Republican Departures From Congress Surge Ahead of 2026 Elections,
"Out of a total of 65 U.S. incumbents from both parties who will not seek to keep their post this year, 40 are Republican lawmakers, the website reported—six in the Senate and 34 in the House. On top of that, Republicans also represent the majority of lawmakers leaving office early this year—six out of ten." https://www.newsweek.com/republican-departures-from-congress-surge-ahead-of-2026-elections-11638354
In an effort to counter the exodus, voting restrictions are now a priority,
"DORAL, Florida, March 9 (Reuters) - U.S. President Donald Trump, addressing Republican lawmakers directly on Monday, pressed them to enact sweeping new voting restrictions as a way to "guarantee" victory in November's midterm elections, saying he would refuse to sign new bills into law until they do.
The SAVE America Act would impose new voter restrictions including a requirement for proof of citizenship for people registering to vote. It first emerged two years ago in response to Trump's false claims that people in the country illegally were voting in U.S. elections." https://www.reuters.com/legal/government/house-republicans-seek-path-trump-agenda-amid-war-election-headwinds-2026-03-09/
Didn't the republicans realise a while back that if the required checks were imposed, one of which was a passport it would probably harm turnout for their own voters?
Didn't the republicans realise a while back that if the required checks were imposed, one of which was a passport it would probably harm turnout for their own voters?
It didnt help the tories. However that doesnt mean the republicans cant be, ermmm, flexible about how and when to enforce it. A true red county/voting station then just be relaxed but then crank up the checks everywhere else.
"Out of a total of 65 U.S. incumbents from both parties who will not seek to keep their post this year, 40 are Republican lawmakers
interesting article about why Republicans are looking to leave. Article suggests that support for Trump in the House may have already reached a high watermark, and regardless of mid-terms, is only headed in one direction.
saying he would refuse to sign new bills into law until they do.
Was watching something yesterday that said this probably won't have the effect he thinks it will - the Constitution says that if the President doesn't sign a law from Congress within 10 days it automatically becomes law anyway.
saying he would refuse to sign new bills into law until they do.
Was watching something yesterday that said this probably won't have the effect he thinks it will - the Constitution says that if the President doesn't sign a law from Congress within 10 days it automatically becomes law anyway.
IANAE, but that's only partially true
He must either sign it or veto it and return it within 10 days. If he does nothing then it becomes law as if signed.
If he vetoes it and returns it within 10 days then Congress must vote by 2/3 majority to pass it.
If he vetoes it and returns it within 10 days into an adjourned house then it dies.
It appears, unsurprisingly, that the immigrant removal policy cooked up by Steven Himmler and Il Douche is having completely the opposite effect to what was claimed in Douche’s Big Beautiful Bill! With any luck, his tottering enterprise will come crashing down and bury the son of a bitch!
Immigrants made up 14.7% of the U.S. population in 2023, but paid 17.3% of the share of taxes and made up 17.4% of the share of income, making higher income and paying more in taxes per capita than their U.S.-born counterparts, according to the report.
Bloody immigrants coming over and paying more taxes than the locals....
How do you re-word "they took our jerbs" to "they paid for our roads, fire departments, parks etc etc etc" but keep it catchy?
It appears, unsurprisingly, that the immigrant removal policy cooked up by Steven Himmler and Il Douche is having completely the opposite effect
Remember that Miller (especially) is a unapologetic white supremacist - the immigration policy is having precisely the effect intended - the removal from America of non-whites. He (Miller, and for that matter; Bannon, Fuentes, etc) do not give a single shit about the economic impact good or ill.
The Cult is alive and flourishing, praise the king.
https://bsky.app/profile/bgrueskin.bsky.social/post/3mgpixjozlc23
The Republican Party is now a full on evangelical religious cult
An excerpt from a recent Robert Reich newsletter explains much:
Some thirty years ago, my dear friend, the late Republican Senator Alan Simpson, told me Democrats viewed Republicans as stupid and Republicans viewed Democrats as evil. “I’d rather be in the stupid party,” he chuckled.
I asked him why Republicans saw Democrats as evil.
He took a deep breath. “Religion.”
I said I didn’t understand.
“It’s the Christian right,” he said as if talking to a five-year-old. “Since Reagan, my party has been a magnet for religious conservatives and Christian fundamentalists, where it’s all about good and evil. Too bad, pal. You’re on the evil side.”
That was thirty years ago. Since then, the divide has only sharpened.
well if the other day when this orange goon was talking about dead people walking around with no legs wasn't enough, here's his latest spout of verbal diarrhea... he seems to have forgotten who the president is.
https://www.independent.co.uk/tv/news/trump-gavin-newsom-dyslexia-us-president-video-b2940198.html
Danish PM Mette Frederiksen has gone to the polls early hoping to benefit from a “Greenland bounce” in her popularity after standing up to Trump. Starmer has also benefited from adopting a harder line over Iran. Are we seeing a wider movement where Trump is an electoral liability to Europeans who do not distance themselves from him? Even Badenoch called him “childish” (she’s not wrong).
We’re at the point now where unless you're an Israeli politician then the more distance you can put between yourself and Trump, the more you’ll benefit electorally.
Even Kemi, who’s hardly the brightest button, has finally fathomed this one out. Has Farage gone on holiday again? He’s been very quiet of late. Maybe everyone needs to keep posting up pictures like this, just to remind everyone how buried in Donald’s colon he is
A US view on the behavior of their president in The Atlantic
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/2026/03/trump-iran-war-allies/686423/
Sorry, but that's an AI image - no way is his tie that short.
The slow learner
Abandonment of Ukraine incoming in 5, 4, 3...
I think there's a non-zero chance that Trump will decide that if Europe won't help him, then he won't help Ukraine. I don't know if there's any plans being made in Paris, Rome, Berlin or London for that eventuality.
There have been prior claims that France was delivering a large part of Intelligence support to Ukraine a while back, I don't know how valid that was/is?
There have been prior claims that France was delivering a large part of Intelligence support to Ukraine a while back, I don't know how valid that was/is?
In December 2025, Chief of the Main Directorate of Intelligence of Ukraine, Kyrylo Budanov, said that US intel was critically important, particularly for ballistic missile launches towards Ukraine.
President Macron's January 2026 announcement seemed to be a bit over-blown with his claimed 2/3 of all intel. It may be that France can duplicate a proportion of US intel
Hospital ship, the USNS Mercy, completed some minor repairs in Alabama and set sail at the end of Feb.
She was one of two possible candidates that were on the way to Greenland at President Trump's request.
.
.
.
She's turned up off Portland, Oregon (almost enough scrabble letters there to make "Greenland") where she's waiting to access the Vigor works for a refit. Her sister ship is still moored at Norfolk, Virginia
TACO.
WTF did he just 'joke' in the Japanese Prime Minister's presence ! Jesus effing Christ
Don't mention the war....it's ok, I think I got away with it.
Just watched it on YouTube as the racist old grandpa insulted Sanae Takaichi whilst she looked her watch.
It's disgusting that the Orange monster uses the garish oval office to degrade world leaders.
^^ It comes back to an article sometime posted a day or so ago, I think it was The Atlantic?
Trump says stuff like this but he either has such little intelligence or even memory that he doesn't understand that comments like this (or threats to Greenland, tariffing allies, undermining other countries politicians etc etc) aren't forgotten by other leaders or their populaces. Even if they pretend they are forgotten or other demeaning measures are taken in order to placate Trump it's still pointless. Within days, weeks or months, trump's forgotten about the favour and will slam you and your country publicly anyway.
So, better to say FU from the start so at least you don't lose political capital at home for absolutely no lasting positive position from Trump.
Another complimentary article on empower dumb-**** in another American publication…
Such a classy and thoughtful comment from the supposed president of the USA
https://bsky.app/profile/mehdirhasan.bsky.social/post/3mhlmkw4xxs2r
I just read this on the BBC. The man truly has no shame.
How many years have we spent being gobsmacked at how truly vile he is and saying ‘he can’t get any lower’, yet he somehow always does.
That the American people saw fit to elect him not once, but twice, is a stain on the nation and all the more reason we should distancing ourselves from them as rapidly as possible
Does the fact that he's such a vile individual not make it into American media, or don't they care?
They're told they like it
The man truly has no shame.
and
That the American people saw fit to elect him not once, but twice, is a stain on the nation
Is he not exactly the president it was possible to predict he would be both when 'in business' and during the election campaign(s)? He is the very definition of Ronseal....he is exactly what it said on the tin.
The problem is Americans. The majority of them thought he was their man. Not just the poor ones, or the ill educated ones, the majority of them. The average Trump voter earns more than me - a graduate in a graduate profession. There is no excuse - this is their guy - this is what they chose, consciously and deliberately. Trump is not an outlier - he's just a graphical representation of the American collective mindset.
Next time you hear an American accent - just remember that post and remind yourself that odds on the person in front you looks a bit like that on the inside.
It’s not just USA citizens. Many European countries are close to electing much the same, only their/our democratic systems have delayed it happening. It’s coming…
i read somewhere in the last day or two that it would only take something like ten republicans to stop all this if they voted to impeach
Now i dont know much about US constitution so i dont know if that is true or not, but even if it is kind of correct, give or take a few, it does make you stop in your tracks and go wtaf?
The problem is Americans. The majority of them thought he was their man. Not just the poor ones, or the ill educated ones, the majority of them.
A majority of Americans did not vote for him. Very close to (but slightly less than) 50% of votes were for Trump but the turnout was only 64% so less than a third of elegible voters actually voted for him.
This is partly a problem of their voting system but it’s really a problem with the quality of the opposition. We suffer the same issue here - Boris ended up as PM and Farage might too: not because a majority of people think that’s a good idea but because: 1. People who have been tribal voters who hate the candidate, can’t bring themselves to vote for the “enemy” so vote for nobody.
2. People who didn’t like the other candidate weren’t prepared to hold their nose and mark an X to keep the nut job out. So abstain.
3. The media and polls suggested Kamala likely to win so abstentions feel making a protest feel they aren’t risking anything.
4. for far too long politicians have been career managed establishment figures - so someone with personality stands out and can gain votes.
An American voter gives their opinion near the beginning of last night's show:
2. People who didn’t like the other candidate weren’t prepared to hold their nose and mark an X to keep the nut job out. So abstain.
it was more than that - a lot of false equivalence was drawn between harris/biden and Trump, a lot of dems were outraged by biden not stopping israel and despite all the evidence thought trump would stop the war, because of his non interventionist stance......
He is the very definition of Ronseal....he is exactly what it said on the tin.
He's wearing whats in the tin too it seems
i read somewhere in the last day or two that it would only take something like ten republicans to stop all this if they voted to impeach
Impeachment is only a first step and just requires a simple majority - successfully voting to impeach simply moves the process on to a trial at some point in the future and that trial has a much higher bar - 2/3rds of the senate - to actually convict. Impeachment in itself stops nothing, it's the equivalent of being charged in a usual court case, Trump was impeached twice in his last term and it was pretty much business as usual. I'm not sure theres much of an appetite really to go through a fruitless exercise for a third time.
The maths of it all changes after the midterms possibly (should they happen, and happen in a reasonably fair way - ie with no more republican gerrymandering and voter suppression than normal). Record numbers of republicans are standing down in November and theres rumours that the the party as a whole hopes to it gets rinsed in the election and loses both houses - partly for the consequences it would create for trump directly but also as a way for the party to try and divorce itself from Trump's legacy and start afresh after he's gone.
a lot of racism and sexism reduced Harris vote
One of the key things was also Biden's, and therefore Harris', support for Israel
I'd be keen to hear the thoughts of those voters in recent weeks but I doubt we will
a lot of racism and sexism reduced Harris vote
all the other losers in the previous 59 presidential elections were white, or men. Overwhelmingly they were both. Being black, or a woman won't have been particularly off-putting to potential democratic voters - voters who'd not so long ago elected the countries first black president and who's party leader in the house of representative was a woman. There are far more nuanced reasons for Harris losing. Many voters would have been put off because she's from California for instance which is broadly considered to be an electoral handicap and (a key motivation for choosing Walz as a running mate.)
But most particularly the handicap she had was there was no primary campaign. The people who win the nomination for the presidential race rarely go into the campaign as the favourite- the process of campaigning for nomination is a way that people are able to grow into the role of being 'presidential'.
Given that she was just lumbered with the nomination a few weeks before the election its actually remarkable she polled as well as she did. She wouldn't be crazy to go for it again in the sense of throwing her hat in the ring next time around
I wonder if someone from the past will own up to their own mistakes in the past and open up about what Epstein did and how any Trump facts can be made public.
After the sick insult to the FBI guy dying n the last day or so there must be someone who loves USA and wants this to end? Maybe someone who has nothing to loose and is getting old as well.
The problem is Americans. The majority of them thought he was their man. Not just the poor ones, or the ill educated ones, the majority of them.
A majority of Americans did not vote for him. Very close to (but slightly less than) 50% of votes were for Trump but the turnout was only 64% so less than a third of elegible voters actually voted for him.
This is partly a problem of their voting system but it’s really a problem with the quality of the opposition. We suffer the same issue here - Boris ended up as PM and Farage might too: not because a majority of people think that’s a good idea but because: 1. People who have been tribal voters who hate the candidate, can’t bring themselves to vote for the “enemy” so vote for nobody.
2. People who didn’t like the other candidate weren’t prepared to hold their nose and mark an X to keep the nut job out. So abstain.
3. The media and polls suggested Kamala likely to win so abstentions feel making a protest feel they aren’t risking anything.
4. for far too long politicians have been career managed establishment figures - so someone with personality stands out and can gain votes.
Good points poly. Having it in for all Americans because enough of a a minority voted for Trump is like having it in for all Brits because enough of a minority voted for Brexit.
At some point, there will be a US not run by MAGA loons. We need to be ready and willing to work with them to demonstrate that cooperation and concensus is better than isolationism. Otherwise we increase the level of division in the world.
Does all this mean he has to give back his FIFA Peace Prize?
It's meaningless, so, no
There are far more nuanced reasons for Harris losing.
I'm sure there are, but not to put words in his mouth; I don't think that's what @tjagain is suggesting. I agree with him that there were probably many Republican and Democrat voting Americans that would've been more likely put their mark against a white man -had one been running against Trump, than a woman of mixed heritage.
4. for far too long politicians have been career managed establishment figures - so someone with personality stands out and can gain votes.
I am not sure about this one. Leaving aside the "establishment" piece the reason most politicians learn not to answer questions in a certain way is because they get crucified if they dont.
The likes of Trump or farage though are allowed not to answer questions in a way others are not. Corbyn for example got attacked for getting moody especially when doorstepped - fair enough. However Farage to be far more moody and aggressive even in press conferences.
The likes of Trump or farage though are allowed not to answer questions in a way others are not.
I think this is key, Trump (a lesser extent Farage, although I get the impression that changing) is allowed to say and do things and mendacity that are given a pass by press - the expression "baked in" springs to mind, he can and does say things that (for instance) Starmer, or Corbyn for that matter, simply cannot.
Americans seem to view the president as God's messenger.
There are far more nuanced reasons for Harris losing.
I'm sure there are, but not to put words in his mouth; I don't think that's what @tjagain is suggesting. I agree with him that there were probably many Republican and Democrat voting Americans that would've been more likely put their mark against a white man -had one been running against Trump, than a woman of mixed heritage.
Indeed that is the point.
I think this is key, Trump (a lesser extent Farage, although I get the impression that changing) is allowed to say and do things and mendacity that are given a pass by press - the expression "baked in" springs to mind, he can and does say things that (for instance) Starmer, or Corbyn for that matter, simply cannot.
I think characters like trump and farage have benefited from a shift that social media has created, both in a more direct, unmediated route to 'the public' without PR departments/journalists/publisher/broadcaster as gatekeepers. But what they also benefit from is having little care for the consequences of what they say which allows not so much for more freedom in what they say but just for there to be sheer volume of things said precisely because they don't care
Most of the rest of politics is still tied to an older model which is 'headline' based. An announcement of any sort could dominate the news cycle for a day - be on the front page of a paper / top of the website / at the start of a news bulletin and dominate discourse beyond that.
But theres a tension between politicians wanting give headlines and journalists wanting to make headlines. So politicians are necessarily practiced in trying to hold to a point, largely because are not really speaking for themselves but speaking for a party that is a broader coalition, so their aim is to communicate to a wider audience in a way that holds that coalition together.
Political journalists have become accustomed to trying puncture that. Becuase theres more drama in exposing tensions and contradictions but also, seemingly becuase theres more 'sport' for them. They all want to somehow claim a pelt, be the guy that skewered the minster on the issue of something or other. The political and media class basically curses the rest of us into having to take part in their old 'school debating club' culture.
This makes many politicians seem very locked down in public. Politicians generally don't have anything interesting to say until they've retired from politics. (Richard Osman made a great point that theres no point in having politicians on the panel on Question Time because they are the people who are uniquely unable to actually answer a question about politics on a live TV show)
That worked in an old model where news was a fixed agenda for each 24hr cycle
Social media demands an 'always on' model. Every post appears at the top of a feed the moment it's made and tumbles down the page. Headlines on the news site stick to the top of the page until they are eclipsed by a more important story but media posts are all equal and fall down the page at the same speed. So to stay on the page you have to post all the time. And to post all the time you have to give very little thought to the veracity of what you are posting or the consequences to anyone of that post beyond yourself.
Farage and Trump have no problem in just posting constantly. Farage becuase he has no political responsibility - he currently neither has to act on or be responsible for the outcomes of anything he says, and although he's notionally the head of a party he actually doesn't care about any of his party members, they're just dressing, and he knows for the most part his voters don't even know who anyone else in the party is (60% of reform supporters have never heard of Richard Tice for instance)
Trump, even though he is in power just doesn't care. He does very little of the actual work of president, isn't really abreast of whats really being done by the people who are doing the work and also has no real interest in the future of the party or the presidency, or the country, or the world, in the future beyond his presidency. So he can just blurt out any old crap and have no care for the consequence
In constrast say - Starmer is actually running a country, and running it in a highly turbulent climate. He doesn't have the time to blurt out exciting talking points all day and he has to necessarily be very measured in what he does say because a poorly chosen word or phrase risks division or rebellion in his own party or could even spark an international incident. He could kill thousands of people, collapse economies, with a TikTok video.
But this always-on culture makes Trump and Farage appear 'genuine' even though they are often lying - they are at least genuinely and openly lying and it makes people who are carefully trying to convey accuracy and truth appear insincere as they often have to hold to a message even if it conflicts with their own emotional response to circumstances.
There may well be a future for politics where dialogue takes place in a space where we all accept people's positions and perspectives differ even if they broadly have the same political ambition, and people can give their first heartfelt response to emerging circumstances and modify their position as they, and we, learn more. Basically for leaders to be more emotionally open as they naviagate the tasks of making decisions and policy. And we might have a political press that can accept that this work is done fluidly and that any attenuation if course isn't a 'dramatic u turn' or a 'betrayal'. The problem at the moment is short, communicative discourse from politicians requires too much time and effort to make if the media is going to scrutinise and challenge every word for opportunity for some sort of gotcha moment
But I don't think that'll happen overnight - our current crop of politicians can't just switch off the filters and become 'genuine' becuase we'd perceive that shift as insincere. We need to wait for a new crop of politicians and commentators who are much more native to a more direct connection between leaders and voters
TLDR
Benjimin Frankin once wrote 'I'd have written a shorter letter but I didn't have time"
Pascal wrote that, it's mis-attributed to Franklin, although he did say, "Lost time is never found again."
Good post/thoughts though, I think you're spot on about modern journalism trying to hard with performative winning.
Pascal wrote that, it's mis-attributed to Franklin, although he did say, "Lost time is never found again."
Oh well I can blame Sir Ken Robinson for that mis-attribution (although he did say he wasn't sure if it was actually Churchill). Pedro Pascal it is then.
A little bit of levity in these odd times. My ex-boss just whatsapped this to me, and it made me smirk
Bad news from Mar-a-Lago.
The special election resulted in a Republican upset, particularly as their candidate was personally endorsed by the President.
Dems now run President Trump's home constituency.
Despite all the talk he voted by postal ballot
Impressive log of all the dodgy shit Trump has been up to in office
https://www.trumpactiontracker.info/
yeah talk about devaluing the dollar
https://bsky.app/profile/aidanmcl.bsky.social/post/3mhyi5xqtbk25
Hahah oh my gods he's so unaware
Have you seen his bloody signature? It looks like the output from a seismograph.
i can see much currency being defaced
He's very particular about what pens he uses for that famous signature. He stopped a cabinet meeting yesterday, in the middle of a war, to go on an unhinged ramble about why he like sharpies 😳
Madder than a bucket of spiders!
Private Eye have labelled him "Mad King Donald", which is very fitting.
Madder than a bucket of spiders!
hes doing it because no one dares say no, they all just guffaw like the toadies they are, he knows it & he loves the power it makes him feel, absolute narcisist
TBH old people going off on something else isn’t exactly new 🙂
He stopped a cabinet meeting yesterday, in the middle of a war, to go on an unhinged ramble about why he like sharpies 
what a pratt, the blethering idiot.
hes doing it because no one dares say no, they all just guffaw like the toadies they are, he knows it & he loves the power it makes him feel, absolute narcisist
Pretty well summed up by Ian Dunt today...
https://iandunt.substack.com/p/the-mad-emperor-has-triggered-chaos
He's very particular about what pens he uses for that famous signature. He stopped a cabinet meeting yesterday, in the middle of a war, to go on an unhinged ramble about why he like sharpies 😳
Madder than a bucket of spiders!
He has previous.
He's very particular about what pens he uses for that famous signature. He stopped a cabinet meeting yesterday, in the middle of a war, to go on an unhinged ramble about why he like sharpies 😳
He has previous.
Away back in the day when this thread started, I remember NoBeerInTheFridge commenting asking why we were all so interested in Trump. He wasn't interested because anything Trump did would have no impact on his life.
It's a shame he's not round here anymore as I'd love to hear if his view has changed as diesel creeps towards £2 a litre!
At least the "Biden/Obama was just as bad" comments have petered out a bit for now. They'll be back though....