A place were I can write...

My simple blog of pictures of travel, friends, activities and the Universe we live in as we go slowly around the Sun.



October 15, 2026

Two cargo ships sunk

Two cargo ships sunk in Strait of Hormuz as Iran ramps up attacks in run-up to midterms

By Jessie Yeung, Isaac Yee, Teele Rebane

Two cargo ships have sunk near the Strait of Hormuz in the past 24 hours after being struck by unknown projectiles in separate incidents – highlighting the heightened danger to shipping as Iran steps up attacks in an attempt to regain control over the critical waterway.

The Singapore-registered container ship GFS Pride was struck on Tuesday while passing through the strait, catching fire and later sinking, according to the Maritime and Port Authority of Singapore. All crew members were safely evacuated.

Videos verified by CNN show black smoke rising from the ship as it takes on water, while later footage and satellite images show cargo scattered in the water and a small oil slick. Iranian state media Press TV reported that the ship had “hit a sea mine on an unauthorized route” – which experts cast doubt on, saying a drone attack was more likely.

The merchant vessel Cape Dao, registered under Antigua and Barbuda, also sank, according to data from the International Maritime Organization (IMO) on Wednesday – after it was first hit by projectile on September 23. One Indian crew member was killed.

While many vessels have been hit in the Strait of Hormuz this year, these are only the second and third to have sunk in the Middle East since the Iran war began in February, according to IMO data. Attacks have ramped up significantly since the end of September, once again reducing the amount of oil transiting out of the Middle East and raising oil prices around the world.

That’s been a consistent headache for US President Donald Trump as the midterm elections approach, with gas prices, tariffs, and other factors driving up the cost of living top of mind for many voters.

Data from the United Kingdom Maritime Trade Operations (UKMTO), which monitors shipping incidents, shows just how high the risk is. Nine attacks in or near the Strait of Hormuz have been reported since Monday, including a drone strike on a tanker.

Only 4.147 million barrels of oil successfully transited the Strait of Hormuz on Monday – less than a quarter of pre-war levels, according to maritime data tracking service Kpler. And the seven-day average of oil flow through Hormuz has dropped sharply since early October, Kpler’s data shows.

“The sinking of Singapore-flagged GFS PRIDE marks a dangerous escalation after weeks of near-daily attacks on commercial shipping. Iran claims a naval mine; but a drone strike is more likely,” said former US Navy officer Charlie Brown, also a senior adviser for United Against Nuclear Iran, a nonprofit that tracks and reports on Iranian sanctions violations.

“Many ask what response will the US Navy mount to Iran’s escalating attacks on global shipping,” he added. “But the real question is what response will other nations take? How long will the world tolerate this threat to shipping, seafarers and freedom of navigation?”

The US military continues to enforce a blockade on Iranian ports to maintain economic pressure on Iran. To some extent, it’s worked: Iran’s economy is in tatters, and in recent months it clearly lost its leverage over the strait, with the amount of oil flowing from other Gulf nations through the waterway increasing to near-normal levels.

That’s partly thanks to a complex operation involving US-military-escorted “dark” transits across the strait at night, with tankers turning off their transponders to avoid detection.

That rise in oil flow is why Iran is now ramping up its attacks and threats, hoping to wrestle back the leverage it once had over the strait – especially as American voters head to the polls.

The Trump administration has tried to lower prices in other ways, including a controversial deal announced last week to drop some sanctions on Russia to import a relatively small amount of the country’s diesel. But this has been met with bipartisan criticism – and there’s no guarantee it will bring any substantial relief, with analysts warning that diesel could climb near all-time highs by November.

Takeaways

Talarico tackles abortion, faith and ‘conspiracy theories’: Takeaways from the CNN & Jubilee town hall

By Eric Bradner, Patrick Svitek

Texas Democratic Senate candidate James Talarico appealed face-to-face to skeptical Republicans and independents Wednesday night in a joint town hall hosted by CNN and Jubilee, framing the election in populist terms and insisting he is willing to break with his own party if doing so benefits the state.

“I’m a proud Texas Democrat, but I already have a religion and I already have a sports team,” he said. “So, I have no problem sharing hard truths with my party if it’s what’s best for Texas.”

Talarico faces Republican Attorney General Ken Paxton in one of the most important Senate races of November’s midterm elections. Democrats need a net gain of four seats to claim the Senate majority, and flipping a GOP-held seat in Texas would be a significant boost to that effort.

Talarico, a former seminary student, peppered his remarks with references to his “spiritual heroes” and made references to the last three popes. He said he felt he could find common ground with conservatives — in part by looking to solutions to the problems that fuel cultural divides, rather than treating those divides as a political hammer with which to “beat each other over the head.”

And as he campaigns for the votes of independents and moderate Republicans in Texas, where Democrats haven’t won statewide in three decades, he attempted to frame the election in populist terms — regular Americans against wealthy individuals and corporations.

“The only minority destroying America is the billionaires,” Talarico said.

Paxton — who has refused to debate Talarico and has not responded to an invitation to hold his own town hall — was absent from nearly all of Wednesday night’s discussions. Talarico only circled back to the topic of his Republican opponent at the end, after telling the audience that he doesn’t “want people to vote just against Ken Paxton. I want them to vote for me.”

But he took one big swing at Paxton in the final minutes.

“We have an opportunity in this race not just to defeat the most corrupt politician in Texas; we have an opportunity to defeat this entire corrupt system,” he said.

Here are takeaways from Talarico’s town hall:

Courting a broad spectrum of voters

Talarico repeatedly sought to reach out to the Republican and independent voters he’ll need to win in deep-red Texas, emphasizing that there is common ground to be found — an effort that was on display when he was challenged by a woman who opposes abortion rights.

Talarico told the woman that “it’s OK that you and I come to different conclusions” about the moral and theological questions surrounding the issue.

“What I think we can do is actually come together on reducing the number of unplanned pregnancies and the number of abortions,” he said. “Because if we treat this issue as a public health problem and not a culture war problem, then we can actually make progress together.”

It was one of several ways Talarico looked to make appeals across the aisle on Wednesday night. He also emphasized his willingness to break with the Democratic Party. He called the national debt “an emergency” and said policymakers should seek to run the federal government more efficiently. He broke with progressives’ calls for aggressive breaks from fossil fuels to combat climate change, emphasizing his support for Texas’ oil and gas industry and declaring that he endorses an “all of the above energy strategy.”

He also declared himself “a border security Democrat” and criticized former President Joe Biden’s administration’s management of the US-Mexico border.

Asked if he supports abolishing Immigration and Customs Enforcement — a position held by many progressives within his party — Talarico quickly responded: “No, and I never have.” He then argued that President Donald Trump’s mass deportation efforts have gone too far, and that the president has deployed ICE as a “secret police force.”

“We don’t want federal agents murdering our neighbors before our very eyes,” he said.

‘Nasty case of the flu’

Talarico opened the town hall by addressing his recent absence from the campaign trail that lasted more than a week and fueled Republican attacks that at times veered into debunked conspiracy theories. Talarico returned to making public appearances on Friday.

Talarico reiterated that he had a “nasty case of the flu” and said he now feels “much better.” Looking back, he said he would not have handled the absence differently,

“I think the responsible thing to do when you have something like the flu is stay at home and not get other people sick,” Talarico said, adding that he was able to work remotely.

Talarico knocked Paxton and the “conspiracy theorists” for their attacks over his absence, calling them a distraction from issues that are more important to voters.

“Conspiracy theories don’t put food on the table,” Talarico said.

Clarifying past statements

Talarico sought to clarify a number of comments he has made in recent years that have drawn scrutiny as he runs for Senate.

One of those comments came in 2020 during a Sierra Club event where he called capitalism an “oppressive system.” Talarico took issue with the media’s characterization of the remark and said he was referring to a “crony capitalism” that disproportionately benefits the wealthy.

“What I’m trying to get back to is OG capitalism where we actually reward work instead of wealth,” Talarico said.

Talarico was also asked about a Senate primary debate in January where he criticized Immigration and Customs Enforcement. He said at the debate that it was “time to tear down this secret police force and replace it with an agency that actually is going to focus on public safety.”

Talarico said he does not support abolishing the agency.

“We need Immigration and Customs Enforcement in this country, but that’s not what we’re seeing,” Talarico said. “What we’ve seen over the last year is a secret police force, and that’s what we don’t want in this country.”

Later, Talarico was confronted again about his 2021 comment that “God is non-binary.” He reiterated that he was “being provocative” when he said it.

Connecting health scare to economic message

Talarico has framed his entire campaign around his willingness to take on big business and wealthy interests — and used the emotional story of his own diabetes diagnosis as he laid out one example of how he said he wants to do so.

The 37-year-old Talarico choked up briefly as he explained that in 2018, during his first campaign for the state legislature, he walked 25 miles across his district in one day — and then fell ill and slept for 36 hours. He was hospitalized and diagnosed with type 1 diabetes.

Talarico said when he went to Walgreens to pick up his prescribed insulin for the first time, he learned the cost was $684 — money he did not have at the time.

That was the impetus behind his successful push to cap insulin copays in Texas at $25 per prescription, he said.

If he is elected to the Senate, Talarico said he would push to similarly cap costs across the nation for other medical necessities, including cancer drugs and EpiPens. He also said he would seek to roll back cuts in Affordable Care Act spending imposed by congressional Republicans and Trump in 2025, and would push for a new “public option” that would allow Americans to purchase health insurance coverage from a government-run program.

“These for-profit corporations are making billions of dollars in profit off our pain,” Talarico said. “If you’re willing to take on this corrupt system, then you can actually make change for people.”

Facing scrutiny of his Biblical interpretations

At least two voters challenged Talarico on his liberal interpretations of the Bible — and the candidate sought to find common ground with them.

One of those voters was a Catholic Texan who described herself as a “one-issue” voter on abortion. Talarico told her that some of his “spiritual heroes,” such as Pope Leo, are “pro-life” and that he “can respect anyone like you who is consistently pro-life.”

“We’re both Christians, and the Bible is silent on the issue of abortion,” Talarico said. “It means you and I both have to look at different scriptures to try to come to a conclusion. But what I think we can do is actually come together on reducing the number of unplanned pregnancies and the number of abortions.”

The voter disputed Talarico’s claim that the Bible does not address abortion, pointing to the Ten Commandments, one of which says, “Thou shalt not kill.” Talarico responded sympathetically, saying it was “OK that you and I come to different conclusions about that.”

Another voter, a Republican named Sarah Gardner, also raised issues with how Talarico has used his faith to argue the Democratic position on social issues. She said people “need to be careful using modern cultural terms when talking about God.”

Talarico agreed, saying it was a “very fair criticism.”

Blow them all up....

Zelensky says Ukraine will resume strikes on Russian refineries as frustration with Trump mounts

By Sana Noor Haq, Jim Sciutto, Kathleen Magramo

Ukraine will resume strikes on Russia’s oil refineries President Volodymyr Zelensky has said, also criticizing what he called a “dangerous” withdrawal of US intelligence sharing and restrictions to the Starlink satellite internet service.

The Ukrainian leader said he had halted attacks on Russian oil infrastructure for three days after the US announced a surprise “energy ceasefire” initiative. But given that Russian attacks on Ukraine’s energy facilities continued, Zelensky told the Financial Times: “We’re done.”

On Thursday, Russia’s Ministry of Defense said Ukraine had attempted a large-scale attack on a Russian oil refinery in Ryazan overnight. Ukraine has not yet commented.

Zelensky’s comments lay bare his growing frustration with President Donald Trump, who last week announced a controversial deal to buy Russian diesel. Trump has heaped pressure on Ukraine to stop striking Moscow’s refineries as he works to bring down energy costs ahead of the midterm elections.

Zelensky has condemned Trump’s willingness to strike business deals with Moscow as well as the US president’s apparent admiration for Russia’s Vladimir Putin. He also told the FT that Ukrainian military officials were told by their US counterparts that “if you will not stop [the energy strikes], we will block intelligence.”

Then on Wednesday, Ukraine said Starlink had restricted some military internet services, disrupting key operations, deepening alarm in both Kyiv and among European allies.

Last week, Trump wrote on social media that Russia’s President Vladimir Putin agreed to supply markets with his country’s diesel fuel as the US president works to bring down energy costs. That move drew bipartisan criticism and sparked anger among European allies.

On Monday, Russian forces launched fresh attacks on Ukraine just hours after the US president stated an “energy ceasefire” had come into effect – a measure that neither Moscow nor Kyiv had publicly confirmed.

Both Russian and Ukrainian troops intensified aerial attacks on each other’s energy infrastructure in the weeks leading up to that as movements on the battlefield remain relatively stagnant.

The Trump administration had warned Ukraine and allies in Europe that the US could suspend intelligence sharing and European purchases of US weapons for Kyiv if it did not halt deep strikes on Russian energy facilities.

Information sharing is invaluable to Ukrainian defense efforts against Russian ballistic missile attacks by giving the locations of missile launchers along with data on where the strikes are being directed, and when.

In the days that followed, Trump administration officials, including the president, insisted such intelligence sharing continued. But what explained the lack of missile warnings?

When asked by Kyiv for an explanation, US officials blamed the weather. But Ukrainian officials suspected it was deliberate. “America says it was a failure,” a European official told CNN. “But it can’t be the truth.”

“This will give Russians a real leverage on a frontline at the time when we effectively stopped their advances, and de-occupy the territories,” a Ukrainian official told CNN.

Defensive capabilities ‘artificially restricted’

That information deficit has been compounded by Elon Musk’s Starlink curbing some internet services in Ukraine, according to local officials. Ukrainian authorities said they were caught off-guard by restrictions on the military-grade version of Elon Musk’s Starlink, called Starshield.

A Ukrainian Defense Ministry Source told CNN on Thursday that “as of now, Starshield’s operations have resumed and are continuing.” The source added that the ministry is talking with all parties involved “to determine all the causes and circumstances of yesterday’s restrictions.”

But Zelensky has indicated that some restrictions are still in place. On Thursday morning, the Ukrainian president said Russia had launched more than 850 attack drones since midnight “at a time when the speed of our defensive capabilities is being artificially restricted.”

Zelensky said earlier that Ukrainian forces use the satellite system to defend against Moscow’s jet-powered Shahed drones, and that Russia was trying to capitalize on the disruptions.

Ukraine’s top diplomat in Washington, Denys Sienik, also told CNN that Starshield speeds have improved but are not fully restored, adding, “We hope all will be resumed to the previous level.”

Kyiv has received no response from SpaceX or the Pentagon, a Ukrainian official told CNN.

Musk on Wednesday said Starshield systems are owned and controlled by the US government and that any limits on its speed or usage are up to the US military and president. He added that Starlink is a commercial service owned and controlled by SpaceX and is limited to civilian or defensive activities.

Musk said Starlink “cannot be used for offensive military action, as doing so would be inappropriate for a commercial company.”

CNN has reached out to the White House and the Pentagon for comment.

Zelensky has spent the past week trying to shore up support among European leaders. On Wednesday, he met Britain’s Prime Minister Andy Burnham and King Charles in London.

Delusional......

Whose Jesus? The Left and Right Fight Over Faith in the Midterms

The latest episode of “Stress Test”: God is on the ballot in November.

Mother Jones

Christian nationalism—the idea that strict adherence to Christian theology should govern American political life, separation of church and state be damned—has been on the rise in America for years. Some vanguard elements of this revolutionary movement believe adherents are called to wage a spiritual battle for control of the United States, seeking command of schools, public policy, and even the courts. Its ascendancy helped propel Donald Trump into the White House the first time, and it continues to find purchase at the highest rungs of government, including inside Trump’s second-term cabinet.

How is the movement impacting the midterm elections? Our guest on this new episode of Stress Test is Kiera Butler, a Mother Jones national correspondent who has tracked Christian nationalism for years and documented the shifting fortunes of its top leaders. In Trump’s first term, the charismatic prophets of the New Apostolic Reformation held sway. In his second, the ascendant figures are more ascetic, chief among them Doug Wilson, pastor and founder of Christ Church, a more Calvinist congregation in Moscow, Idaho. Wilson also co-created the Communion of Reformed Evangelical Churches, a global network of 160 congregations—including the one attended by Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth.

“Pete Hegseth, who has started these worship sessions in the Pentagon, brought Doug Wilson in earlier this year as a speaker,” Kiera says. “You have this very clear line from this Christian nationalist leader, Doug Wilson, right to Pete Hegseth, who is very close to President Trump.”

Kiera joins host Garrison Hayes to discuss the movement’s rising political influence, and the current state of religion in politics more broadly: how it is shaping leaders like Hegseth and JD Vance, and how the right has pushed to rebrand basic Christian empathy as a sin.

Garrison, himself a former pastor, observes how the left is trying to reclaim the space: “You have a candidate like James Talarico, who is actively talking about Jesus as a person who invites the stranger and the immigrant. And so you have this kind of warring and competing vision of Christianity playing out in American politics.”

What’s stressing Kiera out? “Fundamentalism in all of its forms,” she says. “When I look around and I see people who are against religious pluralism and who are actively trying to undermine the separation of church and state, that’s what freaks me out.”

This transcript was generated with automated tools and may contain errors.

Garrison Hayes: Talk about faith during these midterms is kind of everywhere. We’re talking about Islam and Judaism. And of course, if you’re anything like me, you’re interested in the conversation about Christianity that’s happening again during the midterms. If you’ve been keyed in on the political conversation that we’ve been having here in America, then you know that you’re well aware that this conversation about Christianity and faith isn’t only limited to the right wing. Both Democrats and Republicans are leveraging the common language of faith to appeal to voters in this time. And so, who better to talk to than my colleague Kiera Butler? She’s been diving deep into Christian nationalism, following it closely for a very long time.

Welcome back. This is Stress Test from Mother Jones. I’m Garrison Hayes, and we’ve been talking about the midterms kind of nonstop. That’s what this show is all about. And I’m really, really excited to dig into this conversation. I’ll tell you, in the last episode, David Corn, my co-host, and I had a great conversation with Mother Jones reporter Russ Choma on the money side of the upcoming midterm election. There’s so much there around who’s funding who, campaign finance, potential malfeasance, all that stuff is kind of there, and you definitely want to go back and check it out. If you missed it, you can watch that on our YouTube channel, youtube.com/motherjones. Definitely go check that out.

But I think this conversation is also really interesting and really, really important. We’re talking about the role of faith in the current political economy. So without further ado, I want to welcome national correspondent Kiera Butler onto the stage here with me to talk about today’s topic. Kiera’s been keeping a close tab on extremism and Christian nationalism here in the United States for a while. Kiera, welcome to the show.

Kiera Butler: Thank you so much for having me, Garrison.

GH: Of course, of course. I want to start with where we are right now. You know, I made something a little over a year ago after Charlie Kirk’s death. I watched his memorial service, and it felt like a revival. It also kind of felt like the kind of peak of Christian nationalist fervor in this country. I don’t know if I’m misreading that. You’ve been, of course, staying close on this. And so a year later, heading into the midterms, are we still seeing that same momentum that many Christian nationalist types were riding after the unfortunate and untimely assassination of Charlie Kirk?

KB: Yeah, you know, that was certainly a flashpoint. Charlie Kirk’s murder hit a lot of people really hard in the Christian community, and not just Christian nationalists either. You know, I think that was a real reckoning in that community. And in some ways it was a unifying force, and in other ways, you know, we saw new divisions kind of coming to light after that. I would say that since then it’s not that there’s any less Christian nationalism, it’s just that it’s looking a little bit different, and we can get into that.

GH: Yeah, I’d like to get into it. And it felt like in some ways some people were trying to use that as a way to advance a more stringent Christian nationalist agenda. And I’m curious if you were seeing the same thing up close.

KB: Yeah, so I like to put the Christian nationalists into kind of two different buckets, right? You’ve got the kind of more old-school evangelical charismatic Christian nationalists. These are folks, I’ve done a little bit of reporting on the New Apostolic Reformation. This is a movement where, you know, self-proclaimed prophets will talk about politics as kind of a mountain to be conquered. There are these seven mountains that, you know, culture and entertainment and politics and education. There’s, you know, several more as well. And these folks, you know, if you picture kind of your evangelical megachurch, you know, the worship band, people kind of swaying back and forth, it’s a very kind of interactive style of worship.

This was the movement that really defined Trump’s first presidency. You know, this is Paula White-Cain, who is actually still Trump’s spiritual adviser, but this movement was ascendant, and you saw January 6, 2021, was a big moment for these folks. You know, that this movement was very influential in that storming of the Capitol and in election denialism.

In Trump’s second term, we’ve really seen the emergence, or I guess the ascendancy, of a different kind of Christian nationalism. We’ve seen a group of folks who I wrote about about two years ago for the first time called the TheoBros. These folks are Reformed Christians, and Reformed theology is a whole thing, as you know, Garrison. It’s—there’s a lot to it. But basically, these folks believe that God decides in advance who’s going to heaven. Their worship style is much more restrained. They sing hymns and psalms, you know, that they are not the, like, you know, soaring worship band, pastor in jeans, like, you know, strutting back and forth. They’re very almost puritanical in their worship style.

These folks, though, are pretty extreme in their beliefs. A lot of them believe women shouldn’t be able to vote. A lot of them believe in bringing—they call it prison reform, but by prison reform they mean bringing back public flogging and public execution, which, you know, we’ve seen—we’ve just seen a whole news cycle about that recently. And, you know, they also—they’re self-proclaimed Christian nationalists. They will come right out and say, you know, I believe that the Ten Commandments should be replacing the US Constitution. So I should say, you know, that was kind of a long-winded way of explaining these two Christian nationalist camps that I notice and, you know, really saying that the latter, the TheoBros, I see as more influential politically these days.

GH: Yeah, that’s a good point to kind of transition, because the idea here, you know, as you’re saying with the folks who are more influential, is to really have the ear of the president, the people who are really wanting to have a little bit more influence on exactly what kind of comes out. And I guess my question in all of this is, who are the people who have the ear of the president in this time, and who are the leaders that are influencing those who will likely be elected in these midterm elections?

KB: One of the most influential Christians who has Trump’s ear is Pete Hegseth, secretary of, as he says, war. He is a Reformed Christian. He certainly belongs to this camp of TheoBros that I was just talking about. His faith—he belongs to a church that is in a denomination called the Communion of Reformed Evangelical Churches. This is a Christian nationalist denomination. It was started by a guy named Doug Wilson, who’s a pastor in Moscow, Idaho. I’ve spent a lot of time reporting about Doug Wilson and his beliefs, and he is the spiritual adviser of Pete Hegseth. And in fact, Pete Hegseth, who has started these, like, worship sessions in the Pentagon, brought Doug Wilson in earlier this year as a speaker at the Pentagon. So, you know, in Pete Hegseth, you have this very clear line from this Christian nationalist leader, Doug Wilson, right to Pete Hegseth, who is very close to President Trump.

I will also say that JD Vance, even though he’s a Catholic, so he’s a kind of a different flavor, he mixes pretty freely with this group of TheoBros. A lot of the TheoBros have connections to Silicon Valley. And JD Vance became acquainted with them during his time in Silicon Valley with the world of Peter Thiel, another Christian thinker. And so JD Vance is—he’s very influenced by this, by the TheoBro movement, by some of the, I would say, like, postliberal intellectual circles that JD Vance moves in have influenced him quite a bit.

GH: Yeah, well, Kiera, you kind of undersold yourself. You haven’t just been reporting on Doug Wilson. I want to come back to JD Vance and the folks inside the White House in a bit, but you haven’t just been reporting on Doug Wilson. You actually went out to Moscow, Idaho, to talk to him. You interviewed him, and I’m curious what that was like, and what did you see when you were there?

KB: Yeah, I’ve actually been to Moscow twice now. So in Moscow, it’s—I have to say, it’s an adorable town. I felt so at home there. I used to live in Berkeley, California, and it reminded me of, like, a mini Berkeley, like college town, you know, think, like, little cozy cafes and, like, couches on porches, and, you know, the University of Idaho is the big college that’s there, and their mascot is the Vandal. And so you see this, like, little Vandal things everywhere. Super cute town, really beautiful part of the country. It’s kind of in the northwest corner of Idaho.

But Doug Wilson has this project there. He’s trying to make Moscow, Idaho, into his own little Christian fiefdom. He’s said this. This is something that he’s, you know, fully, you know, states as a goal of his, and he’s done a pretty good job. He started this church, which is now a whole denomination of Reformed Christians. I think there’s something like 160 churches around the world in this denomination. In the county, Latah County, in Moscow, where he is, there are seven churches that are related to his original one. He started a publishing house that’s now a media company. It’s called Canon Press, K through 12 Christian school, a college called New Saint Andrews—

GH: I’m jumping in only because, Kiera, I imagine someone watching this is like, okay, he has a, you know, a press and a media company and he has a church that’s maybe growing, perhaps. What are some of the things that a person or someone who subscribes to Doug Wilson’s beliefs, or maybe just Doug Wilson himself—he can speak for himself—what does he believe? As I understand it, there are things that they believe about women and about the gender roles and all of this stuff. Can you get into some of the beliefs?

KB: Yeah, absolutely. So Doug is a proud—well, I’ll say Doug is a fan of the patriarchy. His religion, his denomination is patriarchal. Women do not hold leadership roles in his church. He believes in household voting, which is actually something JD Vance has mentioned too, where the head of the household would vote for the entire household. And Doug Wilson believes that men should be the heads of households, and that wives should be submissive to their husbands. That’s a strong core of his belief.

Related to that, he also believes that women are ill suited for combat roles in the military, which of course gets important when you think about what Pete Hegseth is doing with the US military. And in addition to that, you know, he has the sort of beliefs that you would expect from a kind of a fundamentalist Christian. He believes gay marriage should be illegal. He believes abortion should be illegal, that abortion should be considered murder.

GH: It actually may be helpful, Kiera, to just hear from Doug Wilson. I’d love to play a little bit of tape, a little snippet from your interview with Doug Wilson back in September, where you asked him about his relationship with the defense secretary, or the secretary of war, as he calls himself. And then I want to ask you about what you thought of his answer. So let’s hear from Doug Wilson first.

GH: You know, it really strikes me that he is almost trying to downplay his kind of connection and role. That’s what kind of stood out to me. What stood out to you, Kiera?

KB: Yeah, you know, what stood out to me in all of my interactions with Doug Wilson when I was there in Moscow is that he is kind of very different when I’m interviewing him, like, you know, when I’m talking to him in person, than he is in some of the viral clips of him that have gone around. You know, he famously said to CNN, like, women are the kind of people who people come out of. In it—I don’t know, like, in his speech at a National Conservatism Conference two years ago, he said, I’m a Presbyterian, not a Lesbyterian. He talks about the tranny flag a lot. He, you know, uses the word retarded, retard. He, you know, he is so much more measured when I’ve been talking to him one-on-one, or, you know, you saw his wife Nancy there in that clip, with her as well. It really is, like, I’ve been thinking of it as, like, a tale of two Dougs.

GH: That’s fascinating. You bring out the—like, maybe you have, like, an energy that brings the respect out of him in some way. I don’t know what you think that is.

KB: Well, I think part of it is that he knows who he’s talking to, right? Before I ever went to Moscow, I’d been emailing back and forth with him, and to his credit, like, he will always answer my emails, but he’ll often work in, like, a little dig at the end. Like, he’ll be like, Okay, and that’s what I think, and you can go write that in your commie publication. So he certainly is aware of the Mother Jones readership, I guess.

The other thing I think that is relevant here is that he—every time he’s—he told me during that same interview that you just played a clip from, I asked him, like, is there any part of this when you have a clip that goes viral or, you know, when you say something particularly controversial and there’s a lot of media scrutiny, like, is there anything that’s good for you and your movement when that happens? And he said, absolutely, it’s great for us. You know, people see what I’m saying and they, you know, want to move to Moscow, Idaho, or they want to, you know, find their nearest Communion of Reformed Evangelical Churches church.

Another one of his core beliefs is that Christians—like, Christian nationalism is very literal to him. So in his ideal version of a Christian America, people of other faiths would not be allowed to hold office. And he gave me an example: Like, Muslims in his Christian America would be able to practice their faith, but they would not be able to build a minaret. So this is a very kind of muscular version of Christian nationalism that he’s imagining.

GH: Yeah, there’s something about it that, you know, I don’t think it always goes unsaid, so I won’t make that statement, but it isn’t said enough that there’s something, I think, deeply bigoted about a lot of what Christian nationalism is trying to advance. I mean, you have—obviously this is Islamophobic in nature. We know that there is actually a ton of anti-Blackness that kind of pops up among some of these, quote-unquote, TheoBros, as you call them. And obviously we also have seen a great deal of antisemitism present in Christian nationalism. In the conversations that you’ve been having with Christian nationalists, have any of those elements of bigotry come up when they aren’t being polite, good little boys?

KB: Yeah, you know, anytime you ask about immigration, that’s kind of the tell, right? That, like, you know, the both kinds of Christian nationalists, both the New Apostolic Reformation, kind of the charismatic, Pentecostal evangelicals, and the TheoBros, these Reformed guys, like, none of them are, you know, pro-immigrant in any way. And the only—well, no, definitely will not say the only, but an interesting tension comes when you think about Catholics, right? And, you know, JD Vance has gotten himself into some trouble with this. JD Vance obviously is very—it’s kind of a hard line on immigration, but his Catholic faith is in conflict with that. You know, there’s social justice teaching in Catholicism, that, you know, to be welcoming to immigrants, to, you know, extend empathy to immigrants is a core tenet of that faith. So there’s been some interesting tension there. And I’m actually curious, Garrison, what you’ve noticed along those lines as you’ve been looking at folks on the left and Christians in those circles.

GH: Yeah, I mean, well, you have this big showdown happening in Texas, where you have the Republican Party has, of course, taken the position of being anti-immigration and taking pretty hard lines on immigration. And then on the Democratic side, you have a candidate like James Talarico, who is actively talking about Jesus as a person who invites the stranger and the immigrant. And so you have this kind of warring and competing vision of Christianity, I think, playing out in American politics. You know, it’s really interesting to see the way that scripture is leveraged on both sides of this conversation. I, of course, have my own perspective in all of this, but I’m really curious to see how Americans who have obviously voted now for Donald Trump—some subset, some section of Americans have voted for Donald Trump, who always ran on an anti-immigration kind of platform—they voted for him now three times, right? And obviously elected him twice. And so I’m kind of interested how a state like Texas, where this conversation isn’t just theoretical, it’s very much kind of playing out in the practical—I’m curious how that will play out from an electoral perspective.

But it is interesting to see how Christians on the center left are thinking about Christianity as a way to advance their political agenda. And I don’t think it’s necessarily new. I wouldn’t describe it as new. Black Christians have absolutely across the South been using and leveraging their faith in electoral politics for a long time. I mean, the Souls to the Polls movement has been a really significant way to get Black voters out to go vote, but I’m seeing it in kind of outside of Black circles in a way that does feel a little new, and I’ve been really curious where that’s coming from.

KB: I’m curious if you’re hearing in your circles anything about empathy, because one of the big themes over the last year or two, I would say, in the right-wing Christian nationalist circles is the notion of empathy as a sin. The idea that kind of an excess of empathy and/or misplaced empathy is sinful and is something that, you know, Christians need to repent for. And this, particularly with immigration, I would say, you know, folks are saying, like, you know, if you’re welcoming everybody and if you’re, you know, if you’re having a, you know, a bleeding heart for, you know, all of these people who are flooding over the borders, then that is a sin. You’re sinning. What are you hearing in your circles?

GH: You know, I’m certainly hearing the opposite of that. This idea is, of course, a part of, to your point, a kind of certain type of Christian nationalist thinking. It’s certainly a talking point. There’s a commentator named Allie Beth Stuckey who wrote an entire book around this called Toxic Empathy. And so I’ll take the reporting hat off for just a moment here. And as a former pastor, I will say that the notion of having some kind of empathy for the stranger, for your neighbor, understanding, welcoming them in, that is a very common theme throughout scripture. You know, whatever you do to the least of these, you’ve done unto me, and, you know, do unto others as you would have them do unto you is a really common theme throughout the synoptic gospels. And so it’s hard to kind of wrap my mind around, as a former pastor, it’s hard to really wrap my mind around this as a sin. Okay, that’s kind of difficult to find, I think, in scripture.

But I will say, you know, I’m really curious, you know, what—you know, putting the reporter hat back on, you know, maybe for a moment here—I’m really curious if this is cutting through. And I, you know, Kiera, maybe you have access to some polling data and what people are actually feeling here in the moment, but I’ve been really curious to learn more about how Christians are responding to this. I mean, truly, love thy neighbor feels so fundamental to the kind of ethic of Christianity that it’s hard to imagine what Christianity is without it. And I would, you know, use that term, love thy neighbor, as kind of a proxy for this concept of empathy.

KB: Yeah, I mean, that’s—to me, when I first heard about Allie Beth Stuckey’s book, and also a co-pastor of Doug Wilson’s, Joe Rigney, wrote a very similar book, and when I first heard about it, I thought to myself, just like you were saying, it seems incompatible with basic Christian teachings. But, you know, I think it was maybe it was last year when JD Vance was talking about this, when he sort of got into it about the ordo amoris, the Latin for rightly ordered love, I guess. He was talking about, you know, how you should love, or God wants you to love your family first and then, you know, your extended family, and it kind of is, you know, this concentric-circle model of who you should devote your care and empathy to, and the farther out you get from your kind of core nuclear family, the less you should love. And he used that to sort of explain his stance on immigration. And the pope actually came back and was like, That’s not what that means, which was—it was just kind of a funny little disagreement.

But I agree, you know, I don’t have any polling. I don’t know whether there’s polling on this issue of empathy or not, and if there is, I don’t have it at my fingertips, but I am very curious about how Christians are receiving that notion.

GH: You know, I think a lot of this really depends on something that I’ve heard pastors say for a long time, which is that people aren’t really reading their Bibles anymore, and that there’s this kind of—there’s a real concern that Christians are getting further and further removed from the kind of primary source text in all of this. I will say, as a person who again has kind of studied this stuff and was a pastor for a while, that a part of the Ten Commandments is, you know, the fourth commandment talks about the extension of rest, and it really goes all the way out to the stranger that’s in your country, the stranger in your gates, and then it works backwards from there all the way to the person who lives in your home, a family member. And so this kind of notion that one is supposed to love closer and then maybe kind of work your way out, it kind of, like, there’s something, I’d say, maybe intuitive about that, the idea of proximity, but I think the Bible writers go out of their way to invert that as a way of, I think, reaffirming the importance of loving those far away from you. Okay, this isn’t Bible study, Kiera Butler.

KB: I do want to say, though, this made me think of something, and I can’t help but mention it. There is a Progressive Baptist church—and I live in Atlanta, and there’s a Progressive Baptist church in my neighborhood—and they have a bunch of signs outside the church, and one of the signs is, like, somebody drew, like, almost like a child’s drawing of Jesus, and the speech bubble says, Y’all, that is not what I said.

GH: Right. Right. Okay. I want to move us on. You just kind of closed out a big investigation about this organization called Life Surge. I loved your episode of Pablo Torre Finds Out. It was so good. You went to this event, you kind of dug deep. If you don’t know, Life Surge is a Christian roadshow that’s tied to the former star quarterback Tim Tebow, and it was great. I’d love for you to tell us a little bit more about that and where we can go find it. What’s kind of interesting about that investigation?

KB: Yeah, so Life Surge is—their main event that they draw people in with is, like, a roadshow. It’s, like, a one-day event that’s where they kind of mix, like, worship and motivational speakers. Many of their speakers are, like, athletes, like really famous athletes like Tim Tebow, and, you know, they’ve had Magic Johnson, they’ve had David Ortiz, just, like, you know, super famous people. And during that day they try to get you to sign up for these—what they call Impact Classes, and they’re, like, financial—like, they teach you how to invest in the stock market, teach you how to, like, flip houses and, you know, allegedly make a bunch of money in real estate. And then once you go to the three-day classes, then they try to sell you on packages of investment training that cost, like, you know, packages that range from, like, $10,000 to, like, $50,000.

And so my investigation focused on how folks who have done these classes have said that the salespeople are using faith to sell them on a product that they can’t afford. So I’ve, you know, talked to people who have ended up tens of thousands of dollars in debt and said things like, you know, that the salesperson said, If you’re having doubts about whether you want to buy this financial package, that was the devil. The devil was putting doubts in your mind. So that was the investigation.

You know, an interesting thing, I guess, just in the wake of the investigation, Tim Tebow cut or paused his ties with Life Surge, and a bunch of the other high-profile speakers did as well. So that was—it was really interesting to see that impact there of our investigation. But, you know, I think because the investigation really got a lot of attention, I’ve gotten a lot of tips from people and, you know, threads to follow, and it really does seem like this is sort of the tip of the iceberg, the world of Christian finance seminars that people are, you know, spending a lot of money and at times losing a lot of money. This is a real wing of, I guess, the right-wing Christian movement that I had not explored before. So I think it’s something to keep an eye on going forward, for sure.

GH: I think so, Kiera. I’m excited to see more of what you uncover. Okay, before we let you go, I want to ask you the question that we’re asking all of our guests here on this show: After all of your Christian nationalist reporting and all of that, what’s stressing you out the most?

KB: What’s stressing me out the most? Fundamentalism in all of its forms. You know, I think—and that is not unique to Christianity, of course. To me, when I look around and I see people who are against religious pluralism and who are actively trying to undermine the separation of church and state, that’s what freaks me out.

GH: Listen, to our viewers and our listeners, Kiera has another Doug Wilson story in the works, along with some of the excellent sneak preview reporting that you heard here today. It’s important, it’s fascinating. These stories are so, so important. They have incredible impact, as you already heard. So make sure you follow her reporting on MotherJones.com. Kiera Butler, thank you.

GH: That’s all we have for you in today’s episode. If you missed the previous episodes of Stress Test, you can watch them on our YouTube channel or wherever you get your podcasts. Our great journalism here at Mother Jones—Kiera’s reporting, Russ Choma’s reporting, Ari Berman’s reporting—all of that is made possible with your support. Your views, your subscriptions keep us going. So don’t forget to like and to share and to subscribe to our YouTube channel. If you have any questions or suggestions, please leave them for us down in the comments below. Our producers love reading your comments. We’ll be back in just a couple of days with another edition of Stress Test. Until then, take care.

More Than Pause Frat Rape Parties

Cornell Can Do a Lot More Than Pause Frat Parties

The college is suspending Greek events after a sexual assault lawsuit. Other schools banned fraternities long ago.

Sophie Hurwitz

All parties and other social events held in fraternity houses on the campus of Cornell University will be cancelled for the remainder of the 2026-27 school year as the university’s administration contends with a lawsuit alleging a horrific 2024 gang rape in the Chi Phi fraternity house, which has sparked weeks of protest on and off its Ithaca, New York, campus. Michael Kotlikoff, the institution’s president, announced the frat party ban in an email Tuesday afternoon.

“These measures will provide time for a thorough review of fraternity life at Cornell to determine whether and how it can safely continue,” Kotlikoff said in his email. The university will also be allowing New York State Police to investigate on-campus sexual assault allegations; CBS News obtained a transcript of the interview between campus police and the anonymous student who filed suit against seven Chi Phi members, who told them, among other things, “I can say with 100 percent confidence I was raped”; campus police reportedly never showed that transcript to the district attorney. The city of Ithaca has also suspended all new Cornell-affiliated event permits, a move that primarily affects fraternities.

Cornell is not the first school to temporarily suspend fraternities or their activities in order to “review” their safety. Three major state universities—the University of Arizona, Louisiana State University, and West Virginia University—have suspended some or all of their on-campus fraternities this month alone amid hazing and assault allegations. (The University of Arizona and Louisiana State University partially lifted their suspensions within weeks.)

In fact, the websites of countless large universities include lists of “suspended or unrecognized” Greek life groups. But the suspensions are typically just that: temporary, and limited in scope. In Cornell’s case, it may be difficult for fraternities to move activities off-campus thanks to Ithaca’s ban—but it remains to be seen how feasible enforcing that ban may be. The same goes for the university’s ban on parties organized by Greek groups on campus.

One study found that fraternity members are three times more likely to rape women than nonaffiliated college men are. Sorority women, meanwhile, are 74 percent more likely to be raped than unaffiliated women on college campuses. But while colleges pause fraternity activities in the wake of hazing deaths, sexual assaults, or other forms of frat-sanctioned violence, they rarely force them to close their doors permanently.

After a fraternity pledge died in a hazing incident at Florida State University in 2017, that university indefinitely suspended all 55 fraternities and sororities on its campus—only to partially lift the ban a year later.

At least a dozen fraternity and sorority pledges have died in hazing incidents since 2020—in that year, given the pandemic’s social distancing requirements, only one young woman died in a hazing incident. That was the lowest number in decades. Most years, multiple students have died.

Abolishing fraternities entirely may be an overdue conversation; the idea seems to come up once or twice a decade. But some schools that have actually moved toward banning single-gender fraternities entirely, like Harvard and Wesleyan University, have backed off in the face of legal threats or suits by alumni.

Where fraternities are smaller, less connected, and less significant in campus life, attempts to ban them have been more successful. Swarthmore College in Pennsylvania banned fraternities in 2019 after leaked messages revealed pervasive misogyny, racism, and sexual violence within its two frats. Middlebury College banned fraternities all the way back in 1991; Amherst College and Williams College have prohibited them since 1984 and 1962.

But in Cornell’s case, Kotlikoff said at a faculty town hall last Monday that permanently banning frats would only make things worse—and could send the problems associated with Greek life “into the shadows.” It’s true that banning fraternities does not automatically eliminate the human capacity for violence. It just takes away a setting in which certain kinds of violence against certain kinds of students are demonstrably made much more likely.

They are greedy....

America’s Billionaire Capital Is Poised to Gut Public Transit

Voters in the San Francisco Bay Area are split on a measure to rescue local transit. Disabled and low-income residents’ mobility is on the line.

Julia Métraux

When Jillian Crochet, a disabled power wheelchair user and artist in Oakland, California, waits to take the bus, she already faces delays that many other riders don’t. People are invariably blocking the wheelchair spot, even if it’s not too crowded, and she can end up waiting 20 minutes longer for a new bus. That wait may soon get even longer.

The San Francisco Bay Area is facing a funding crisis for many of its public transit programs. Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART), which serves riders across five of the area’s most populous counties, is considering cutting 70 percent of its service and closing up to 15 of 50 stations, some 30 percent. Caltrain, the area’s leading local commuter rail system, could discontinue weekend service and shutter up to a third of its stations. Two major local transit systems, San Francisco’s Muni and AC Transit in Alameda and Contra Costa counties, could also shut down lines. Paratransit would also be impacted, even beyond the potentially longer wait times and fewer slots that transit cuts will inevitably cause.

“The biggest thing about paratransit [that] people don’t realize is it’s tied to our fixed route,” said Michelle Rousey, a member of the East Bay Paratransit Access Committee. “So if you cut fixed-route [lines], you’re inevitably cutting paratransit users too.” 

In November, voters in the Bay Area counties of Alameda, Contra Costa, San Mateo and Santa Clara will vote on whether or not to pass a sales tax of up to one cent on the dollar for over a decade to continue to fund transit and improvement projects. Proponents of the measure estimate it’ll bring in just under $1 billion annually. Despite a court case by opponents arguing that the ballot measure was biased and misleading—which a judge ruled against, finding it “unpersuasive”—the ballot measure has received relatively little organized pushback.

In effect, San Francisco–area voters are faced with a referendum on whether the general public in a highly car-dependent area—and one of the richest parts of the country—will consider further taxes to fund a public good.

The area’s transit funding crisis was exacerbated by ridership that plunged at the beginning of the Covid pandemic and remains too low to fill the coffers of BART and other services. A poll published in early October by Joint Venture Silicon Valley, a nonprofit that has provided regional data for over 30 years, found that 48 percent of voters surveyed across the five Bay Area counties voting on the tax supported it, leaving the outcome an open question.

“For a few years there was federal funding that helped keep the agencies going, as obviously there was hope that ridership would recover,” said Jeff Cretan, a spokesperson for the campaign in support of the ballot measure. But Bay Area public transit is still in crisis, leaving no adequate options beyond the November ballot measure.

At the state level, California—despite its size and wealth—does not fund its transit as well as some large states.

“Pennsylvania, New York, they deliver more of the proportion of the transit systems’ budgets than places like BART do,” Cretan told me. San Francisco also has a separate ballot measure for a parcel and property tax to continue funding city-level public transit, which would generate around $180 million annually.

Bay Area transit already has gaps and shortcomings, especially around accessibility for disabled people. In interviews, more than half a dozen transit-dependent disabled and aging Bay Area residents I spoke to—groups that are disproportionately reliant on public transit—highlighted the importance of adequately funded transit for their autonomy.

“The Bay Area has a very uneven transit network,” San Jose State University’s Mineta Transportation Institute education director Asha Weinstein Agrawal told me. “There are some communities, particularly the downtowns of some of the older cities, that have quite a rich network of bus and rail service. But there are many, many parts of the Bay Area where there’s [already] virtually no transit service, or it is so infrequent as to be of relatively little use.” 

For Jackie Liu, an autistic artist with Long Covid who lives in Daly City, the fact that a region like the Bay Area has allowed transit funding to reach a crisis point feels like a “slap in the face.” Liu depends on public transit to get to her doctor’s appointments in San Francisco.

“Considering the fact that we are in the heart of one of the most economically prosperous regions of the economy for the upper echelons,” Liu said—the area boasts the country’s highest concentration of billionaires—“I just feel like it’s a stark demonstration of the inequality that exists in our society.”

They see the blood-letting to come.....

With no October surprise in sight, Republicans try to save themselves

Michigan Senate candidate Mike Rogers and Alaska Sen. Dan Sullivan on Friday became the latest Republicans to break with one of the president’s policies.

By Megan Messerly and Daniel Desrochers

Republicans have lost hope for a last-minute surprise that will substantially change midterm math that’s increasingly adding up against them.

Instead, they’re doing what they can to save themselves.

Many are distancing themselves from some of President Donald Trump’s most unpopular policies — in some cases, ones they agreed with only weeks before — as polls show the president is deeply unpopular and at risk of dragging Republican candidates down with him.

While the party in power often takes a beating in tough midterm cycles, it is especially notable under Trump, who has historically responded viciously to dissent.

“There’s been a little bit of a reset across the country where Republicans are saying what they want to say and less worried about repercussions,” said Ari Fleischer, White House press secretary for former President George W. Bush.

Michigan Senate candidate Mike Rogers and Alaska Sen. Dan Sullivan on Friday became the latest Republicans to break with one of the president’s policies, voicing concern over Trump’s deal with Vladimir Putin to import diesel from Russia.

Nate Adams, a spokesperson for Sullivan, said in a statement that the senator “believes American energy dominance is the answer to high prices, and that means producing more of it in Alaska, for Alaskans, by Alaskans, not importing it from Russia.” Trump stumped for Sullivan on Tuesday in Wasilla, Alaska.

“You just don’t want to give that guy an inch,” Rogers told reporters Friday before a campaign event in Michigan. Rogers said he opposed importing diesel from Russia and preferred a temporary diesel export ban, such as one the White House considered and rejected.

The remarks come on the heels of similar moves by other GOP candidates to create distance from the White House. In Iowa and Ohio, Senate hopeful Rep. Ashley Hinson and Sen. Jon Hustedcalled for a quickend to the Iran war. In Florida, Rep. María Salazarsaid Trump’s deportation policies went too far. In Kansas, Sen. Roger Marshallsaid he was “frustrated” by the president’s plan to import foreign beef. And Rogers’ position on Russian fuel comes after he voiced concerns last week about the president’s trade war with Canada.

Together, they’re reflective of the overall sour mood across the country, where Republicans are broadly upset that the Trump administration hasn’t done more to better set the economic stage for the midterm elections. Growing numbers of Republicans are resigned to the idea that Trump won’t deliver an October surprise to jolt their campaigns.

It’s too late for gas prices to drop under $4 per gallon, mortgage rates are unlikely to fall significantly and beef prices remain at historic highs. That’s led to candidates looking for ways to show they are responsive to voters’ concerns even when Trump doesn’t appear to be.

In Kansas, where Marshall is mired in an unexpectedly close contest with Democrat Adam Hamilton, farmers are grappling with not only the president’s tariff agenda — which has caused supply-chain headaches for more than a year — but rising diesel costs, labor shortages and the Trump administration’s efforts to lower beef prices at the expense of U.S. cattle ranchers.

Marshall said that the president’s move to import foreign beef sent the wrong signal to domestic cattle ranchers.

“There is a concern that people say, ‘I’m going to pass this year and vote in two years for president,’” said Ken Rahjes, a GOP state lawmaker in western Kansas, who said he still believes Republicans will turn out in November.

A White House official, granted anonymity to speak candidly, said there is “absolutely no distance” between Trump and Republicans, providing a long list of candidates who have appeared alongside the president at rallies in their states or attended the Dallas midterm convention, as well as examples of more than two dozen candidates who have featured the president prominently on social media.

“These candidates are talking about the issues in their states. They are running real campaigns and these are kitchen-table topics they need to address — they aren’t breaking with [Trump’s policies],” the official said.

The White House and Trump-aligned GOP operatives have made clear that the president is tolerating the moves from candidates, so long as they don’t criticize him directly. A second White House official, granted anonymity to share details of private conversations, said that he explained to the president that “just because they have a stance on an issue” that conflicts with the president’s “doesn’t mean they are balking” him — and that the president agreed.

“Candidates need to be able to talk to the issues, but it’s certainly not a balk at him or a stiff arm or anything like that,” the official said, noting that candidates like Hinson have still been appearing with the president even as they’ve disagreed.

It is true that Republicans rarely criticize Trump even as they urge him to change many of the policies that have come to define his second term.

Rogers last week released a campaign ad — which features the candidate at a bar drinking a Canadian beer the U.S. has prohibited importing — calling for an end to Trump’s month-plus trade war with Canada.

It was a reversal for Rogers who shortly after the trade war started in August said in an interview on Fox News that “some” of the trade war was the “right thing” for Michigan and that “the Canadians have not been good partners.”

“It shouldn’t be surprising that folks are looking for opportunities to distance themselves from Washington,” said Michigan strategist Jason Roe, who is working on the reelection campaign of Rep. Tom Barrett (R-Mich.). “If there’s not going to be a resolution and things aren’t going to improve, then you need to be talking about it.”

Hinson has criticized the knock-on effects of the Iran war, saying that her constituents “are being squeezed” and “shouldn’t have to foot the bill at the pump or the checkout line for the war in Iran.” Rogers, Husted and Wisconsin gubernatorial candidate Tom Tiffany have all also called for an end to the war.

“Everybody is so upset out here. They’re mad,” said Iowa farmer Lance Lillibridge, an informal ag adviser to Hinson who is active in GOP politics in the state.

“I gotta agree with her. I want it to end as well, and so does everybody in Iowa, and her job is to take that message to Washington,” said Lillibridge, who added that he remains a staunch supporter of the president and believes fertilizer companies are to blame for the squeeze farmers are feeling.

RNC spokesperson Natalie Baldassarre said that “Republicans remain united behind the president’s agenda of cutting taxes, lowering drug costs, and securing our communities.”

“We are laser-focused on winning, and our candidates will run the races necessary to best represent their districts and prevent Democrats from taking control,” she said.

Spokespeople for the Hinson and Marshall campaigns did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

A spokesperson for the Rogers campaign referred back to his public remarks, while Adams, the Sullivan spokesperson, noted that the senator has worked with the administration on several efforts to bring down the cost of diesel in Alaska, including last week’s dyed diesel executive order.

The White House has, in some cases, communicated with campaigns and candidates on their messaging, giving them leeway to diverge from the president’s, so long as they aren’t directly criticizing Trump himself. Asked Wednesday about the Rogers ad calling for an end to the trade war, Trump told reporters he “viewed it as he wanted Canada to make a deal,” a point Rogers himself underscored during a Thursday night debate, noting that he had spoken with Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick about the issue.

While the Michigan and Maine Senate races have been most roiled by the Canadian tariffs, they’re having ripple effects in other contests. Alaska Sen. Lisa Murkowski said it would help Republican candidates like Sullivan if the Canadian tariffs were not an issue.

“They’re having an impact in Alaska too, when it comes to [the] cost of goods. But I don’t know that people are making that connection as much as they may in some of the other border states,” Murkowski said.

Write off the House

Some Republicans write off the House

After waiting for weeks to see if the party’s deluge of money could help a raft of GOP incumbents who appeared to be in terrible shape in internal polling, more recent internal Republican polling still shows deep erosion in Trump country.

Calen Razor

Top Republican officials are increasingly accepting the House may already be lost as they shift to trying to limit the damage and salvage a Senate majority.

After waiting for weeks to see if the party’s deluge of money could help a raft of GOP incumbents who appeared to be in terrible shape in internal polling, more recent internal Republican polling still shows deep erosion in Trump country.

Now, Trump officials and Republican operatives say more candidates may have their funding from GOP campaign groups cut off in the coming days, before it’s too late to spend the money elsewhere to shore up other shaky races.

“I speak to a lot of people. There is no one who has privately stated that they believe Republicans can hold the House — not in recent weeks, anyway,” said former Rep. Carlos Curbelo, who lost in the last big House Democratic wave in 2018 after representing a South Florida swing district.

Five senior House Republicans, granted anonymity to candidly discuss their party’s precarious position, told POLITICO the House has all but slipped from their grasp.

One of those Republicans compared the situation to Democrats’ 2006 flip of the House — specifically noting that potential Senate seat flips in North Carolina and Ohio could have downballot effects, while House candidates in redrawn red states like Florida and Texas are “hanging on with their fingernails.”

President Donald Trump’s political operation and the top House GOP super PAC have been cutting off ad spending across the map in races they feel are no longer winnable or worth the money, including for Reps. Mariannette Miller-Meeks and Tom Kean Jr.

And some national operatives are already starting to point fingers over who’s to blame, arguing that surprisingly-competitive Senate races are sucking away donor attention — therefore forcing House operatives into tough spending decisions.

White House officials insist they’re not giving up on the House, and that moves by the president and his team to shift the allocation of resources shouldn’t be seen as them prioritizing one chamber over another.

“The cutting of resources should not dictate what the philosophy is or what the outlook is for the overall race at large,” a senior White House official said. “It’s not doom and gloom around here. Everyone’s very positive, upbeat.”

But on the ground, Republicans seem to be giving up hope for any saving grace from the president in the final stretch.

“President Trump has made this election all about himself,” a second senior House Republican said in an interview. “Now we have to survive that political storm.”

Why waste money when you are going to lose.....

Whatley campaign is currently dark on TV as GOP groups retreat from North Carolina

A spokesperson for the Republican Senate nominee said it is a “temporary pause.” But it’s an unusual move less than three weeks before Election Day.

Erin Doherty

Michael Whatley’s campaign has temporarily gone dark in North Carolina.

The Republican Senate nominee does not currently have future linear TV ad reservations booked in the race, a highly unusual move less than three weeks before Election Day in a state that was once considered a top GOP priority.

Whatley’s last broadcast TV ad aired one week ago, according to tracking firm AdImpact. The pause comes as Republicans and major outside GOP groups, including Senate Leadership Fund, disinvest from the state in an acknowledgment of the difficulty of beating Democratic nominee Roy Cooper, the former North Carolina governor, in November.

“It’s a temporary pause and we’ll be back on the air shortly with our closing message that may or may not ask voters why does our elderly opponent refuse to answer basic questions about his health and ability to serve in the U.S. Senate,” Whatley spokesperson DJ Griffin said in a statement. “We are confident we have the resources needed to win the only poll that matters — Election Day in November.”

Cooper’s campaign, by contrast, has $7.4 million in future TV ad reservations, in addition to $11.2 million from outside groups. Republican outside groups have just $4.7 million reserved, giving Democrats a nearly 4 to 1 advantage in future TV ad spending, according to an analysis of AdImpact data.

The move by Whatley’s campaign is rare this close to the election, a period when candidates typically ramp up their advertising as voters begin casting ballots.

“It was always going to be a tough seat for Rs to hold,” said Doug Heye, a longtime GOP strategist who is from North Carolina. “Trump’s numbers are in the tank and Cooper is a good candidate who has won statewide. This is what was always going to happen.”

Cooper, who has repeatedly led Whatley in public polling and candidate fundraising, enters the final stretch of the campaign as the clear front-runner over Whatley, a former chair of the Republican National Committee and the handpicked candidate of President Donald Trump.

A spokesperson for Cooper sharply rebutted the Whatley campaign’s characterizations about the Democrat’s health. “These are more desperate lies from a desperate candidate,” Kate Smart said in a statement. “Roy Cooper has held over 350 events over the course of this campaign, is in excellent health and will obviously serve his full term.”

Major outside groups on both sides have already begun retreating from North Carolina. The GOP-aligned Senate Leadership Fund paused its spending in the state earlier this month, while other Republican groups, including Old North Action, have also pulled back.

Democrats are increasingly bullish on Cooper’s chances of flipping the seat — one of four pickups the party needs to win back the Senate, assuming it defends all of its current seats. The Democratic-aligned Senate Majority PAC has also started pausing its spending in North Carolina, increasingly turning their attention to fund other competitive Senate races.

Credits tied to data centers

Democratic tax writers demand Meta explain use of research credits tied to data centers

Seven Finance Committee senators led by Ron Wyden signed a letter demanding answers from Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg.

Brian Faler

A group of Senate Democratic tax writers said Wednesday that Meta may be abusing a popular business tax break, and are demanding more details of why the social media giant is claiming a research subsidy in conjunction with its construction of data centers.

The lawmakers wrote they want to know whether Meta, which includes Facebook and Instagram, is improperly claiming the provision, which is supposed to be reserved for research and experimental technologies, not typical business expenses. Their letter was prompted by a recent report by the New York Times that the company has cut its tax liability by billions of dollars using the credit.

“The federal research credit can be a useful and necessary tool to support our nation’s innovation economy and cutting-edge research,” the senators said in a letter to Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg. “Subsidizing your A.I. data center build is not close to meeting this standard.”

They added: “Any efforts by Meta to use A.I. data center expansion as eligible for research credits is potentially a significant misapplication of federal tax law that merits further investigation.”

The letter was signed by Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), the ranking Democrat on the tax-writing Finance Committee, and six of his colleagues on the panel. One of the letter’s signers, Sen. Peter Welch of Vermont, separately wrote last week to IRS CEO Frank Bisignano, asking the tax agency for information on how Meta and other major tech companies are using the R&E tax credit.

It comes as data centers have emerged as a major bipartisan issue in the midterm elections amid widespread voter backlash against the facilities. Budget forecasters say tax breaks claimed by companies for the AI infrastructure buildout are now big enough to put a dent in federal tax receipts.

The tax code has long included subsidies for corporate research and development programs, which have been broadly supported by lawmakers in both parties. Republicans beefed up the provisions part of their 2025 tax cuts.

A Meta spokesperson rejected the criticism.

“Unlike traditional data centers, AI-optimized data centers are inherently new and require extensive testing and experimentation that cannot be simulated in order to get the design and build right,” the spokesperson, Andy Stone, said. “This is precisely the kind of domestic investment Congress encouraged when it established these tax incentives decades ago.”