harder,&#8221; he said. &#8220;If Republicans don’t fight hard to deliver this wildly popular legislation that President Trump has specifically requested, how can we ask Americans to entrust us with both chambers of Congress in the future?&#8221;
Recent polling has shown that despite harsh Democratic opposition to the SAVE America Act, a majority of Americans support strict voter ID requirements.
On Tuesday, White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt called the SAVE America Act &#8220;one of the most critical pieces of legislation in our nation&#8217;s history.&#8221;
&#8220;Passing the SAVE America Act is the most important thing that Republicans and frankly, Democrats, can do to strengthen election integrity and protect democracy,&#8221; Leavitt added. &#8220;It&#8217;s what the American people elected Republicans to do, and they must deliver on it as soon as possible.&#8221;
The press secretary also slammed Democrats for promoting the &#8220;myth&#8221; that the legislation would make it more difficult for women to vote.
&#8220;As far as married women who have changed their name, if they&#8217;re already registered to vote, they&#8217;re entirely unaffected by the SAVE Act, and for the some fraction of individuals who have changed their name or their address, they can still register to vote, of course. They just have to go through their state processes to update that documentation,&#8221; Leavitt continued.
Trump <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/front-of-the-line-trump-says-he-wont-sign-a-thing-until-save-act-hits-his-desk">said</a> on Sunday that he would not sign any other legislation until the SAVE America Act is sent to his desk. The White House kept the pressure up on Tuesday, urging Americans to &#8220;DEMAND&#8221; that their senators get on board with the Save America Act.
&#8220;We either fix the integrity of America&#8217;s elections, or we won&#8217;t have a country left to fight for,&#8221; the White House <a href="https://x.com/WhiteHouse/status/2031396991238869117">posted</a> on X. The post also included a <a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/saveamerica/">link</a> to a White House webpage that provided contact information for each U.S. senator&#8217;s office.
Thune <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/the-paid-influencer-ecosystem-it-just-entered-the-election-integrity-fight?author=Drew+Berkemeyer&amp;category=News&amp;elementPosition=undefined&amp;row=0&amp;rowType=Vertical+List&amp;title=The+%E2%80%98Paid+Influencer+Ecosystem%E2%80%99%3F+It+Just+Entered+The+Election+Integrity+Fight">said</a> on Monday that much of the pressure campaign on the SAVE America Act is coming from conservative activists on X, which he called a &#8220;paid influencer ecosystem,&#8221; not from within the Senate itself.
&#8220;We want to get to the SAVE Act,&#8221; Thune added, but he warned that a talking filibuster would make other priorities much &#8220;harder&#8221; to address.
The Senate effectively ended the talking filibuster in the 1970s and moved to the silent filibuster, which has allowed the opposition to stall votes only by stating their intent to filibuster, and thereby require 60 votes to invoke cloture. Trump, who also pushed for the Senate to abolish the filibuster, has suggested that he would take executive action to impose voter ID and citizenship requirements if Congress doesn&#8217;t pass the SAVE America Act.

One Senator’s Final Plea To Save The SAVE America Act

Mike Lee

Politics

Marjorie Dannenfelser serves as president of Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America. She has been called “the woman who brought down Roe.”
 * * * 
Late last Friday, President Donald Trump’s Department of Justice asked a judge to dismiss Missouri v. FDA, a case brought by pro-life states over FDA rules that allow abortion drugs to be prescribed online, without doctors ever seeing or speaking to the actual patient. These rules risk women’s health, enable <a href="https://sbaprolife.org/latest-news/abortion-drugs-fuel-abuse-the-women-poisoned-against-their-will">abuse and coercion</a>, and effectively nullify all pro-life laws at the state level. In this lawsuit – it’s not the only one – the Trump DOJ argues that the policy should stand indefinitely until the FDA decides what, if anything, it will do.
The vast majority of Americans think women should be required to see a doctor before taking abortion drugs. In every poll where it’s been asked, this has been by a wide margin – including large majorities of independents, suburban women, and Gen Z, as well as nearly half of those who call themselves pro-choice. These requirements were standard for years, until, citing COVID, the Biden administration effectively removed them a few months into his term.
That Biden-era policy still stands today. As a result, throughout the country, abortion is de facto regulated by activist groups in the states with the most lax laws, who ship drugs nationally, regardless of the laws in the state where the patient lives. Many of these groups will prescribe to anyone who fills out an online form, without even requiring a video or phone call. Some advertise that they’ll send these drugs “in advance” to women who aren’t even pregnant.
These groups have no idea of the woman’s medical situation, or the actual age of the baby, creating serious health risks for the mother. Nor do they have any real confirmation of who filled out the form in the first place. Stories of abusive husbands and boyfriends obtaining these pills and forcing them on their unwilling partners have become sadly commonplace. Most recently, a baby girl in Texas named <a href="https://x.com/marjoriesba/status/2027079983009534202?s=20">Presley Mae</a> was delivered stillborn after her father slipped the drugs to her unwilling mother in secret.
Abortion drugs, to be clear, are not like “Plan B” or the “morning-after pill.” They are designed to abort unborn children much, much later. While the FDA’s own limit for the drugs is 10 weeks, the groups who send these pills often say they will provide them through the third month of pregnancy. Some emphasize – for “informational purposes” – that the pills continue to be “effective” until the fifth or sixth month, at which point the baby might survive a usual dosage. After 18 weeks, <a href="https://www.ineedana.com/pills-after-12-weeks">one group</a> warns women that they may see “spontaneous gasping or movements” from the baby, but notes that these “typically stop on their own[.]” Of course, whatever their nominal limits, these companies have no way of verifying the baby’s age without an actual examination.
Trump’s DOJ argues, among other things, that pro-life states suffer insufficient harm from FDA rules (despite the effective nullification of their own state protections) to even be able to sue. They’ve also argued that some victims of this regime – women whose boyfriends filled out the form, obtained the pills, and forced the drugs upon them – shouldn’t have standing to sue without proving that it’s likely to happen again. On top of that, they say, the FDA is monitoring the situation, a full review will take place eventually, and that action is unwarranted until the review is finished at some indefinite point in the future.
The best indication we have for the timeline for this review is reporting from last year that Dr. Marty Makary, the head of the FDA, is waiting until after the midterms to decide whether to act. This wouldn’t necessarily be surprising, but it would be enormously ill-advised. According to a recent national polling from <a href="https://sbaprolife.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/02/SBA_National_Memo_Final.pdf">Cygnal</a>, not only do the overwhelming majority of Republicans support returning to the old status quo and restoring in-person visits, but around a third of them would be less likely to vote in the midterms if Republicans weaken their dedication to these and other pro-life policies.
That would be a disaster. In midterms, even small mistakes can lead to large losses, and seriously demoralizing a third of your base would be no small mistake. For our part, we’re planning to spend <a href="https://sbaprolife.org/newsroom/press-releases/leading-pro-life-group-announces-80-million-midterms-investment">$80 million</a> this cycle trying to keep a pro-life majority in the House and Senate. But spurning a third of your base to avoid being on the winning side of a 70-30 issue makes that goal unnecessarily difficult. This may be why nearly every Republican in Congress who is up for re-election has already explicitly asked the administration to change its tune.
In the meantime, each month of inaction means around 10,000 babies like Presley Mae will die – just in the states with the strongest pro-life laws. Abusers will continue to get their hands on these lethal drugs. And countless women and girls will be sent to the emergency room with serious complications.
Pro-life states are right to sue – the FDA, as the administration has already admitted elsewhere, can end this situation immediately if they want to. The harms are real and serious. And failure to act risks not just the midterms, but hundreds of thousands of lives. The fact that Trump’s DOJ is siding with the pro-abortion lobby to get these cases thrown out is a disgrace.
 * * * 
The views expressed in this piece are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.

Abortion drugs

A Quiet DOJ Move Could Ignite A Midterm Fight

Abortion Drug

Pro-Life Movement

Trump Administration

When asked to name something he loved other than his family or friends, the Democrat hoping to turn a Texas Senate seat blue said “trans children.”
James Talarico, a state lawmaker who won the Democrat primary in Texas last week, listed &#8220;trans children&#8221; as the “something that&#8221; he loved &#8220;that’s not family or friends” during an August 2023 podcast <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3CligU7twvE" target="_blank" rel="noopener">appearance.</a> The clip, unearthed by The Daily Wire, highlights the radical record Talarico has attempted to downplay as he fights to win a Senate seat in a state President Donald Trump won by almost 14 points in 2024.
“I love, I&#8217;m just saying this because it&#8217;s all on my mind, the trans children who showed up yesterday at the state capitol to advocate for their humanity. They shouldn&#8217;t have to, but it was an inspiration to watch,” he said on the “A Superbloom” podcast.
<div style="max-width: 728px; margin: 0 auto;">
<iframe style="aspect-ratio: 16/9; max-width: 100%; width: 100%; margin: 20px auto 5px; border: 0;" src="https://player.mux.com/rOVpWXMjgf00cW3h6J9Nqik3VEkZdY5Z3?metadata-video-content-type=embed_video&amp;metadata-video-id=c3acc7b0-1ac3-47ae-9c51-285501068557&amp;metadata-video-stream-type=on-demand&amp;metadata-video-title=2026-03-09%3A%20James%20Talarico%20Transgenderism&amp;poster=https%3A%2F%2Fdailywireplus-v2.imgix.net%2Fimages%2Fembedded-videos%2Fefeb6469-f2a2-44e3-8579-8059a1fe647a.png&amp;autoplay=false&amp;accent-color=%23DB3D3B&amp;primary-color=%23ffffff&amp;secondary-color=%23000000" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen"></iframe>
Credit: Superbloom Podcast
</div>
Talarico, who defeated Texas Rep. Jasmine Crockett in a contentious Democrat primary last week, has a history of pushing transgender ideology in the Texas state legislature and opposing legislation that would protect kids from transgender procedures. He <a href="https://journals.house.texas.gov/HJRNL/88R/PDF/88RDAY63FINAL.PDF" target="_blank" rel="noopener">voted against</a> a 2023 law that protected kids from transgender surgeries and cross-sex hormone procedures.
Talarico will face either incumbent Senator John Cornyn or Attorney General Ken Paxton, who are headed to a runoff election after a contentious Republican primary in May. Both have opposed transgender procedures on kids.
Talarico once claimed during a committee hearing that there are more than two sexes.
“The one thing I want us to all be aware of is that modern science obviously recognizes that there are many more than two biological sexes,” he <a href="https://nypost.com/2021/04/26/texas-lawmaker-sparks-backlash-for-arguing-there-are-six-sexes/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">said</a>, pointing to genetic abnormalities. “In fact, there are six.”
The Republican party says the video demonstrates that Talarico is a &#8220;sick freak.&#8221;
&#8220;James Talarico is a sick freak obsessed with talking to kids about sex changes,&#8221; GOP spokesman Zach Kraft told The Daily Wire. &#8220;I am not sure which one of his six genders he &#8216;identifies&#8217; as, but he needs to keep that to himself and stay away from children.&#8221;
The Democrat lawmaker, who has attempted to center his persona around his Christian faith, has claimed that parents who don’t “affirm” their children’s gender confusion are abusive. During an April 2019 hearing, he spoke out against a bill that would clarify the definition of abuse to make sure it would punish parents who didn’t accept their child’s so-called gender identity.
Talarico <a href="https://house.texas.gov/videos/5129" target="_blank" rel="noopener">said</a> he considered “unwillingness” to “acknowledge a child&#8217;s gender identity” as “abusive” or “destructive” to the child.
“I say that because if that&#8217;s our belief, a foundational belief, then the idea of being neutral on any kind of abuse seems worrisome to us, at the very least,” he said. “ And any idea about keeping it private also seems worrisome, because abuse is not something to be kept private or to be neutral on.”
“There&#8217;s only one person who can determine a child&#8217;s gender identity, and that&#8217;s the child,” Talarico said, <a href="https://house.texas.gov/videos/5129" target="_blank" rel="noopener">claiming</a> that accepting a child’s perception of his or her gender was a “life and death issue” and that parents could be pushing their kids to commit suicide if they don’t affirm their confusion.
Talarico also <a href="https://www.instagram.com/p/CVD-Gi-FbWh/?hl=en&amp;img_index=3" target="_blank" rel="noopener">attacked</a> Republicans for passing a bill in October 2021 keeping males out of female sports.
“Texas Republicans have passed their anti-trans bill. Over and over, Christians used scripture to justify bullying trans kids,&#8221; he said at the time. &#8220;I told them in my faith, God is non-binary.&#8221;

MixCollage-09-Mar-2026-01-04-PM-2287

WATCH: James Talarico Says He Loves ‘Trans Children’ In Unearthed Clip

Texas

Menu