In a U.S. Senate race that could determine control of the chamber, Alaskans now face an unusual choice: Dan Sullivan or Dan Sullivan. And a third political heavyweight named Dan Sullivan has drawn a line in the sand, weighing in on which Sullivan he backs heading into November.
Earlier this week, former Anchorage Mayor Dan A. Sullivan endorsed Sen. Dan S. Sullivan (R-AK) for re-election this fall over retired teacher Dan J. Sullivan and former Democratic Rep. Mary Peltola. 
“As the OG Dan Sullivan, I urge Alaskans to vote for Sen. Daniel S. Sullivan. He’s been great for Alaska,” the former mayor <a href="https://www.facebook.com/dan.sullivan.3910/posts/pfbid02rq5wKtwmJHp3b1fNCQmQ43AspBkDZqcCTDV5KneoBean9q35RKX7Ao5CmeEF9mXUl">posted on his Facebook page.</a>
The endorsement, which went viral on social media, follows a closely watched legal fight over Dan J. Sullivan’s Senate bid. The former elementary school teacher, who has no prior political experience, successfully qualified for the primary ballot, <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/dem-senate-hopeful-runs-from-kamala-harris-support">The Daily Wire previously reported.</a>
Republicans, including the incumbent senator, have accused Dan J. Sullivan of working with Democrats and the Peltola campaign to confuse voters and boost Peltola&#8217;s chances of defeating Sen. Sullivan.
Dan J. Sullivan, Peltola&#8217;s campaign, and the Alaska Democratic Party have denied the allegation.
Sen. Sullivan has called his namesake&#8217;s candidacy a &#8220;dirty political trick coordinated by Democrats and the campaign&#8221; of Peltola and <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2026/06/02/alaska-senate-dan-sullivan-name-ballot-peltola/6559e452-5ee5-11f1-9c46-d6211372eede_story.html">accused</a> him of &#8220;purposely trying to trick my constituents to rig the election for Peltola.&#8221;
Alaska election officials initially removed Dan J. Sullivan from the ballot, but he ultimately prevailed at the state’s highest court and was allowed to run.
Republicans&#8217; concerns intensified after Dan J. Sullivan placed third in the nonpartisan primary and secured a spot on the November ballot alongside Sen. Sullivan and Peltola. 
The national GOP, however, got some good news in the <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2026/08/18/us/elections/results-alaska-us-senate-primary.html">latest vote dump</a> from the August 18 election. As of Wednesday, Democratic candidate David B. Leslie was leading another Republican by just 43 votes for the final spot on the November ballot. If the result holds, Leslie would advance and could potentially pull votes away from Peltola.
Alaska uses ranked-choice voting in the general election. Voters rank candidates by preference, and if no candidate receives a majority of first-choice votes, the lowest-performing candidate is eliminated and those ballots are redistributed according to voters&#8217; subsequent choices.
Peltola also made waves earlier this month when she distanced herself from support offered by former Vice President Kamala Harris’ political action committee.  
Harris’s Fight for the People PAC sent an email urging supporters to “stand behind Mary,” <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/dem-senate-hopeful-runs-from-kamala-harris-support">The Daily Wire reported.</a> It called the Alaska contest a “must-win race” for Democrats hoping to retake the Senate and declared, “If there’s anyone who can flip Alaska and secure the Senate majority for Democrats — it’s Mary.”
Peltola&#8217;s team responded almost immediately, insisting it had not approved the email and had no knowledge of it before it went out.
“Mary isn’t seeking endorsements from anyone from the Lower 48 — her focus is and always will be Alaska,” the statement read. 
<a href="https://www.cookpolitical.com/senate/race/488531">The Cook Political Report</a> ranks the race as a toss-up.

dan-sullivan-x-2

Dan Sullivan Endorses Dan Sullivan Against Dan Sullivan In Key Senate Race

Alaska

ballots

dan sullivan

mary peltola

Mary Petola

Midterms

News

politics

Republican

Voting

A Boston federal judge on Wednesday lifted her remaining block on key portions of President Donald Trump&#8217;s executive order seeking to tighten mail-in voting rules ahead of the midterm elections.
U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani’s decision <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/supreme-court-makes-decision-in-mail-in-ballot-fight-ahead-of-midterms?author=Jacob+Wheeler&amp;category=News&amp;elementPosition=6&amp;row=0&amp;rowType=Vertical+List&amp;title=Supreme+Court+Makes+Decision+In+Mail-In+Ballot+Fight+Ahead+Of+Midterms">comes two days</a> after a divided Supreme Court stayed a previous ruling from Talwani that blocked the Trump administration from implementing portions of the order.
In her <a href="https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.mad.298449/gov.uscourts.mad.298449.204.0.pdf">nine-page order</a>, Talwani, an Obama appointee, expressed frustration with the Supreme Court&#8217;s intervention and cited Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson’s dissent but said she was “compelled” to lift the injunction in light of the high court’s ruling.
The development allows the U.S. Postal Service (USPS) to move forward for now with new requirements for mail ballots in federal elections, even as Democratic-led states challenge the new rule in a <a href="https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.mad.305406/gov.uscourts.mad.305406.1.0.pdf">separate lawsuit.</a>
“This is a major win for the security of American elections,&#8221; White House spokeswoman Lauren Bis told The Daily Wire. &#8220;These are commonsense measures that protect the security of mail-in ballots and ensure only Americans are electing American leaders. This Administration will continue to lawfully enact the agenda President Trump was elected on — which includes the safety and security of our elections.”
The Supreme Court&#8217;s unsigned 6-3 decision Monday marked an interim victory for Trump but did not resolve the order’s underlying legality.
The justices found that the Trump administration was likely to prevail on its argument that the states challenging the order lacked standing because they had not demonstrated the concrete and imminent injuries necessary to bring their claims at this stage.
“The Court’s disposition of this application does not mean that any measure taken by the Government to implement the Order will necessarily be lawful. On that score, time will tell,” the court wrote. “But the Order itself does not harm the States, so the District Court lacked jurisdiction to bar the Government from trying to implement it.”
In March, Trump signed an <a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2026/03/ensuring-citizenship-verification-and-integrity-in-federal-elections/">executive order</a> directing the Department of Homeland Security to create and distribute “State Citizenship Lists” identifying residents who are U.S. citizens and will be at least 18 years old by the next federal election. 
A separate provision directed the U.S. Postal Service to establish new procedures for mail-in and absentee ballots in federal elections.
Last Friday, the USPS issued a <a href="https://public-inspection.federalregister.gov/2026-17238.pdf">final rule</a> establishing new standards for mail-in ballots in federal elections. Under the rule, election officials would have to submit voters’ names, addresses, and unique ballot-envelope barcodes through a federal portal before handing ballots over to the Postal Service. Ballots in violation would be rejected and returned to the authorized ballot mailer.
All three liberal justices dissented from Monday&#8217;s Supreme Court decision. Justice Jackson wrote a solo dissent to blast the court’s order.
“This is not a close call. The Government suffers no harm from an injunction limiting unlawful actions, much less ‘hypothetical’ and ‘speculative’ acts that the Government says it was not even sure it would take,” Jackson wrote. 
“When the Government’s obvious goal is to interfere with the Plaintiff States’ practices and prerogatives in a manner that the Constitution does not authorize, it is both a serious legal error and a grave misuse of our equitable emergency powers to let the Executive proceed even one step further,” Jackson added.

IMG_6319

Trump Scores Second Major Win In Mail-In Voting Fight

2026 elections

Elections

Executive Orders

Mail-In Voting

President Trump

supreme court

Trump Administraiton

voting restrictions

The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday cleared the way for President Donald Trump to begin enforcing parts of an executive order aimed at restricting mail-in voting ahead of the midterm elections.
In an<a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/25pdf/26a124_hgci.pdf"> unsigned order</a>, a majority of the justices agreed to pause a lower-court ruling by U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani in Boston that blocked the Trump administration from carrying out portions of a March executive action. Monday’s order allows the Department of Homeland Security to move forward with creating and distributing “State Citizenship Lists” cataloging adult U.S. citizens in each state ahead of federal elections.
Monday’s decision is an interim victory for Trump but does not resolve the order&#8217;s underlying legality,<a href="https://www.cnbc.com/2026/08/24/supreme-court-mail-voting-trump.html"> CNBC reported.</a>
The Supreme Court found that the Trump administration was likely to prevail on its argument that the district court lacked jurisdiction to block the order, concluding that the states challenging it had not shown the concrete and imminent injuries required to bring their claims at this stage.
“The Court’s disposition of this application does not mean that any measure taken by the Government to implement the Order will necessarily be lawful. On that score, time will tell,” the court wrote. “But the Order itself does not harm the States, so the District Court lacked jurisdiction to bar the Government from trying to implement it.”
A separate injunction Talwani issued on Aug. 11 still bars the Postal Service from implementing procedural changes ahead of the Nov. 3 elections, meaning the administration would need to overcome that order before the USPS changes could take effect for the midterms.
In March, Trump signed an <a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2026/03/ensuring-citizenship-verification-and-integrity-in-federal-elections/">executive order </a>directing the Department of Homeland Security to take steps to create and distribute “State Citizenship Lists” cataloging residents who are U.S. citizens and will be over the age of 18 at the time of an upcoming federal election. The order also directed the U.S. Postal Service to begin a rulemaking process involving new procedures for mail-in and absentee ballots.
Last Friday, the USPS issued a<a href="https://public-inspection.federalregister.gov/2026-17238.pdf"> final rule</a> establishing new standards for mail-in ballots used in federal elections. Among other requirements, election officials would have to submit voter names, addresses, and unique ballot-envelope barcodes through a federal portal before outbound ballots are presented to the Postal Service. Mailings that fail to comply with the rule’s requirements would not be accepted and would be returned to the authorized ballot mailer. The USPS rule remains subject to the separate federal injunction blocking its implementation ahead of the midterms.
All three liberal justices dissented. Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson wrote a solo dissent to blast the court’s order.
“This is not a close call. The Government suffers no harm from an injunction limiting unlawful actions, much less ‘hypothetical’ and ‘speculative’ acts that the Government says it was not even sure it would take,” Jackson wrote.
This is a developing story. Stay with The Daily Wire for updates.

Supreme Court Makes Decision In Mail-In Ballot Fight Ahead Of Midterms

mail in ballots

trump administration

California Democrats are under fire after revealing that the state does not track noncitizens on its voter rolls, raising serious questions about compliance with federal standards.
The disclosure comes alongside findings from a Department of Homeland Security review that flagged roughly 250,000 noncitizens registered to vote across California, triggering calls for immediate roll cleanups.
&#8220;According to a DHS review of state voter rolls and public records, they identified approximately 278,000 non-citizens who are registered to vote in federal elections,&#8221; the White House <a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/election-integrity/?utm_medium=email&amp;utm_source=ncl_amplify&amp;utm_campaign=260818-icymi_california_admits_it_doesnt_track_noncitizens_on_voter_rolls_as_federal_law_requires&amp;utm_content=ncl-9v8BuAUBN3&amp;utm_term=&amp;_nlid=9v8BuAUBN3&amp;_nhids=ncM4MFZBmTEXyls">stated</a>. &#8220;Since Democrat states refused to share their voter files, the real number is actually much higher — yet even this limited analysis found more than a quarter of a million foreigners illegally registered to vote. Put together, these disclosures reveal an election system so broken and vulnerable that no one can possibly defend it.&#8221;
Jordan Sekulow, executive director of the American Center for Law and Justice, <a href="https://thefederalist.com/2026/08/17/california-admits-it-doesnt-track-noncitizens-on-voter-rolls-as-federal-law-requires/?utm_medium=email&amp;utm_source=ncl_amplify&amp;utm_campaign=260818-icymi_california_admits_it_doesnt_track_noncitizens_on_voter_rolls_as_federal_law_requires&amp;utm_content=ncl-FZ9z3crAdY&amp;utm_term=&amp;_nlid=FZ9z3crAdY&amp;_nhids=ncM4MFZBmTEXyls">reported</a> that his organization submitted public records requests seeking details on state efforts to safeguard voter rolls. The California Secretary of State’s Office responded that its central registration system does not maintain a specific category or reason for cancelations based on non-citizenship.
State officials noted that applicants must sign a document of eligibility under penalty of perjury when registering. But without serious tracking of potential noncitizen removals, it is difficult to see if those safeguards are working.
A different inquiry directed to the California Department of Justice about procedures for investigating referrals of possible illegal voting left some unanswered questions. California DOJ officials reported having no formal written policy listing standard procedures for managing or processing those referrals once they got them.
“California’s own Department of Justice — the agency charged with enforcing the state’s election laws — has no written policy for what happens when someone reports illegal voting. Not redacted. Not withheld. Nonexistent,” Sekulow wrote.
The National Voter Registration Act requires states to maintain and make publicly available their efforts to ensure roll accuracy for at least two years. A real problem is that driver’s licenses issued in California under state programs like AB 60, which don’t require proof of legal presence, can be used for personal identification.

California Residents Vote In Primary Election

California Dems Face Scrutiny After Troubling Revelation On Noncitizen Voters

California

Democrats

illegal immigrants

A lefty Lutheran minister running to flip a battleground Iowa congressional district has preached the importance of “showing up” on the campaign trail — while her own record shows she’s been a no-show for dozens of key votes in the state legislature.
State Senator Sarah Trone Garriott (D-IA), the Democratic candidate for Iowa’s 3rd Congressional District, leaned on her pastoral background in the <span class="iNqyIf" data-sfc-cp="" data-sfc-root="ep" data-copy-service-computed-style="font-family: &quot;Google Sans&quot;, &quot;Helvetica Neue&quot;, sans-serif; font-size: 16px; font-weight: 400; margin: 0px; text-decoration: none; border-bottom: 0px rgb(10, 10, 10);">Evangelical Lutheran Church in America (ELCA)<span class="WBgIic Wg1cdb notranslate" data-wiz-attrbind="class=yVqw8e_l/R4Tih" data-sfc-root="ep" data-wiz-uids="yVqw8e_m,yVqw8e_n,yVqw8e_o" data-copy-service-computed-style="font-family: &quot;Google Sans&quot;, &quot;Helvetica Neue&quot;, sans-serif; font-size: 16px; font-weight: 400; margin: 0px; text-decoration: none; border-bottom: 0px rgb(10, 10, 10);"><span class="NMq1me" data-animation-atomic="" data-wiz-attrbind="class=yVqw8e_l/TKHnVd" data-copy-service-computed-style="font-family: &quot;Google Sans&quot;, &quot;Helvetica Neue&quot;, sans-serif; font-size: 16px; font-weight: 400; margin: 0px; text-decoration: none; border-bottom: 0px rgb(10, 10, 10);"><span aria-hidden="true" data-sfc-ls="yVqw8e_l/kMntnd" data-copy-service-computed-style="font-family: &quot;Google Sans&quot;, &quot;Helvetica Neue&quot;, sans-serif; font-size: 16px; font-weight: 400; margin: 0px; text-decoration: none; border-bottom: 0px rgb(10, 10, 10);"> over the weekend to argue that she is uniquely equipped to represent her constituents every day in Washington.
“Everyone knows me as the pastor. I am a Lutheran minister. I still preach on the weekends, and this month I&#8217;m celebrating the 18th anniversary of my ordination,” she <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YKfUkUr9XhA">said</a> at the Iowa State Fair. “And one thing that I have learned from ministry is to serve a community well, you have got to show up.&#8221;
Trone Garriott&#8217;s voting record tells a very different story. In the 2026 Iowa Senate session, Trone Garriott has already missed 62 of 312 floor roll-call votes — roughly 20% of all votes, according to her legislative record reviewed by The Daily Wire.
Among the votes she <a href="https://www.legis.iowa.gov/docs/publications/SJNL/20260324_SJNL.pdf">skipped</a> were a <a href="https://legiscan.com/IA/bill/HF2515/2025">bill strengthening sentences for sex predators</a> convicted of sexually exploiting minors and legislation <a href="https://legiscan.com/IA/bill/HF2739/2025">funding the Iowa Department of Health and Human Services</a>, including Medicaid — a critical source of funding for rural health care and an issue Trone Garriott has <a href="https://www.desmoinesregister.com/videos/news/politics/2026/03/15/iowa-us-house-candidate-sarah-trone-garriott-talks-rural-healthcare/89154635007/">repeatedly highlighted</a> on the campaign trail. Treon Garriott did not obtain a leave of absence for missing either vote.
The D.C. hopeful also missed other consequential votes, including legislation funding <a href="https://www.legis.iowa.gov/docs/publications/SJNL/20260502_SJNL.pdf">veterans’ services</a> in the state and a bill cracking down on <a href="https://www.legis.iowa.gov/docs/publications/SJNL/20260502_SJNL.pdf">human trafficking</a> by expanding screening and strengthening protections for victims.
The Daily Wire has reached out to Trone Garriott for comment.
A state legislator missing 20% of recorded votes falls well short of the typical member of Congress&#8217; voting rate. In 2025, members of the House and Senate collectively participated in 96.8% of roll-call votes, meaning the average member missed roughly 3.2%, <a href="https://rollcall.com/2026/03/11/vote-studies-participation-up-in-2025-despite-notable-absences">according to a Roll Call analysis</a>.
Rep. Zach Nunn (R-IA), her Republican opponent, has a 95% attendance rate, according to <a href="https://www.stumpwatch.com/politicians/zachary-nunn-n000193">StumpWatch</a>, a political accountability tracking website. In November, the two candidates will battle for a purple congressional seat that could help determine control of the House. In 2024, Nunn won the Des Moines-area district by less than four percentage points.
&#8220;Sarah Trone Garriott couldn&#8217;t be bothered to show up when Iowans needed a tax break or rural healthcare needed funding, but she never hesitated to cash in her taxpayer-funded paycheck,” RNC spokesman Zach Kraft said in a statement to The Daily Wire. &#8220;Iowans want bipartisan workhorses like combat veteran Zach Nunn, not do-nothing career politicians like Sarah Trone Garriott.&#8221;
The 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, <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/watch-democrat-candidate-says-trans-ideology-threatens-the-white-male">The Daily Wire</a> previously reported. During a 2023 <a href="https://www.iaumc.org/newsdetail/sen-rev-sarah-throne-garrett-encourages-laity-to-confront-christian-nationalism-18119210">speech</a> on “Christian Nationalism” at Ames First United Methodist Church, Trone Garriott argued that Evangelical Christians needed “threats” to react against to maintain their identity.
When she did show up to vote, Trone Garriott rejected a bill to keep <a href="https://www.legis.iowa.gov/docs/publications/SJNL/20220302_SJNL.pdf#page=4">boys out of girls’ sports</a> and <a href="https://www.legis.iowa.gov/docs/publications/SJNL/20230307_SJNL.pdf#page=26">opposed</a> legislation shielding children from transgender procedures. Still, on the campaign trail, she touts herself as a legislator who will represent Republicans and Democrats alike in Congress.
&#8220;You have to show up for everyone because that is what my neighbors deserve. A legislator who is going to show up for them whether they vote for them or not,” she told the fair crowd. “And I would often knock doors just to tell my neighbors even if they said they weren’t going to vote for me. I want you to know who I am, and here’s my phone number so you can call me if you need help, because that’s my job.”

Iowa Residents Vote In Primary Election

Lefty Pastor Preached ‘Showing Up.’ Then We Checked Her Record.

Christianity

Faith

House of Representatives

Iowa

Sarah Trone Garriott

swing districts

voting history

voting record

A federal judge on Tuesday blocked a key part of President Donald Trump’s effort to tighten mail-in voting rules ahead of the 2026 midterm elections, preventing the U.S. Postal Service from implementing new nationwide requirements for mail ballots.
U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani issued a preliminary injunction barring the Postal Service from enforcing the mail-voting provisions of Trump&#8217;s executive order for the November elections or any earlier federal election.
The ruling expands an <a href="https://www.axios.com/2026/06/25/trump-mail-in-voting-order-blocked">earlier injunction</a> from Talwani that applied only to the 23 states and Washington, D.C., that sued over the order. The new ruling applies nationwide. 
Trump’s <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/trump-targets-mail-in-as-new-move-could-reshape-how-your-ballot-is-handled">executive order</a> directed federal agencies to work with states to create lists of eligible voters and instructed the Postal Service to use those lists when determining whether to deliver mail-in and absentee ballots.
Under the order, states could submit lists of voters they intended to provide mail ballots to, while the Postal Service would establish state-specific participation lists and transmit ballots only for voters enrolled through the new system. The order also called for official election-mail markings, unique barcodes, and other requirements for ballot envelopes.
Talwani ruled that the president likely lacks the constitutional authority to impose the requirements, siding with voting-rights groups that argued election regulation rests with states and Congress rather than the executive branch. 
“The court finds that enfranchisement heavily outweighs the executive’s attempt to unconstitutionally insert itself into the domain of election regulation,” Talwani <a href="https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/28549939-league-of-women-voters-vs-donald-trump-memorandum-and-order/">wrote</a>. 
She also warned that allowing the administration to implement the changes could create “increasing chaos and an erosion of trust in our democracy,” particularly with the midterm elections rapidly approaching.
&#8220;That it is now less than 90 days before the November 3, 2026 midterm elections underscores the critical need for an injunction to prevent Defendants from changing election rules on the eve of the election,&#8221; she wrote.
The Trump administration has argued that the executive order is intended to prevent noncitizens from voting and strengthen election security. Noncitizen voting in federal elections is already illegal, but the administration argues additional safeguards are necessary to verify voter eligibility.
The order came after Trump-backed legislation imposing additional federal voting requirements —the SAVE America Act— stalled in Congress. 
State election officials and voting-rights groups challenged Trump&#8217;s executive action, arguing that the Constitution gives states and Congress, rather than the president, authority over election procedures. 
Talwani, an Obama-appointed judge, agreed that the challengers were likely to prevail, concluding that the administration could not use the Postal Service to carry out the mail-voting provisions. 
The Trump administration has already asked the Supreme Court to intervene in the earlier litigation over the executive order, seeking to revive provisions blocked by lower courts before the November 3 midterms. 
The White House vowed Tuesday to continue fighting for Trump&#8217;s election agenda following Talwani&#8217;s latest ruling.
&#8220;The entire Trump Administration will continue lawfully enacting the agenda President Trump was elected to enact &#8211; which includes the safety and security of American elections,&#8221; White House spokeswoman Lauren Bis said in a statement. &#8220;This campaign pledge from the President is why millions of Americans sent him back to the White House.&#8221;
The ruling comes with less than three months remaining before Election Day, leaving the administration and states with limited time to resolve the legal dispute before voting begins.

President Trump Meets With Lebanese President Joseph Aoun

Trump’s Midterm Election Push Hits Legal Roadblock

2026 Midterms

election integrity

federal judge

SAVE Act

SAVE America Act

Voter ID

Voter Integrity

Leftist outlet MS NOW aired a segment featuring three Texas women who identified themselves as Republicans and vowed to cross over for James Talarico — but records show at least some of them have voted in Democratic primaries and donated to liberal candidates and causes.
Talarico, who has sparked backlash for his <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/this-book-is-gay-read-the-sexually-explicit-volumes-james-talaricos-church-gives-kids">fringe views on Christianity</a>, <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/watch-james-talarico-says-he-loves-trans-children-in-unearthed-clip">affection for transgender children</a>, and <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/the-audio-thats-blowing-a-hole-in-talaricos-christian-persona">disdain for the American flag</a>, is banking on Republican crossover support to become the first Texas Democrat elected statewide in decades.
“Republicans for Talarico is as real as the six genders that Talarico claims exist, but has yet to explain what they are. This lame rebrand of White Dudes for Kamala is full of lifelong Democrat donors, activists, and other losers,” RNC spokesman Zach Kraft said in a statement to The Daily Wire.
That “rebrand” was put on display earlier this month when MS NOW <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QTXuIMcrG2s">aired a segment</a> from the political show &#8220;<a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N3XT-GrW140&amp;t=1015s">Long Play</a>,&#8221; featuring three white women from Tarrant County who portrayed themselves as disgruntled conservatives eager to vote for one of the most liberal candidates in Texas to run for federal office. The exchange went viral after <a href="https://x.com/TeamTalaricoHQ/status/2084349378118943127?s=20">Talarico’s campaign</a> seized on the segment, dubbing the women “Republican Moms.&#8221;
During the segment, former school board candidate Mindy McClure described herself as a “moderate Republican,” but as the saying goes, follow the money. <a href="https://www.fec.gov/data/committee/C00931741/?cycle=2026&amp;tab=about-committee">Federal Election Commission filings</a> show McClure has repeatedly given through ActBlue to Democratic candidates and anti-Trump groups dating back to 2018, including the Lincoln Project and Kamala Harris&#8217; 2024 presidential campaign.
“You’ve been Republicans for most of your voting lives. Who’s voting for James Talarico?” asked Jennifer Palmieri, the former communications director for Hillary Clinton’s failed presidential campaign.
All three of the <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N3XT-GrW140">so-called Republican moms</a> raised their hands, arguing they had been duped by conservative culture-war messaging about “woke” politics in elementary schools.
Allison Stiles complained that COVID-19 had galvanized the “far right” around concerns over public school curriculum, using that apparent frustration as part of her rationale for supporting Talarico. “And I never send money to state people, but this year I did. Not only am I going to vote for you, but I’m going to give you some money!”
“It seems to be this systematic dismantling, where they want to almost, to use the phrase, burn it all down, and then rebuild it the way they want it,” Erin Montgomery said. “These are people that I may have supported, and I felt like I held a chunk of responsibility for what was happening, and now I&#8217;m going to do my damnedest to turn it around to get them out.”
Montgomery hasn&#8217;t <a href="https://x.com/CurrentRevolt/article/2085077692290937195/media/2085076944916287488">voted </a>in a Republican primary since at least 2017 and over the last 20 years has voted in more Democratic primaries than Republican primaries, according to a Republican source who has reviewed the voting records. <a href="https://x.com/CurrentRevolt/status/2084733284194365561?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E2084733284194365561%7Ctwgr%5E88f64285ce5f9c9c82a94de61c205a277f64cc00%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&amp;ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fdallasexpress.com%2Fstate%2Fcurious-case-of-talaricos-republican-moms-voting-records-dont-match-the-script%2F">Texas reporter Tony Ortiz</a> also reviewed the records, which showed that at least two of the women participated in Democratic primaries despite identifying themselves as Republican voters during the interview.
“Ran the voting record for one of the ‘Republican’ women featured here and she’s already been voting in Democratic primaries this year,” Ortiz wrote in a post on X. “Seems disingenuous to call yourself Republican if you’ve already been voting Dem.”
In response to the discrepancies, a Talarico campaign spokesperson said the women have no official ties to the campaign, <a href="https://www.foxnews.com/politics/rnc-chair-says-talaricos-gop-crossover-hopes-pipe-dream-nobody-going-follow-him">telling Fox News</a>: &#8220;Republicans in Texas are endorsing James Talarico and rejecting Ken Paxton because they know James will bring people together to lower costs while Paxton continues to enrich himself at the expense of working people.”
The strategy extends beyond the three women from Tarrant County. Talarico has also leaned into the endorsement of former Tarrant County Judge Glen Whitley, a longtime Republican who has in recent years backed prominent Democrats — including Kamala Harris for president and Colin Allred over Sen. Ted Cruz in the 2024 Senate race, <a href="https://www.wfaa.com/article/news/politics/inside-politics/texas-politics/prominent-texas-republican-endorses-democrats-kamala-harris-colin-allred/287-1a3450ff-8796-49bc-9363-e8e4d726c7b8">according to local outlet WFAA</a>.
At a campaign stop in San Antonio over the weekend, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton called for Republican unity heading into November, warning that the race could help determine the balance of power in Washington.
“We need to unify, because the choice — as James Talarico would say — is binary. He would say nonbinary,” Paxton <a href="https://x.com/James_Barragan/status/2086144021466935724?s=20">joked</a>. “We have a radical, socialist Democrat and a conservative Republican … we’re all coming together because we realize this is a threat not just to Texas but the entire nation.”

Texas Senate Candidate James Talarico Campaigns Along The Texas Border

‘Republicans For Talarico’ Exposed As Complete Scam

2026 election

James Talarico

Ken Paxton

MS NOW

Republicans

Texas

An Obama-appointed federal judge on Wednesday issued a sweeping order blocking President Trump’s voter ID executive order, which would have required proof of citizenship for voter registration.
U.S. District Court Judge Denise Casper, who is based in Boston, was nominated by former President Barack Obama and confirmed by the U.S. Senate in 2010 <a href="https://www.congress.gov/nomination/111th-congress/1710">via voice vote.</a> With Wednesday&#8217;s order, she effectively turned her preliminary injunction into a permanent block on the administration’s attempt to overhaul elections without Congress. 
Casper dismissed the administration’s claim that the lawsuit was premature, ruling that election oversight belongs to the states and Congress under the Constitution and that Trump’s requirements violated the separation of powers.
The Constitution “does not grant the President any specific powers over elections,” she wrote, according to the <a href="https://apnews.com/article/trump-elections-judge-358912bcb6c7223b3d2d36465156fde9">Associated Press</a>.
The issue of late-arriving ballots is currently <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/americas-biggest-legal-bombshells-are-still-ahead?author=Jacob+Wheeler&amp;category=News&amp;elementPosition=26&amp;row=0&amp;rowType=Vertical+List&amp;title=America%E2%80%99s+Biggest+Legal+Bombshells+Are+Still+Ahead">before the U.S. Supreme Court</a>, with a ruling expected as soon as Thursday. Justices will decide whether a Mississippi law that allows a grace period for mail-in ballots is constitutional. A ruling in favor of the Republican National Committee, however, could upend voting rules in dozens of states. 
“I hope the Chief Justice understands the path these rogue judges have charted for the judiciary,” White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller <a href="https://x.com/StephenM/status/2069828946246381808?s=20">said</a> in response to the ruling. 
In March 2025, President Trump <a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/03/preserving-and-protecting-the-integrity-of-american-elections/">signed an executive order</a> requiring proof of citizenship to register for federal elections and mandating that ballots be received on election day. The order directed states to share voter data with federal agencies and cooperate in prosecuting election crimes, and threatened to withhold federal funding from noncompliant states.
“Despite pioneering self-government, the United States now fails to enforce basic and necessary election protections employed by modern, developed nations, as well as those still developing,” the directive read.  
The ruling deals another blow to Trump’s election security agenda, coming hours after he refused to sign bipartisan housing legislation over the Senate’s failure to pass the SAVE America Act.
The president said in a mid-morning Truth Social post that he had canceled his planned press conference on Capitol Hill and would not be signing the housing bill, <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/trump-gives-washington-a-taste-of-its-own-medicine-refuses-to-sign-housing-bill">The Daily Wire</a> reported. 
“Today’s Housing News Conference and Signing is hereby cancelled until such time as we pass the desperately needed SAVE AMERICA ACT, which I consider to be a National Emergency,” Trump said.
Earlier Wednesday morning, he foreshadowed his frustrations with a post about Democrat Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren’s involvement with the housing bill.
“The Elizabeth ‘Pocahontas’ Warren centric housing bill, which is of minor importance compared to lower interest rates, and even FISA, pales in comparison to passing THE SAVE AMERICA ACT,” Trump wrote. “That is what Americans, both Dumocrats, Republicans, and everyone else, care about.”
The Department of Justice is expected to appeal the ruling.

US-VOTE-POLITIC

The Election Security Measure An Obama Judge Just Blocked

Trump

President Donald Trump fired off a Truth Social broadside on Thursday, accusing California Democrats of stealing the state&#8217;s gubernatorial primary — and given the Golden State&#8217;s long, sordid history of electoral shenanigans, he&#8217;s got plenty of reason to be suspicious.
&#8220;There&#8217;s BIG cheating by the Dumocrats in California,&#8221; Trump <a href="https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/posts/116690093479247202">posted</a>. &#8220;Votes are all tied up. May not be in for weeks. Under investigation by the U.S. Attorney&#8217;s Office in Los Angeles. Why the vote counting DELAY???&#8221;
The <a href="https://www.reuters.com/world/us/hilton-becerra-lead-tight-primary-race-california-governor-2026-06-03/">results</a> from Tuesday&#8217;s jungle primary are indeed dragging. With all precincts partially reporting in the governor&#8217;s race, Trump-endorsed Republican TV host Steve Hilton leads the pack with 27.6% of the vote, while former Biden Health and Human Services Secretary Xavier Becerra sits in second at 25.6% — each clearing 1.3 million votes. Liberal billionaire Tom Steyer lurks in third at 19.8%, and since most California ballots are cast by mail — with postmarked ballots accepted up to a week after Election Day — the final two finalists advancing to November are far from settled.
If the results hold, California gets the rare spectacle of a true Republican vs. Democrat November showdown, with Hilton facing Becerra for the seat being vacated by term-limited Gov. Gavin Newsom. Becerra, if he wins in November, would be the first Latino elected governor of a state where 40% of residents are Hispanic. Hilton — a British-born former Fox News host who became a U.S. citizen in 2021 — is hoping to follow fellow immigrant and Republican Arnold Schwarzenegger to Sacramento.
Trump celebrated Hilton&#8217;s early lead, posting that the former television commentator &#8220;will turn California around, quickly — and the Federal Government will be there, with him, to help!&#8221;
But Trump&#8217;s fraud allegations aren&#8217;t coming out of nowhere. California Democrats have spent years engineering the electoral deck.
In November 2025, voters <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/californias-redistricting-ballot-measure-overwhelmingly-passes?author=Cameron+Arcand&amp;category=News&amp;elementPosition=undefined&amp;row=0&amp;rowType=Vertical+List&amp;title=California%E2%80%99s+Redistricting+Ballot+Measure+Overwhelmingly+Passes">passed Proposition 50</a> — dubbed the &#8220;Election Rigging Response Act&#8221; — which suspended California&#8217;s independent redistricting commission and handed Democrats control of a new congressional map explicitly designed to flip five Republican-held House seats. Newsom and former Democratic House Speaker Nancy Pelosi championed it. Former California Republican Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger opposed it. It passed with 64% of the vote in an election that the state mailed ballots to all voters.
Then, in February 2026, Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco — himself a Republican gubernatorial candidate — <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/democrat-ag-makes-behind-the-scenes-ballot-move-what-is-he-afraid-of">executed search warrants</a> and seized 650,000 ballots from that very Prop 50 election after a citizen watchdog group identified a stunning discrepancy: 45,896 more votes tallied than physical ballots received. California&#8217;s Democratic Attorney General Rob Bonta immediately moved to block the count — and the ballots were scheduled for destruction in May. The question that hangs in the air: if the results were clean, why fight so hard to stop someone from counting the paper?
California&#8217;s electoral history offers other reasons for suspicion. In the 2024 congressional elections, Democrats <a href="https://www.latimes.com/politics/story/2024-12-07/californias-congressional-races-are-a-bright-spot-for-democrats">flipped three Republican House seats</a> — including one by a paper-thin 187-vote margin that wasn&#8217;t called until a month after Election Day, with both parties deploying armies of staffers to &#8220;cure&#8221; flagged mail ballots. More Democratic ballots were cured than Republican ones — by a margin exceeding the final vote spread.
Republicans are energized heading into November. Early turnout data from the primary showed the GOP outpacing Democrats in several key counties.
But in California, where mail ballots arrive for weeks and ballot-curing operations can erase narrow deficits, election night results have a funny way of shifting in Democrats&#8217; favor by the time the last envelope is opened.

Trump Signs Order Directing Customs Crackdown Amid Trade Gaps

Trump Blasts ‘Big Cheating’ In California As Votes Trickle In

California Elections

donald trump

California Republicans appear energized heading into the state’s closely watched June 2 primary, holding an early turnout advantage as Democrats scramble to unite behind a candidate in multiple key races.
The Golden State sends every registered voter a mail-in ballot, arguing that the policy gives voters ample time and access to make their voices heard. With a few weeks until Election Day, more than 900,000 have returned ballots in California&#8217;s primary, which features a contentious gubernatorial race plagued by <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/swalwell-accuser-claims-dem-drugged-choked-and-raped-her?author=Jacob+Wheeler&amp;category=News&amp;elementPosition=73&amp;row=0&amp;rowType=Vertical+List&amp;title=Swalwell+Accuser+Claims+Dem+Drugged%2C+Choked%2C+And+Raped+Her">scandals</a> and <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/democrat-crashes-out-on-reporter-before-she-can-even-ask-a-question?author=Jacob+Wheeler&amp;category=News&amp;elementPosition=13&amp;row=0&amp;rowType=Vertical+List&amp;title=Democrat+Crashes+Out+On+Reporter+Before+She+Can+Even+Ask+A+Question">stumbles</a> and the Los Angeles mayoral contest. 
The data,<a href="https://tracker.politicaldata.com/?type=statewide"> compiled by Political Data Intelligence</a>, paints an encouraging early picture for Republicans. As of May 15, statewide Republican turnout stood at 6%, compared to 4% for Democrats. Despite trailing Democrats nearly 2-to-1 in voter registration, Republicans remain competitive in the total vote share.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
California Early Voting Now vs at this point in 2022
At this point in 2022: 
🔵 54% 
🔴 26% 
🟡 20%
(719k Voted)
Now: 
🔵 41% (-13) 
🔴 37% (+11) 
🟡 22% (+2)
(906K Voted) <a href="https://t.co/dI1IfKRDjB">https://t.co/dI1IfKRDjB</a> <a href="https://t.co/FRGT6nYz2E">pic.twitter.com/FRGT6nYz2E</a>
— OSZ (@OpenSourceZone) <a href="https://twitter.com/OpenSourceZone/status/2055711433568969212?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">May 16, 2026</a></blockquote>
Of the 900,000 ballots returned so far, 371,130 were cast by registered Democrats, compared to 334,791 from registered Republicans. Another 199,967 came from independents or voters with no party affiliation. GOP returns have increased 11% compared to this point in the 2022 midterm cycle. 
In battleground Orange County — where President Ronald Reagan once joked that <a href="https://www.reaganlibrary.gov/archives/speech/remarks-republican-campaign-rally-fullerton-california">“good Republicans go before they die”</a> — the divide is even more pronounced. Roughly 6% of registered voters have returned ballots, with Republicans holding an advantage of more than 10,000 votes. 
In San Diego County, where Democrats make up the majority of registered voters, Republicans have posted an 11% turnout rate — nearly double the Democratic rate of 6% — and account for a majority of returned ballots.
Even in deep-blue Los Angeles County, home to the marquee showdown between Mayor Karen Bass and Spencer Pratt, Republicans hold a 4% turnout rate, compared to a sluggish 2% for Democrats. Democrats maintain a raw vote lead in the City of Los Angeles, reflecting their significant registration advantage over Republicans.
Older white voters make up the overwhelming majority of the early vote so far, according to PDI&#8217;s data. 
“Republicans are potentially returning their ballots at a pre-2020 rate, before [President Donald] Trump and other leaders discouraged it,” PDI Vice President Paul Mitchell <a href="https://nypost.com/2026/05/16/us-news/california-sees-massive-surge-in-republican-votes-as-more-than-900k-ballots-already-returned/?utm_medium=social&amp;utm_campaign=nypost&amp;utm_source=twitter">told The New York Post.</a> “It’s kind of typical of a low-turnout election that these are the people that always vote in every election. They probably almost always vote early, and they’re getting their ballots in right away.”
On the Republican side, voters have to choose between former Fox News host Steve Hilton and Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco.
Former Health and Human Services Secretary Xavier Becerra leads the crowded Democratic field, followed by progressive billionaire Tom Steyer, former Orange County Congresswoman Katie Porter, San Jose Mayor Matt Mahan, and former Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa. 
Under California’s “jungle primary” system, the top two vote-getters advance to the general election in November regardless of party.

Americans voting in an election

California Republicans See Surge In Early Voting With Democrats In Disarray

Primary

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

opinion

Virginia&#8217;s most popular Republican is AWOL on the most ludicrous redistricting in the nation.
The Commonwealth of Virginia now stands exactly a month away from an April 21st vote that would approve the most partisan Democrat gerrymander in the nation, and Republicans are nowhere to be found.
Governor Abigail Spanberger (&#8220;Moderate&#8221; &#8211; The Wall Street Journal) rubber stamped the 10-1 redistricting attempt by octogenarian radical leftist Louise Lucas — who actually runs the Richmond legislature — sending a bizarrely shaped map to Virginia voters which amounts to a blatant power grab, allowing for five Democrat majority seats all based within a stone&#8217;s throw of Washington, D.C. to govern the entire state. With zero acknowledgement that Virginia&#8217;s electorate had a Republican governor just months ago, and a 6-5 Democrat majority in the current Congressional representation, it&#8217;s an obscene approach to destroying local representation that short-circuits districts approved by a bipartisan commission on a decade-long basis.
The question on the minds of conservative Virginians through all of this is clear: Where is Glenn Youngkin?
Youngkin, the most popular Republican politician in Virginia, criticized this attempt in its early days. But when Virginians tune in to March Madness, they aren&#8217;t seeing a single ad featuring the former governor. Instead, they&#8217;re barraged with Democrat ads featuring Donald Trump and decrying the current map (where they already have a majority) as racist, unfair, and corrupt.
The deluge is unending, and funded primarily from out of state Democratic entities.
The amount in question is upwards of <a href="https://x.com/apublictrust/status/2031813155807019222">$22 million</a> in ad spending — closer to $30 million according to some consultants — and one of its biggest funders is, you guessed it, George Soros to the tune of <a href="https://x.com/MSchmidtRVA/status/2034295507833454607">$5 million</a>.
By comparison, the Virginia Republican-aligned pushback in defense of the current map is essentially nonexistent. There is no major ad campaign pointing out the false narrative Democrats are advancing. With Youngkin apparently unwilling to expend significant political capital fighting this effort, only former Attorney General Jason Miyares has stepped into the breach — and unlike the former governor, he lacks the donor class connections to bring major resources to the fight.
What&#8217;s particularly maddening for conservatives in the Commonwealth is that even Democrats admit the April referendum is a close-run thing, well within the margin despite their recent sweep of the Old Dominion&#8217;s top three jobs. With a winnable situation sitting right in front of them, though, Republicans seem to be throwing up their hands — or hoping that the Virginia Courts will bail them out and render the map unacceptable. But this question won&#8217;t even be heard <a href="https://wtop.com/virginia/2026/03/virginias-redistricting-referendum-still-sparking-fierce-partisan-debate/">until after the vote</a>.
Glenn Youngkin seems to have a mindset that having had a successful four-year tenure as governor, his time engaged in partisan politics is at a comfortable lull. He&#8217;s happy to wait a couple of years and just run for president if he&#8217;s in the mood. But if this blatantly partisan Democrat redistricting wins in April, Republicans — and not just those in Virginia — should absolutely blame him for the loss, and for the ludicrously skewed gerrymander that will end up with five Democrat Congressmen representing most of the state while comfortably living within driving distance of the best country clubs in Northern Virginia.

Virginia Gubernatorial Candidate Winsome Earle-Sears Closing Campaign Rally

Yes, Virginia, There Is A Glenn Youngkin — He’s Just Not Around To Fight Gerrymanders

Yes, Virginia, There Is A Glenn Youngkin — He's Just Not Around To Fight Gerrymanders

Menu