Voter REAL ID Archives - Page 3 of 9

Tag Archive for: Voter REAL ID

John Thune Faces Censure Over Failure to Advance SAVE Act

June 27, 2026/in Elections, Hot Topics, Must Read, News, Policy, Voter REAL ID/by The Geller Report

Finally, action and accountability. Thune must go.

Thune to face censure vote from SD GOP over SAVE America Act

Grassroots conservative activist Scott Presler, who was in attendance for the vote, shared footage of the committee vote.

By: Ben Whedon, Just The News, June 26, 2026:

The South Dakota Republican Party’s Resolutions Committee approved a censure resolution against Senate Majority Leader John Thune, who represents the state.

Grassroots conservative activist Scott Presler, who was in attendance for the vote, shared footage of the committee vote. Their decision sends the resolution to the state party.

The resolution condemns Thune’s failure to pass the SAVE America Act, a marquis voter ID bill that has languished in the upper chamber, despite pressure from President Donald Trump and Republican lawmakers. Thune has resisted changes to Senate rules to pass the bill without the 60 votes needed to clear the filibuster.

Thune faces reelection in 2028. The vote follows Presler claiming to have been barred from a paid dinner organized by the South Dakota Republican Party.

Continue reading.

AUTHOR

Pamela Geller

Study: Illegal Immigration Drives Up American Housing Prices

June 25, 2026/in Courts & Law, Criminal Illegal Aliens, Culture War, Economy, Hot Topics, Immigration, News, Policy, Politics, Social Issues, Socialism, Voter REAL ID/by Family Research Council

President Donald Trump and Vice President J.D. Vance have both repeatedly asserted that the Trump administration’s immigration policy — chiefly, deportations — will significantly ease economic burdens on Americans, especially in sectors like housing. A new report is confirming those statements as likely accurate.

According to the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas, the millions of illegal immigrants ushered into the U.S. by former President Joe Biden and his administration drove up housing costs significantly, making it harder for American families to afford homes. “According to the U.S. Congressional Budget Office, net entry of this category of immigrants added roughly 7 million people to the U.S. population over 2021 to 2024 (1.75 million per year), nearly double that of legal immigration,” the Federal Reserve report found. “To put this growth in perspective, net unauthorized immigration — that is, immigration of individuals who entered the country without being formally admitted for purposes of immigration law — averaged only 0.1 million a year from 2000 to 2019 and was slightly negative from 2010 to 2019.”

“We then turn to the effects of unauthorized immigration on the broader local economy, focusing in particular on the housing market,” the report continued. Between 2021 and 2024, the price of housing increased by 2.2% and rent increased by 1.4% for every 1% that illegal immigration increased a locale’s population. “A back-of-the-envelope calculation suggests that [unauthorized immigrant worker flows] can explain about 30% of the total growth in house prices and 20% of total growth in rents over the boom period for the average local market,” the report concluded.

“Increased housing prices is one of many reasons why mass deportations are still needed,” said Lora Ries, director of the Heritage Foundation’s Border Security and Immigration Center, in comments to The Washington Stand. “We have at least 20 million deportable aliens in the U.S. Deporting millions of them will free up housing supply, bring down housing costs, allow young Americans to buy homes and start families. All of this is needed for America to thrive,” she continued. “Border security is half of the equation. Deportations are the other half.”

The Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas report findings are in line with the conclusions of other studies. A Housing and Urban Development (HUD) investigation last year similarly concluded that mass immigration drives up housing costs, particularly for low-income individuals and communities. The HUD report examined “worst-case housing needs, which it defined as Americans who are low-income but do not receive government assistance or welfare and who pay more than one-half of their income toward housing costs. “Between 2021 and 2023, cases of worst-case needs remained elevated at 8.46 million households, virtually the same as the 2019-to-2021 period,” the report found. “One key cause of elevated worst case needs is immigration.”

“Between 2021 and 2024, the foreign-born population of the United States increased by more than 6 million — the largest such increase over such a short period in American history,” HUD found. “The foreign-born population now stands at more than 53 million individuals, making up the highest share of the American population in history,” the report continued. “This immigration-driven increase in households has contributed to a significant increase in housing demand, thus driving up housing prices. In fact, in some markets, immigration has accounted for nearly all of the increase in housing demand in recent years.”

The HUD report found that economic growth over the same period “has been insufficient to lift the wages of low-income renting families high enough to make rent affordable.” The report further concluded that “national macroeconomic policies, such as record immigration, have combined to drive sustained high rental demand, which has continued to place upward pressure on rent prices.” Largely due to mass immigration, fewer than 60 affordable housing units were available per 100 American renters considered “very low-income,” HUD found, and fewer than 40 affordable units were available per 100 American renters considered “extremely low-income.”

Early last year, HUD signed a “memorandum of understanding” with the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) in an effort to collaborate to ensure that taxpayer-funded housing benefits are received by American citizens, not illegal immigrants. In places like Springfield, Ohio, where the Biden administration dumped tens of thousands of Haitian immigrants under temporary protected status (TPS), Americans have been driven out of their homes, with landlords often raising rent prices higher than American workers can afford in order to take advantage of the taxpayer-funded housing assistance afforded to foreign nationals.

“When we talk about housing and why costs are so high, we don’t talk enough about demand, and one of the drivers of increased housing demand is that we’ve got a lot of people over the last four years who have come into the country illegally,” Vance observed last year. “That’s something we have to work on if we want to meaningfully reduce the cost of housing. … We want Americans to be able to afford the American dream of home ownership.”

AUTHOR

S.A. McCarthy

S.A. McCarthy serves as a news writer at The Washington Stand.

The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.

‘NATIONAL EMERGENCY’: Trump Cancels Housing Bill Signing Until Congress Passes Voter ID Law

June 24, 2026/in Budget and Finance, Elections, Hot Topics, Must Read, News, Voter REAL ID/by The Daily Signal

President Donald Trump said he will not move forward with a housing bill signing, which was scheduled for noon Wednesday, until Congress passes the SAVE America Act.

“Today’s Housing News Conference and Signing is hereby cancelled until such time as we pass the desperately needed SAVE AMERICA ACT, which I consider to be a National Emergency,” Trump wrote on Truth Social.

The U.S. House voted Tuesday night 358-32 to pass a housing package aimed at lowering costs for homebuyers and increasing housing supply. The 21st Century ROAD to Housing Act passed the Senate in an 85-5 vote on Monday, and Trump was scheduled to sign it Wednesday in the Capitol. However, he canceled the ceremony Wednesday morning to push the SAVE America Act instead, which requires proof of ID and citizenship to vote.

Trump said in another post that the housing bill “pales in comparison” to the SAVE America Act.

“The Elizabeth ‘Pocahontas’ Warren centric housing bill, which is of minor importance compared to lower interest rates, and even FISA, pales in comparison to passing THE SAVE AMERICA ACT,” he said. “That is what Americans, both Dumocrats, Republicans, and everyone else, care about.”

“Get the bad Republicans to approve it or, better yet, Terminate the Filibuster and approve it, AND EVERYTHING ELSE REPUBLICANS HAVE EVER DREAMED OF,” he added. “The Dumocrats will do it in hour one, 100%. Republicans will feel very stupid if they don’t do it first. I’ll be watching with tears in my eyes!!!”

Trump is also set to join the Senate Steering Committee lunch on Wednesday to discuss strategies to pass the SAVE America Act.

“We have to pass the SAVE America Act, which is voter ID, which is proof of citizenship, etc.,” the president said Tuesday in response to a question from the Daily Signal about his luncheon agenda. “We have to pass it, so we’re going to have to talk about that, and many other things.”

Rep. Chip Roy, R-Texas, said the housing bill is “full of big government garbage & spending,” such as a $200 million affordable housing pilot program to incentivize dense subsidized “affordable housing” units.

Kevin Roberts, president of The Heritage Foundation, stated Wednesday that “Republicans must fight for BOTH” the SAVE America Act and a reconciliation bill including the president’s policy priorities. “Show votes aren’t enough,” he stated in a post on X.

AUTHOR

Elizabeth Troutman Mitchell

Elizabeth Troutman Mitchell is the White House correspondent for the Daily Signal. Follow on X TheElizMitchell.

From Trump’s Landslide to Thune’s Takeover: The RINO Establishment Reasserts Control

June 12, 2026/in Election Fraud, Hot Topics, Must Read, News, Policy, Politics, Voter REAL ID/by Amil Imani

The Captured Capitol and the Strangulation of the Seventy-Seven Million Mandate.

The American electorate did not merely cast ballots; they delivered an explicit mandate for systemic disruption. When seventy-seven million Americans voted to return Donald Trump to the White House and hand Republicans control of Congress, it was a thunderous rejection of the status quo — a demand to dismantle the entrenched managerial class, secure the southern border, and reverse decades of globalist overreach. The victory was a raw expression of popular sovereignty meant to shatter the calcified structures of official Washington. Yet, almost before the ink could dry on the election certificates, the immediate business-as-usual pivot of the Senate Republican leadership signaled a cold reality. The swift elevation of South Dakota Senator John Thune to Senate Majority Leader, succeeding Mitch McConnell, acted as a chilling bucket of water thrown upon the populist base.

For millions of voters, this transition felt less like a changing of the guard and more like a tactical redeployment of the institutional vanguard. Cultural commentators captured the growing fury, noting a profound sentiment bubbling up from the grassroots that the new leadership is viewed as a Trojan Horse for the Uniparty, underscoring an utter contempt for the supporters who voted for a transformative agenda. This chasm is not a misunderstanding over legislative drafting; it is an existential conflict between a populism demanding total reform and an oligarchy practicing clientelist politics.

To understand the intense skepticism surrounding the new Senate leadership, one must view John Thune not merely as an individual, but as a living symbol of a grand institutional apparatus. For decades, Thune has moved through the upper echelons of Washington, rising through the ranks of the Senate Republican Conference leadership as a consummate insider — temperamentally moderate, smooth-talking, and fiercely protective of the chamber’s arcane traditions. Under this dynamic, a popular mandate of seventy-seven million voters is forced through a strict Senate bottleneck where it is systematically diluted and delayed.

The institutional Senate relies on procedural norms, such as the sixty-vote filibuster shield and committee chairperson vetoes, as defensive armor to neutralize populist legislation while hiding behind the math. Rather than aggressively challenging these rules — as Democrats routinely threaten to do when pushing their own structural changes – the Republican establishment treats them as unalterable physics. This allows leaders to shrug, point to the legislative calendar, and blame a lack of bipartisan consensus, satisfying their corporate backers while telling their voters that they tried but simply lacked the votes.

The institutional arrogance of the upper chamber is structurally hardwired by the Framers, though weaponized by modern political operatives. While the House of Representatives operates on a two-year term length that forces an extremely high vulnerability to voter sentiment and hyper-responsiveness to grassroots populist movements, the United States Senate is structurally different.

A six-year Senate term was designed to foster stability, yet in the contemporary ecosystem, it breeds a profound psychological disconnect, keeping senators entirely insulated from the immediate, volatile wrath of their voters. Because a senator can spend four out of six years ignoring the base — advancing judicial confirmations or playing inside-baseball committee games — they cultivate an attitude of utter contempt toward the very people who elected them. They calculate that by the time their re-election cycle rolls around, voter memory will have faded, or a well-funded blitz of slick campaign ads will pacify the public. This long-term insulation transforms the Senate into an elite club where public opinion is treated as a temporary storm to be outlasted, rather than an instruction manual to be executed.

At the absolute center of this political fracture is a stark, irreconcilable divergence between the priorities of the populist base and the interests of the traditional donor class. The seventy-seven million voters driving the populist realignment demand explicit, tangible victories, specifically comprehensive border security with mass deportations, an aggressive economic nationalism anchored by robust tariffs to protect American manufacturing, and a decisive halt to unchecked, multi-billion-dollar foreign entanglements. Conversely, the powerful donor class that funds leadership political action committees operates on a completely different set of incentives.

Corporate benefactors, traditional business coalitions, and Wall Street lobbies quietly favor cheap labor flowing across the border, seamless global supply chains untroubled by protective tariffs, and a foreign policy that guarantees continuous defense spending. While leadership may offer passionate rhetorical support for border security on cable news, their legislative maneuvers often tell a different story, prioritizing corporate tax provisions or quietly defending international trade relationships to signal to their financial underwriters that the populist wave will be carefully managed and kept well within safe, profitable margins.

The modern Republican Party is attempting an impossible political balancing act by riding a raging populist wave to secure majorities and then expecting that wave to instantly stop churning the moment it reaches the marble steps of the Capitol. It is a dangerous, unsustainable strategy. The fierce chasm between the seventy-seven million voters who expect an absolute overhaul of Washington and an institutional leadership devoted to protecting consensus politics cannot be bridged by generic party unity press releases.

If the Senate Republican leadership continues to function as an obstacle to the popular mandate, the outcome will not be a return to the old pre-2016 consensus. Instead, it will trigger a permanent, catastrophic fracture within the GOP coalition — shattering the party from within and proving that an elite class that shows contempt for its own voters will eventually find itself a leadership without a base.

How California’s Election Procedures Turn Early Leads Into Late Losses

June 9, 2026/in Election Fraud, Hot Topics, Marxism, Must Read, News, Socialism, The Truth, Voter REAL ID, Waste, Fraud and Abuse/by The Daily Signal

Delayed vote tallies in California are attributable to the vote-by-mail system and weeklong deadlines for receiving ballots, which undermines confidence in results, election experts say.

Tuesday is the deadline for the last of California’s ballots to arrive, where about 80% vote by mail and about 40% of ballots arrive after Election Day in the nation’s most populous state. These are among the factors that contribute to repeatedly delayed results.

On Sunday, it appeared that Republican mayoral candidate Spencer Pratt would fall out of contention for the general election after several days of appearing in the top two vote recipients along with Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass, a Democrat. Another Democrat candidate, Nithya Raman, appeared to overtake Pratt for second place to face Bass in the general election. The state’s primaries allow the top two vote-getters, rather than party nominees, to advance to the general election.

California also doesn’t allow local jurisdictions to require voter ID and allows 22 days for “curing” ballots. Curing is when a voter’s ballot needs to be corrected or clarified to count, such as fixing illegible marks on the ballot or inserting a missing signature on the ballot envelope.

“There are a lot of consequential House races in the general election. We are likely going to have a similar conversation in November,” Andrew Bahl, a law team staff writer for Ballotpedia, which monitors election procedures, told the Daily Signal.

Similar apparent flips have occurred in previous elections in the state, including in races for the U.S. House of Representatives. On election night in 2024, Republican incumbent Rep. Michelle Steel was leading, but that lead turned into a loss days later as Democrat Derek Tran won the seat 22 days after the election.

In 2024, 80.8% of voters used mail-in voting in California. This figure does not include early in-person voting, according to a Ballotpedia report that contrasted California’s election procedures with Florida’s.

Both states have large voter populations. Among the biggest differences between them is that Florida has strict timelines for tabulating and reporting results, Bahl said. Florida also allows election officials to count, but not report, early in-person and mail votes before Election Day, in contrast to California, which requires tabulation to wait until after the Election Day polls close.

California became an all-mail voting state during the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020, and the state Legislature codified all-mail elections in 2021. After this act, every registered voter in the state automatically received a ballot.

As long as ballots are postmarked by Election Day, they can arrive up to seven days after the election.

“About 23 million ballots were sent to California voters and only about 7 million came back,” Jason Snead, executive director of the Honest Elections Project, told the Daily Signal.

“California has created a system that is at every stage as insecure as possible,” Snead, executive director of the Honest Elections Project, told the Daily Signal.

He added that California has no laws against ballot harvesting or against third parties delivering or picking up ballots in large quantities.

“The desire to get election results on election night cuts across every party,” Snead added. “When people repeatedly see results change, or one candidate concedes and then becomes a victor, it opens the door for speculation.”

Over the weekend, President Donald Trump did far more than speculate, effectively declaring the California elections “crooked.”

“Thousands of homeless may be fueling Nithya Raman’s impossible late surge in LA. Voter fraud was just busted on Skid Row,” Trump posted on Truth Social. “This is why nobody trusts their elections anymore.”

During an interview on NBC’s “Meet the Press,” Trump said: “Look at what’s happening in California. Do you think it’s appropriate that they have an election and five days later they’re nowhere close to picking a winner?”

California Secretary of State Shirley Weber’s office did not respond to an inquiry from the Daily Signal by publication time.

Weber posted on X Monday that elections in California are secure, asserting there is “rigorous testing of machines,” “strict chain of custody,” and “all signatures are verified.”

“Los Angeles County’s focus is not on any particular race or outcome; our focus is on the process. California law provides a canvass period to ensure every valid ballot is properly received, verified, processed, and counted, and that is exactly what we are doing,” Mike Sanchez, spokesman for Los Angeles County, told the Daily Signal. “While there is often significant public attention and commentary surrounding election results, our office remains committed to transparency, accuracy, and ensuring every eligible voter has their ballot counted. We will continue to process and count all timely and valid ballots in accordance with California law.”

There is no evidence of impropriety, but the procedures negatively impact voter confidence, said Don Palmer, a former chairman of the U.S. Election Assistance Commission, now a senior legal fellow at The Heritage Foundation.

“California needs to reform its system because it is not designed for voter confidence,” Palmer, a former director of Florida elections, told the Daily Signal. “After the 2024 election, the California Legislature was forced to make some slight modifications after the long counts. But the system is designed for California Democrats, not California voters.”

The problem has affected several U.S. House races in California, including Tran’s late-breaking victory in 2024.

In 2020, Republican Young Kim was declared the winner over Democrat incumbent Rep. Gil Cisneros 10 days after the election.

In 2018, it took nine days for Democrat Katie Porter to officially win the election over Republican incumbent Rep. Mimi Walters. For nearly a full week after election night, Walters led Porter in the vote count.

This story was updated to include a comment from a spokesman for Los Angeles County, California.

AUTHOR

Fred Lucas

Fred Lucas is senior investigative reporter for the Daily Signal. He is the author of “The Myth of Voter Suppression: The Left’s Assault on Clean Elections.” Follow on X FredLucasWH.

RELATED ARTICLES:

‘It’s Happening Again’: Trump Reacts as Raman Overtakes Pratt in LA Mayoral Race

Ongoing California Ballot Counting Sparks Allegations of Election Fraud

RINO TRAITORS: Senate Kills Voter ID Bill One Day After California Election Chaos

June 6, 2026/in Election Fraud, Elections, Featured, Hot Topics, News, Policy, Regulation, Voter REAL ID/by The Geller Report

The Senate just voted down the SAVE America Act, blocking a measure that would have required voter ID and proof of citizenship for federal elections nationwide.

Let that sink in. Imagine, the day after Americans watched California’s primary results being dragged through yet another counting fiasco.

Republican NO votes: Tillis, Murkowski, McConnell, and Collins.

Washington keeps telling Americans to trust the system while refusing to adopt the most basic election safeguards supported by an overwhelming majority of voters. Public backing from polls showing 80%+ approval for voter ID.

That’s the real story.

The Senate voted 48-50 against waiving budget rules for Sen. Lindsey Graham’s amendment to add SAVE America Act provisions to an immigration funding bill, falling short of the 60 votes needed. The act requires documentary proof of U.S. citizenship like a birth certificate or passport for federal election registration, plus photo ID at polls and curbs on absentee voting. Public backing from polls showing 80%+ approval for voter ID. Sen. Mike Lee plans another attempt soon amid GOP divisions and midterm pressures.

AUTHOR

Pamela Geller

RELATED VIDEO: Why is California still counting ballots?

POSTS ON X:

Spencer Pratt Surges: A Republican Rising in the Heart of Democrats Los Angeles

May 29, 2026/in America 250, Elections, Hot Topics, Must Read, News, Policy, Politics, Social Issues, Voter REAL ID/by Oladigbo Oluwasogo Olalekan

The upcoming Los Angeles mayoral election has become one of the most unpredictable political contests in recent years. Traditionally a Democratic fortress, the city now faces a potential political shift that could redefine its governance for years to come.

At the center of this upheaval is incumbent Mayor Karen Bass, whose tenure has been plagued by unresolved issues, most notably the escalating homelessness crisis. Bass, who promised to significantly reduce street homelessness, has admitted that progress has been slow. As of May 2026, street homelessness in Los Angeles has decreased by only 17.6% under her administration. Her ambitious Inside Safe program, despite costing roughly $400 million, has permanently housed just 1,500 individuals—a result that critics deem insufficient given the scale of the problem. Bass has cited bureaucratic hurdles as the reason for these setbacks, yet many residents remain frustrated by the slow pace of meaningful action.

Amid this dissatisfaction, Republican candidate Spencer Pratt is gaining unexpected momentum. Pratt, who has positioned himself as a pragmatic, no-nonsense alternative to the current administration, has focused his campaign on public safety and effective governance. His policy proposals include increasing funding for the Los Angeles Police Department, holding accountable those who seize public streets, and collaborating with federal agencies such as ICE to ensure law and order.

For many Angelenos, Pratt’s message resonates. A growing number of residents are weary of seeing tents and encampments proliferate across their neighborhoods, and they view Democratic leadership as having failed to address the problem effectively. Even moderate voters, traditionally loyal to Democrats, are showing interest in Pratt’s approach, signaling a potential cross-party appeal.

Polls and prediction markets suggest that while Pratt is still considered an underdog, his chances are rising. The UC Berkeley–L.A. Times poll in late May 2026 showed Pratt at 22% among likely voters, in a tight race with City Councilmember Nithya Raman at 25% and Mayor Bass at 26%. Markets like Kalshi indicate a 20–27% probability of Pratt winning, reflecting growing investor confidence in his candidacy. Analysts suggest a likely runoff, with Pratt holding a realistic shot at advancing, despite Los Angeles’ heavily Democratic electorate.

Pratt’s campaign benefits from running as a nonpartisan critic of the current administration, appealing to voters frustrated with bureaucratic stagnation and rising public safety concerns. Observers note the potential for a “Trump effect,” in which a non-traditional Republican candidate gains traction in urban areas traditionally dominated by Democrats.

The stakes of this election extend beyond city limits. Following the election of progressive New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani, Democratic momentum has slowed nationally. A Republican victory in Los Angeles would provide a significant political talking point heading into the midterms and the 2028 general election, signaling that even Democratic strongholds are vulnerable when leadership fails to deliver results.

While Spencer Pratt’s candidacy may have started as a long shot, his surge in support demonstrates that voters are hungry for effective leadership, accountability, and tangible results. In a city grappling with unresolved crises, Pratt represents a fresh vision and a conservative alternative poised to make history in Los Angeles.

Ballot Betrayal: Furious Americans Turn on Thune as He Stalls SAVE Act in Senate Swamp

May 23, 2026/in America 250, Election Fraud, Elections, Hot Topics, Must Read, News, Policy, Politics, Social Issues, The Truth, Voter REAL ID/by Amil Imani

The explosive standoff over the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility (SAVE) Act has pushed the U.S. Senate into a pressure cooker, transforming the legislative battle into a high-stakes referendum on the leadership of Majority Leader John Thune. For a rapidly growing number of Americans, the slow, agonizing movement on this landmark election security bill is nothing short of a tactical surrender — a profound failure of nerve from a leader increasingly viewed as a worthless roadblock to the populist agenda. Across the country, the hatred directed at Thune is reaching a boiling point, fueled by the conviction that his deliberate inaction is a direct betrayal of the citizens he was chosen to lead. Indeed, there is no institutional excuse; his handling of the SAVE Act is a definitive reason why he should resign.

To understand the intense fury surrounding John Thune’s leadership, one must first look at the bill at the center of the storm. The SAVE Act represents a massive proposed shift in how American federal elections are conducted. The bill’s core mandate is simple but sweeping: it would require all Americans to present formal documentary proof of citizenship — such as a U.S. passport or a certified birth certificate alongside photo identification — in order to register to vote in federal elections.

This legislation is a vital, common-sense measure to protect the sanctity of the ballot box and ensure that only American citizens decide American elections. From this viewpoint, any delay in passing the bill is not a sign of careful deliberation, but a calculated establishment roadblock. Everyday Americans feel that a Republican-led Senate should move with absolute, unyielding urgency to pass what is undeniably one of the most critical pieces of election security legislation in history. Thune’s refusal to force the issue is seen as a symptom of an ineffective, backstabbing leadership style that coddles opponents while leaving his own base defenseless.

The excuse frequently offered for Thune’s failure is that the bill faces an uphill battle due to intense institutional opposition from Democrats and progressive voting rights groups. Opponents argue that the measure is restrictive and addresses a virtually non-existent problem, claiming it could disenfranchise millions of voters who lack immediate access to birth certificates or passports.

However, for the millions of Americans demanding change, these arguments are viewed as mere political smoke screens designed to protect a broken status quo. A real leader would aggressively dismantle these talking points and fight for the rule of law. Instead, by allowing these objections to paralyze the Senate, Thune’s leadership has shown itself to be completely toothless, leaving him in an indefensible position that has alienated the very people who put his party in power.

This friction exposes a glaring disconnect between grassroots expectations and institutional constraints. Activists out in the country are operating on a war footing; they demand immediate, sweeping legislative victories and view the majority leader’s job as a battering ram to push core priorities through. When Thune opts to slow-roll or deliberate, those demanding rapid mobilization do not see strategic patience — they see a betrayal of fundamental promises. To a base primed for zero-tolerance combat, procedural caution reads as a deliberate obstruction of the very reforms promised on the campaign trail.

Ultimately, this is a clash of political alignment and governing DNA. Thune’s traditional, establishment orientation – anchored by a career-long devotion to preserving Senate norms and the filibuster — puts him on a direct collision course with a populist movement that has entirely run out of patience for institutional decorum. Activists and MAGA loyalists demand absolute, unblinking alignment with Trump-era goals and rapid, disruptive action. By choosing to defend the traditional mechanics of the upper chamber rather than weaponizing it for fast-tracked political victories, Thune increasingly finds himself fighting a two-front war: matching wits with Senate Democrats on one side, and dodging friendly fire from an impatient right flank on the other.

Defenders of the establishment point to the procedural challenges of a closely divided Senate, noting that Thune must manage a fractured caucus and handle the 60-vote filibuster threshold. But to a frustrated public, these are simply weak excuses for political cowardice. While Thune has paid lip service to the SAVE Act, suggesting it will remain a central campaign issue for voters in the fall if it fails, this passive stance infuriates grassroots activists. They do not want a campaign talking point for the next election cycle; they want a leader who will deliver results right now.

The intense public anger directed at Thune is not just standard political noise — it is a widespread rejection of his entire approach to governance. When voters see a defining piece of legislation stalled by procedural games, that frustration naturally focuses on the person holding the gavel. To his fiercest critics, Thune’s deliberate approach looks like rank hesitation and an outright unwillingness to fight for the core principles of his party.

Ultimately, the gridlock surrounding the SAVE Act has laid bare a profound leadership vacuum at the top of the Senate. As calls for his resignation grow louder, John Thune stands exposed at the intersection of these competing pressures. For an increasing majority of the American electorate, his continued pattern of legislative delay is no longer viewed as a defense of institutional norms, but as a catastrophic failure to protect the American vote.

Trump Renews SAVE America Push

May 19, 2026/in America 250, Elections, Featured, Hot Topics, News, Policy, Politics, Social Issues, The Truth, Voter REAL ID/by The Daily Signal

Despite a lack of momentum in the Senate, President Donald Trump is not giving up on the SAVE America Act—a bill that would require proof of citizenship and photo identification in federal elections.

On Saturday, Trump demanded the bill be tacked on to separate bills dealing with housing and the extension of Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act spy powers.

“THE SAVE AMERICA ACT MUST BE PASSED, NOW,” wrote Trump. “Use the Housing and FISA Bills to get it done! Maryland just had 500,000 Fake Mail-In Ballots revealed. We cannot, as a Country, put up with this any longer!!!”

Trump’s post came after the Maryland State Board of Elections acknowledged an “error by [their] mail-in ballot vendor resulting in some voters receiving the wrong party ballot for the Gubernatorial Primary Election.“

Per the board, more than 500,000 voters have requested mail-in ballots.

Jared DeMarinis, Maryland’s state administrator of elections, has pushed back on Trump’s characterization, telling CBS, “I want to assure the President, voters, and the public that NO Fake Mail-in ballots were distributed.”

Trump continued in his post, “Voter I.D., and Proof of Citizenship, must be approved, NOW. Crooked Mail-In Voting must be stopped!!! PUT IT ALL IN THE HOUSING AND FISA BILLS.”The SAVE America Act, as passed by the House of Representatives, does not include restrictions on mail-in ballots. However, Trump has pushed for this provision to be added to the bill.Sen. Eric Schmitt, R-Mo., has introduced an amendment to the bill in the Senate that would restrict most mail-in voting. The SAVE America Act has never come to a vote in the chamber.

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., has previously pledged to block any bill that includes the SAVE America Act, calling it “a poison pill that will kill any legislation that it is attached to.”

However, Trump’s post was welcomed by some.

“Thank you, President Trump, for continuing to push for the SAVE America Act,” wrote Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, a principal advocate of the bill, on X.

FISA and housing are both issues where Congress has struggled to find consensus.

The House and the Senate have already passed their own bills intended to expand the housing supply.

House Majority Leader Steve Scalise, R-La., has already placed an amended version of the Senate’s 21st Century ROAD to Housing Act on the House’s tentative schedule for the week of May 18.

With FISA, having failed to come to an agreement on a path forward, Congress has already voted twice in 2026 for short-term extensions of the federal government’s expiring authority to surveil the data of foreigners without warrants—a practice critics say is prone to abuse.

AUTHOR

George Caldwell

George Caldwell is a correspondent for the Daily Signal.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Republican House Should Staple SAVE America Act to Everything It Sends the GOP Senate

Senate Dems Claim Victory Over Thune on SAVE America Act

Can California Elections Be Saved? Voter ID Qualifies for the Ballot

Can the SAVE America Act be Saved?

May 15, 2026/in America 250, Elections, Hot Topics, Policy, Politics, Video, Voter REAL ID/by Conservative Commandos Radio Show and AUN-TV

Broadcast announces pressure on Leader Thune to pass SAVE America Act via talking filibuster.
Method suggests recessing nightly, debating until exhaustion, needing 50+ votes for passage.
Thread provides download links for broadcast and shares many political hashtags/links.

Let’s put renewed pressure on Senate Majority Leader John Thune. The Senate has been back from vacation since April 13, but he hasn’t spent one minute on the SAVE America Act. Remember, the Senate can pass the bill without 60 votes and without changing the rules. It’s simple but strenuous: Assemble all Republicans on the floor. Start the debate and do not ‘adjourn’ every day, but instead ‘recess’ each night. That seems a minor point, but it is the only way to make it work.

The Talking Filibuster: How It Works

Historical engraving of the United States Senate in the 19th century showing a senator delivering a floor speech — the original talking filibuster tradition
The United States Senate — where the “talking filibuster” was born. A senator holds the floor, speaks until exhausted, and gives way only when the debate ends. This is the tradition Majority Leader Thune can invoke today to pass the SAVE America Act by simple majority.

Each Senator is allowed to give only two speeches. Some will talk for a day or so — until they must end their speech for a meal or the bathroom. Most Democrat Senators won’t be able to last more than a few hours. So it could be over in a week or two.

Once they exhaust their vocal cords, a vote is held and the Act can pass with just 50 votes plus the Vice President.

Why Pressure from Constituents Matters

A few RINOs and Never-Trumper Senators won’t vote for it. So we need to make sure every other possible Senator will support it.
Note that a strong Majority Leader can pressure his Senators to do almost anything. “Don’t support it? Pity you’ll lose your membership on the Agriculture Committee…” That’s how the Democrats always have near-100% unity to pass their bills and oppose anything a Republican proposes. It’s not pretty, but it’s the way the Senate works.

“The elections are just months away—we can’t wait. Start the talking filibuster. Use your influence to get 50 Senators onboard.”

— THE MESSAGE TO DELIVER TO MAJORITY LEADER THUNE

The Electoral College and American Freedom

May 13, 2026/in America 250, Commentary, Elections, Hot Topics, News, Policy, Politics, Social Issues, The Truth, Voter REAL ID/by Jerry Newcombe, D. Min.

As we celebrate America at 250, there is a part of our founding in the Constitution (Article II, Section 1. Clause 2), about which some on the left gnash their teeth—the electoral college.

For example, a few days ago, a former Biden administration official asked publicly, “What if we selected our President by letting the person who got the most votes take the office, instead of the Electoral College?”

Townhall.com reported on this incident: “Former Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg is being mocked across the internet after he suggested at a town hall event in Tulsa, Oklahoma, that abolishing the Electoral College would have resulted in a Democrat in the White House. Many critics were quick to point out that in the 2024 election, Donald Trump won not only the Electoral College but also the popular vote in a landslide.”

Meanwhile, many blue states, including just recently Virginia, have signed on to a compact to try and effectively nullify the electoral college.

What is the electoral college, and why does the left hate it so?

It has to do with how “we the people” vote for the president. Many today see the electoral college as an out-of-date relic, and they want to abolish it and have it replaced with the popular vote. Defenders of the Constitution instead say that the electoral college was a brilliant move by the founding fathers to protect us from demagogues.

One expert on the Constitution, including the electoral college, that I enjoy speaking with is John Eidsmoe, longtime law professor and author of Christianity and the Constitution. I spoke with John on a radio segment about calls to abandon the electoral college.

I asked him to define the electoral college. Eidsmoe said, “Well, first of all, it’s not a college, and it meets every four years for the purpose of casting votes for the presidency. And, in fact, it doesn’t even convene in Washington, D.C. Delegates to the electoral college will convene in the capital of each of the 50 states, and they will cast their votes [for the president].”

The number of delegates to the electoral college differ from state to state, based on how many members of Congress they have. For example, Wyoming, has only three delegates for the electoral college, two for their senators and one for their lone Congressional seat. All told, Google notes, “There are 538 electors, equivalent to 100 Senators, 435 Representatives, plus three for Washington, D.C.”

Eidsmoe continued, “The idea of the electoral college was that we are not simply one national government. We are—they would have said “a confederation”—today we might say, “a federation” of states, 50 states now, with certain powers delegated to the federal government. But other [powers] reserved for the individual states. And the electoral college was a means to insure that each state had a role in electing the president.” [emphasis added]

If the left had their way, then national elections for the presidency would likely be decided by the majority of votes of New York City, of Los Angeles, of Chicago, and a few other big cities. We would be reduced to mob rule on the national scale.

We are a constitutional republic (with democratic input), not a pure democracy. As author Tara Ross, an expert on the electoral college, reminds us in her recent book to help children understand the Constitution: pure democracy equals two wolves and a lamb voting on what’s for dinner. The lamb ends up on the menu every time!

Through the years, I’ve had the privilege to interview Ross on the electoral college and attacks on same. She is a retired lawyer and has written a few books on the subject, including Enlightened Democracy and The Indispensable Electoral College. Recently, Tara Ross has written the above-referenced children’s book, We Created a Country: The Story of Our Constitution.

Why did the founders create the electoral college in the first place?

Because it was another safeguard they created in the Constitution to protect us from the abuse of power. The founding fathers recognized the Biblical concept of the sinfulness of man. This is why our governing document still works—it was predicated on the truth that man is sinful, and, therefore, power must be divided.

As James Madison, a key architect of the Constitution, said in Federalist #51: “If men were angels, no government would be necessary. If angels were to govern men, neither external nor internal controls on government would be necessary. In framing a government which is to be administered by men over men, the great difficulty lies in this: you must first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next place oblige it to control itself.”

In short, the electoral college protects us from the abuse of political power. It helps “we the people” (not just the elites) to have a say in who becomes the president. Could this be why the left hates it?

FLORIDA: Sarasota County Elections Office Recognized with Three National Awards

May 12, 2026/in Elections, Hot Topics, Must Read, News, Policy, Politics, Social Issues, The Truth, Voter REAL ID/by Editorial Board - DrRichSwier.com

SARASOTA, FL — Sarasota County Supervisor of Elections Ron Turner announced that the U.S. Election Assistance Commission (EAC) has recognized the office with two national Clearinghouse Award wins and one honorable mention, underscoring the office’s continued leadership in innovative and professional election administration.

The recognitions from the EAC are for:

Award winner – Election Administration Innovations for The Logic & Accuracy Show: Turning Compliance into Choreography
Award winner – Communications for 150 Feet of Clarity: Proactive Outreach for a Positive Voting Experience
Honorable mention – Communications for Clarity Meets Accessibility: A Unified Signage System for Voters

Turner commended the team’s dedication and high standards of service.

“I am immensely proud of the team we have assembled in the Sarasota County elections office,” Turner said. “We continually seek new ways to improve the voter experience and strengthen the integrity of our election processes. These honors from the U.S. Election Assistance Commission reinforce our ongoing commitment to innovation, efficiency and exceptional service to the voters of Sarasota County.”

The EAC is an independent, bipartisan federal agency focused on election administration. Submissions were judged on innovation, sustainability, outreach, cost-effectiveness, replicability and the generation of positive results. Now in its 10th year, the Clearinghouse Awards celebrate best practices and innovative approaches implemented during the 2025 election cycle.

See additional awards and recognitions received by the Sarasota County Supervisor of Elections.

Dems’ Seat-Stealing Scheme Backfires, Reviving GOP Midterm Hopes

May 11, 2026/in Communism, Courts & Law, Culture War, Election Fraud, Elections, Featured, Government Transparency, Hot Topics, Marxism, News, Policy, Social Issues, Socialism, The Truth, Voter REAL ID/by Family Research Council

Politics can turn on a dime, and no one is more painfully aware of that than Democrats. After a euphoric April that saw the party pull off a stunning congressional map heist in Virginia, the party of Minority Leaders Hakeem Jeffries (N.Y.) and Chuck Schumer (N.Y.) has come crashing back to earth — hard. In a matter of 10 days, not only has the state supreme court struck down that referendum Democrats spent $64 million on, but the U.S. Supreme Court tossed a favorite tool of the Left — racial gerrymandering — triggering a massive race to redraw the entire red South. Suddenly, the plans for a November victory parade seem surprisingly premature.

On Friday, in a decision that several legal experts expected, the Commonwealth’s justices ruled that “the legislative process employed” to advance the referendum was unconstitutional and “incurably taints the resulting referendum vote and nullifies its legal efficacy.” It was an outcome that former Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli predicted, noting that there were at least four violations of the state constitution in the process that led to the Democrats’ narrow win at the ballot box. And to many, that win, a squeaker at 51-49%, proved why the purple state should have never been redrawn in the first place.

For Republicans, who were furious at the power grab in Governor Abigail Spanberger’s (D) state, the ruling gives voice to millions of disenfranchised voters who stood to lose four seats in the U.S. House. “This is the correct decision, and it was always going to end up this way,” Rep. Ben Cline (R-Va.) agreed. “Democrats broke laws that they helped write in the first place, blew through deadlines, wrote a biased and misleading ballot question, and lied to the voters in all of their advertising to support the referendum. The voters of Virginia banned gerrymandering six years ago, and that ban remains in effect today,” he reiterated. “This is a great day for fair elections and the rule of law, and it’s a great day for the Commonwealth of Virginia.”

House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.), who already has an uphill climb for the midterms, cheered the result as “a victory for democracy.” “[It] ensures Virginians have fair representation in Congress,” he said.

On the Left, Jeffries and company decried the decision as “shocking,” while Virginia House Speaker Don Scott (D) issued a statement saying, “We respect the decision of the Supreme Court of Virginia. … We respect the court. But we will keep fighting for a democracy where voters — not politicians — have the final say. Because in Virginia, power still belongs to the people,” he argued.

And while Democrats complain about the “unfairness” of the decision, Rep. Morgan Griffith (R-Va.) said it didn’t take a legal genius to see that this was a possibility. “They didn’t pay attention to the fact that they had to follow the Virginia Constitution. And they rushed it through. And they made a number of mistakes [by not following the letter of the law].” But “they’re still complaining that, ‘Well, it went to the voters in the referendum, and those people’s votes didn’t count.’ Well,” Griffith said on Friday’s “Washington Watch,” “they should have anticipated that and gotten all of the i’s dotted, and the t’s crossed. When you do something in an unconstitutional manner under the Virginia Constitution, you’ve got to expect that the court will take action against it. Whether a million people voted in the referendum or 1,000,006 voted in the referendum is not the issue. The issue is, did you follow the rules?”

Frankly, he suspects, “In their heart of hearts, deep down, when they’re not playing politics, I think even the Democrats know that they were pushing the envelope and trying to get by with one quickly. They thought the referendum would basically cow the court into doing it. … And I give the court credit for having the fortitude to recognize that they’re going to irritate the legislature, which appoints them.” Yet, at the end of the day, “The court did its job. It was tough for them to do it. Some of them are likely not to be reappointed by the legislature because of it. But they did the right thing anyway. And I just have great respect for the Virginia Supreme Court for doing the right thing.”

Meanwhile, the setback on the Democratic map is a huge blow heading into November, Axios admits. While a lot of pundits have been crowing that the GOP is on the verge of a midterm bloodbath, the reality is that this is “a huge boost to Republicans’ chances of keeping the House,” the outlet notes. “Even some Democrats now concede that they basically need to run the table in November.”

It also drives home just how much work the Left has to do in agenda-setting. They can’t rely on anti-Trump sentiment carrying the day, as one anonymous House Democrat conceded. “[We] cannot take a midterm victory for granted,” the member told reporters. “Relying too much on the administration’s unpopularity and not enough of their own positive agenda could put an otherwise sure victory at risk.”

With the 10-1 edge in Virginia off the table, Democrats will struggle to make up a lot of ground in the redistricting arms race that has launched in earnest in the South after the U.S. Supreme Court’s rollback of racial gerrymandering. As Punchbowl News warns the Left, “As many as 10 seats could now swing toward Republicans in a worst-case scenario for Democrats,” while adding, “this all remains very fluid.”

Already, Alabama, Louisiana, South Carolina, and Mississippi have rocketed out of the gates to redraw their maps after the justices’ ruling in Louisiana v. Callais — some states even postponing their primary elections to make sure they get their new districts approved first.

The governors of one of those states, Louisiana’s Jeff Landry (R), agreed it was about time that the stranglehold of the Voting Rights Act was loosened. “I think that the Supreme Court has finally helped untangle Louisiana and many states, especially across the South, [from] a nasty wave of litigation that’s been going on since the 90s. … Louisiana has been engaged in 27 federal lawsuits since the 1990s, which has basically taken away the legislature’s power to draw congressional districts.” No longer, he continued, can Democrats “blame the Civil Rights Act for losing elections. That’s the bottom line.”

Finally, Landry told Family Research Council President Tony Perkins, “The Supreme Court has instilled fairness and cemented the rule of law in our election process and the way we draw districts in the United States for the U.S. House of Representatives.”

Fellow Louisianan Mike Johnson echoed that sentiment, pointing to a GOP pick-up of at least eight to 10 seats. “It depends on how many states get in on this,” he stressed to Perkins. “And this trend was long overdue. I mean, for years, we argued … that the common sense reading of the Constitution says you cannot use race as a determining factor [to draw districts]. You can’t discriminate against voters of any skin color. And that’s what the previous regime, the previous kind of rules, had done. So the Supreme Court has finally set that right. And you see a number of states jumping in to correct that.”

In Tennessee, mayhem broke out on the floor of the state House when the general assembly passed a map that turned all nine of the congressional districts red. Governor Bill Lee (R) called lawmakers back into a special session after the Supreme Court’s ruling in Callais to right what many see as a long-time wrong. The state’s House speaker, Cameron Sexton, defended the move on “Washington Watch,” calling out the “aggressive, vile protestors” and Democratic caucus for creating chaos in the Capitol. “We’ve gone through that before,” he shrugged. “We powered through it. We passed it out, and now it’s law.” If the other side sues, Sexton isn’t worried. “We’re prepared. … I feel comfortable that we’re going to win it in the long term, and then the maps will be upheld at some point.”

Ultimately, the entire landscape is changing, David Wasserman, senior editor and elections analyst for the Cook Political Report, underscored to “Washington Watch” guest host Jody Hice. “Keep in mind that by 2029, we could see states across the Deep South sending zero Democrats or black representatives to Congress from states that have some of the highest black populations in the country. … This is going to have the effect of eradicating Democrats from red states, and blue states eradicating Republicans from their delegations.” Places like Illinois could pass a map, he warned, with 17 Democrats and zero Republicans by drawing downstate of Chicago. “Same thing in California. Democrats could draw [a] 52-to-0 map. And so, this is further polarizing Congress.”

At the end of the day, he explained, “What it means is that the battle for control of the House is going to come down to a small group of states with neutral maps that were installed by courts or commissions. And that’s why the bulk of the toss-ups in our chart right now are in Arizona, Michigan, Pennsylvania, [and] Iowa — states where neither party dominates this process.”

And that’s just fine with most Americans, whose biggest concern is a fair and level playing field. “We [need] maps that accurately reflect the population of [our] states,” Johnson insisted to Perkins. “And this is the genius of the Founders, how they set up the three branches of the federal government for checks and balances. And you can’t allow political issues to be the main driving factor in making sure that people are fairly represented in their states,” he argued. “The court has to look at this objectively. They have to evaluate these ideas on the basis of the Constitution. I think they did the right thing here, and it was a long time coming.”

AUTHOR

Suzanne Bowdey

Suzanne Bowdey serves as editorial director and senior writer at The Washington Stand.

Immigrants caught illegally voting in New Jersey elections

May 7, 2026/in Election Fraud, Elections, Hot Topics, News, Socialism, The Truth, Video, Voter REAL ID, Waste, Fraud and Abuse/by Conservative Commandos Radio Show and AUN-TV

Four noncitizens have been caught voting in New Jersey, according to federal prosecutors.

Some of the illegal votes were cast in federal elections nearly six years ago but are only now coming to light, according to the U.S. Attorney’s Office for New Jersey. Officials said three suspects voted in the 2020 and 2024 presidential elections.

U.S. Attorney Robert Frazer said the four immigrants lied on their voter registration forms when they claimed they were citizens. Officials say all four suspects were green card holders, who are not citizens and are not allowed to vote in federal elections. Despite their status, they successfully registered to vote in New Jersey and were able to cast ballots.

“As alleged, the defendants broke federal law by voting in elections they were not eligible to participate in, and then made false statements under oath to conceal that conduct,” said Frazer.

Federal charges of false statements and citizenship fraud. According to federal prosecutors, each immigrant then applied to become a U.S. citizen and lied on their forms. The application process includes a form that requires each person to certify that they have never voted in a federal election.

“Under President Trump and Secretary Mullin, HSI is committed to ensuring integrity in our election systems and ensuring that American citizens — and only American citizens — are electing American leaders,” said ICE Director Todd M. Lyons.

Breakdown of New Jersey voter fraud suspects. David Neewilly, 73, of Atlantic County, is charged with voting by an alien in a federal election, which carries a maximum sentence of one year in prison, and false statements in relation to naturalization, which carries a max sentence of five years.

Jacenth Beadle Exum, 70, of Bergen County, is charged with false statements in relation to naturalization and false statements in relation to naturalization/procurement of citizenship or naturalization unlawfully. The latter charge carries up to 10 years in prison. Prosecutors said that Exum’s visa had expired in December 2000, nearly 26 years ago.

Idan Choresh, 43, of Monmouth County, is charged with voting by an alien in a federal election, false statements in relation to naturalization, and procurement of citizenship or naturalization unlawfully.

Abhinandan Vig, 33, of Monmouth County, is charged with the procurement of citizenship or naturalization unlawfully.

All four individuals had their applications for citizenship rejected after the investigations.

Indiana’s MAGA Voters Get Revenge

May 6, 2026/in Elections, Hot Topics, Must Read, Policy, Politics, Social Issues, Voter REAL ID/by Royal A. Brown III

Establishment RINO state Senators in Indiana get what they deserve — e.g. voted out by MAGA voters.

Playing for Keeps: Indiana’s MAGA Voters Get Revenge, Obliterate GOP Lawmakers Who Stood in Way of Redistricting

By Joe Saunders

When it comes to the top flashpoint in American politics at the moment, Republican voters understand the stakes, even if Republican politicians don’t.

That was the lesson out of Indiana’s primary elections on Tuesday that saw state lawmakers targeted by President Donald Trump go down in defeat to challengers.

And it’s a lesson to which the establishments of both parties should be paying attention.

According to the Indianapolis Star, at least five of the seven Republicans on the ballot who’d opposed a Trump-backed plan to redraw the Hoosier State’s congressional map had been turned out by their party’s voters.

“It’s rare for a state senator to lose in a primary,” the Indianapolis Star reported Tuesday. “Before today, it’s only happened to Indiana Republican senators six times since 2002: three of which occurred in the same districts where incumbents were ousted this year.”

That’s because this year is different.

At a time when Republican legislatures are pulling out all the stops to keep a GOP majority in the U.S. House in the November elections, 21 Indiana Republican state senators scuttled a plan in December to redistrict the state in a way designed to pick up two more House seats while shutting Democrats out completely.

With state Senate elections staggered, and the retirement of one of those Republicans from office, seven of those lawmakers faced GOP voters on Tuesday.

The results weren’t even close.

“Republican Blake Fiechter defeated incumbent state Sen. Travis Holdman (R) in the 19th state Senate district GOP primary, while Tracey Powell unseated GOP state Sen. James Buck in the 21st district,” The Hill reported Tuesday night. “Republican state Sen. Greg Walker lost to Michelle Davis in the 41st district, and incumbent state Sen. Dan Dernulc (R) lost to Republican Trevor De Vries. Republican Brian Schmutzler defeated incumbent state Sen. Linda Rogers (R) in the 11th district.”

“Incumbent Sen. Greg Goode, who represents the 38th district, is the only incumbent, so far, that fended off a challenger supported by the president.”

In a race pitting incumbent Republican Spencer Deery against challenger Paula Copenhaver, the candidates were separated by only three votes as of 8 a.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, according to NBC News.

The takeaway is obvious.

Congressional redistricting has gone from a dusty, once-a-decade discussion into the hottest topic in domestic politics these days because voters understand what the November midterms are going to mean to the future of the Trump presidency — and the future of the country.

If Democrats take the House — and out-of-power parties rally historically in midterm election years — Trump’s closing years in the White House are likely to look similar to his first term when Democrats dogged him with fabulist conspiracies like “Russia collusion” and an impeachment effort so farcical even most Democrats probably don’t remember what it was about.

(Hint: Biden family corruption in Ukraine had a lot to do with it.)

If Republicans hold, there’s a good chance Trump will have a chance in his final two years to continue the domestic and foreign policies that are aimed at restoring the national economy and American leadership in the world.