Well, Here Is This:

Linked in a Wonkette newsletter.

Why Democrats are suddenly winning back the left — and the “double-haters”

Plus, the share of Americans calling themselves Republicans just hit a decade low. Your weekly political data roundup for April 5, 2026.

Leading off: Very liberal Americans, who have rated the Democratic Party poorly relative to other partisans since 2024, have swung sharply back toward congressional Democrats over the last few months. A new poll also finds voters who dislike both parties now prefer Democrats by 31 points. These gains should reassure a party that has faced internal strife since Trump’s second term began, but look less due to renewed faith in the Democrats and more like anti-Trump consolidation. That might not matter for the midterms — a vote won is a vote won — but it will matter for 2028 and beyond.

On deck this week: Tuesday’s Deep Dive will cover some new research on the level of ideological thinking in the electorate and the value (or not) of ideological moderation by the Democrats, and Friday’s Chart of the Week will respond to whatever’s in the news. I’m also finalizing questions for our April Strength In Numbers/Verasight poll this week — so subscribers, send in your question recommendations if you haven’t already! (Email or comments are fine.)

On with the data.

1. Anti-Trump sentiment, not pro-Democratic enthusiasm, is uniting Democrats again

A new YouGov/The Economist poll, fielded from March 27 – 30, finds that Democratic voters have grown significantly warmer toward their members of Congress over the last few months. Earlier in 2026, Democrats said their party’s MOCs were favorable at a rate just 30 points higher than the rate they said their party was unfavorable. That gap has now grown to +55 — rivaling the favorability of Republican MOCs among Republican voters.

Aggregate Democratic views have increased because very liberal Americans have become sharply more favorable toward congressional Democrats since January. This group evaluated the party’s members of Congress favorably by a net +28 points margin — up from a -13 deficit in January. That’s a 41-point shift in two months:

Among Americans who are liberal but not very liberal, moderate, or conservative (basically everyone else), views of congressional Democrats barely budged.

Overall, U.S. adults give the Democrats a favorability rating of -21, 5 points higher than the rating they currently give Republicans.

That is a meaningful change. Last summer, Strength In Numbers documented that Democratic party favorability was unusually weak even as the party remained competitive on the generic ballot. We dug into the survey microdata and found out that this was because many left-leaning Americans were frustrated with their own side after the 2024 loss. Charles Franklin, who conducts the Marquette University Law School Poll, has been tracking the same dynamic in both national and Wisconsin polling. Among Democratic identifiers in Wisconsin, his data shows a net +56 favorability rating for their party, compared to +74 among Republican identifiers for the GOP.

Franklin finds that while Democrats still disagree about what they’re for, they are virtually unanimous in what they’re against: Donald Trump.

The simplest explanation for Democrats’ gains is that politically active party members on the left — who have had a lot of complaints about how the party is handling Trump 2.0 — are now responding to the same thing many other Americans are right now. That is, the president has moved public policy on many issue domains far to the right and up on the authoritarian axis (certainly far past the policy temperature “set point,” to use the language of the thermostatic model), and progressives are setting their differences with the Democrats aside for the moment as they focus on defeating an increasingly unpopular Republican president. This looks more like anti-Trump unity than pro-Democratic enthusiasm.

But it’s not just the base

The Democrats’ consolidation of left-wing liberalism is one piece of a broader backlash to Trumpism that shows up in the polling data right now. Another notable finding this week is from a new CNN/SSRS survey that found that about one-quarter of the public holds an unfavorable view of both parties. These are the so-called “double haters.” This group prefers Democrats on the 2025 generic ballot by 31 points.

This is a big deal for two reasons. First, that’s a massive shift; Double haters broke for Trump in 2016 and again in 2024. Now they’re swinging hard the other way.

Like Franklin’s polling, the CNN report also finds that Democrats’ gains are driven largely by opposition to the GOP, not enthusiasm for Democrats themselves. When asked what they dislike about Democrats, 22% of double haters called the party “do-nothing” and 11% said they aren’t standing up enough to Trump and the GOP, while 10% said they’re too liberal.

Will 2026 be a Democratic fake out?

So we’ve got two layers of anti-Trump consolidation happening at once. YouGov’s data shows the Democratic left is coming home, and the CNN poll shows voters who dislike both parties — a swing group that has been decisive in recent elections — are breaking heavily toward Democrats for the first time in years. Neither group is necessarily enthusiastic about Democrats. But both are currently heavily voting against Republicans. According to the CNN poll, 79% of voters who plan to support Democrats say their vote is a message of opposition to Trump. (Only 46% of Republican voters say they’ll vote to show support for the president.)

This could make for a big electoral win for Democrats in November, despite the division in the party and its overall nominally unpopular rating. According to CNN, Democratic-aligned voters are 17 points more likely than Republicans to call themselves “extremely motivated” to vote in 2026 — even though they’re 14 points less likely to view their own party favorably. Meanwhile, the Democrats have opened up a large lead in the U.S. House generic congressional ballot for 2026. They are up +6 in both the CNN and YouGov surveys, and closer to +5 on average.

This is the pattern I’d expect in a midterm environment that favors the out-party. But with many Americans (including the vaunted “double-haters”) still viewing the Democrats as weak and ineffectual, a big electoral victory will not completely solve their deeper problems of identity and division.

The trend in this data is good for the Democrats, in other words — but don’t misread a positive trend for a positive level.

2. What Strength In Numbers published last week

Readers of Strength In Numbers got three articles last week — a lighter load, since I was out sick Monday and Tuesday.

This week’s Deep Dive asked a question I’ve been getting a lot lately: if Trump is 20+ points underwater, why aren’t Democrats leading the generic ballot by 20?

Trump is 20+ points underwater. So why aren’t Democrats up 20 for the midterms?

G. Elliott Morris Apr 1

Read full story

On Thursday, David and I recorded our weekly podcast about Trump’s record-low polling numbers on Iran and the economy:

(snip-a bit More, go see it)

Science And Wonder And Beauty

I remember seeing a headline or a hyperlink somewhere, maybe yesterday or the day before, but I didn’t get to the story. Lucky for me, it’s linked again in an email today, so here it is!

Whale filmed giving birth, with a little help from her friends

Paris (France) (AFP) – Scientists have managed to film a spectacular event rarely witnessed by humans: a sperm whale giving birth while other females worked together to support the mother and her newborn.

A team from Project CETI, an international effort seeking to understand how whales communicate, were in a boat near a pod of 11 whales off the coast of the Caribbean island of Dominica on July 8, 2023.

A 19-year-old female named Rounder was surrounded by family members and others as she was about to give birth to her second calf.

Over nearly five and a half hours, the scientists documented the group’s behaviour, watching them from the boat, filming them with drones and recording the sounds underneath the waves.

The data they collected, which was published in the journals Scientific Reports and Science on Thursday, represent an exceptional rarity in the history of science.

Out of 93 species of cetaceans — a group that includes whales, dolphins and porpoises — only nine have ever been observed giving birth in the wild.

Rarer still was that whales not related to the mother were helping out.

“This is the first evidence of birth assistance in non-primates,” Project CETI team member Shane Gero told the New Scientist.

“It is fascinating to see the intergenerational support from the grandmother to her labouring daughter, and the support from the other, unrelated females.”

Lifting up the newborn

The birth lasted 34 minutes, from their tails emerging from the water to the calf being born.

During labour, other adult females dove under Rounder’s dorsal fin, often on their backs with the heads facing her genital slit.

Immediately after the birth, the pod’s behaviour “rapidly changed” as every member became active, according to the study in Scientific Reports.

All the adults were “squeezing the newborn’s body between theirs, touching it with their heads”, the researchers wrote.

The whales pointed their noses towards the newborn, “pushing it around, under the water, and onto and across their bodies above the surface”.

The remarkable behaviour dates back more than 36 million years and is believed to be due to the unique history of cetaceans.

After their distant ancestors left the water and adapted to life on land, cetaceans are the only mammals that returned to the ocean.

This dive back into the water required some evolutionary tricks to prevent newborns from drowning.

For example, whale calves are born tail-first, rather than head-first like other mammals.

However, while newborn sperm whales become talented swimmers within a few hours, they still sink right after birth.

So other whales have to lift the calf up “to prevent the newborn from sinking while also facilitating its first breaths”, the researchers suggested.

Primates — including humans — are the only other mammals known to help assist each other out during birth.

Excited vocal sounds

The scientists also recorded the whales making many sounds, including significant changes in “vocal style” during key events, the study said.

This included when a group of pilot whales approached the pod after the birth.

The changes in vocalisation suggest that the group was coordinating to support the birth — or protect the newborn, the researchers said.

Sperm whales have one of the longest pregnancies in the animal kingdom, with a gestation period that lasts up to 16 months.

When calves are born they are already four metres (13 feet) long. They will rely on their mother’s milk for at least two years.

As they grow, the young become the centre of their pod’s social unit, with others helping out with babysitting while the mother searches for food.

After the birth was filmed in 2023, the pod was not spotted again for over a year. Then the newborn was spotted with Accra and Aurora — the other young members of the pod — on July 25 last year.

Surviving its first year is a good sign that the sperm whale will reach adulthood, the Project CETI team said.

Reblog From MPS:

Scottie and I each post from Pro Publica’s excellent news reportage; especially news that gets the barest mention everywhere else. Their excellent reporters can use a hand now. Please read and sign:

Never Cross A Picket Line…

https://actionnetwork.org/petitions/tell-propublica-agree-to-real-job-protections-now?source=direct_link&

Open Windows & Clay Jones In

regard to POTUS’s mental acuity.

President Nucken Futz

Trump is losing what’s left of his mind

Clay Jones

On Easter Sunday, Donald Trump posted to Truth Social, “Tuesday will be Power Plant Day, and Bridge Day, all wrapped up in one, in Iran. There will be nothing like it! ! ! Open the Fuckin’ Strait, you crazy bastards, or you’ll be living in Hell – JUST WATCH! Praise be to Allah. President DONALD J. TRUMP”

Trump supporters, including the evangelicals, don’t care how vulgar he is, how insane he is, or that he is threatening to commit war crimes. They don’t care that he unleashed his tirade on Easter Sunday. They don’t care that he has gone back and forth with his demands regarding the Strait of Hormuz, from wanting to get it open, to demanding help from NATO, to saying it will open up naturally, back to demanding that Iran open it, or he will bomb them straight to hell. (snip-MORE)

Trump unhinged

Another truth social posting by the tangerine monster

Ann Telnaes

Stupid Is As Stupid Does

How Trump’s Vulgar, Criminal Easter Threat Enriches Iran

Juan Cole 04/06/2026

Ann Arbor (Informed Comment) – On Easter Sunday, God’s chosen in the White House issued a vulgar and unbalanced posting on his “Truth Social” that epitomizes the insanity of his Iran War. Attending to it closely will help us understand how Trump has strengthened the government of the Islamic Republic and put it in control of global energy. Trump fondly imagines that he can dislodge Iran from this new ascendancy, but he is wrong, since it depends on sabotage, a sabotage that cannot be policed.

Piers Morgan

@piersmorgan·

This is embarrassing, Delete it, President ⁦@realDonaldTrump⁩ – unless you want everyone to think you’ve lost your marbles.

The foul language and clear mental imbalance visible in this announcement sparked a further round of calls for Trump’s removal under Article 25 of the Constitution, which is nothing more than an internet meme since Trump has surrounded himself on his cabinet with people even more certifiable than he is, and who wouldn’t dare move against him.

Trump, having imbibed whatever substance it is that makes him manic, announced that “Tuesday will be Power Plant Day, and Bridge Day, all wrapped up in one, in Iran. There will be nothing like it!!!”

He is repeating a threat he made previously, to bomb Iran’s civilian electricity-generating plants as well as its civilian bridges.

Iran has 98 major power plants fueled by fossil gas, which generate 85% of the country’s electricity. The largest, the Damavand power plant south of the capital, Tehran, has a generating capacity of over 2.8 gigawatts.

One of Iran’s power plants is nuclear, at Bushehr. If Trump or Israel bombs it, the consequent radiation pollution will deeply harm the Arab Gulf states, not only through airborne particles but also by contaminating sea water, which is drawn on by the region’s desalinization plants. This exposure to radiation would certainly increase cancer risk in the region. There are mountains between Bushehr and the Iranian interior, so the radioactive particles would be blown west toward other countries such as the United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia and Qatar.

Striking civilian power plants, and above all nuclear ones, endangers the noncombatant population of children, women and unarmed men and violates International Humanitarian Law.

In fact, the International Criminal Court in the Hague issued “warrants of arrest for two individuals, Mr Sergei Kuzhugetovich Shoigu and Mr Valery Vasilyevich Gerasimov, in the context of the situation in Ukraine for alleged international crimes . . .” on June 24, 2024. They were indicted for “for the war crime of directing attacks at civilian objects (article 8(2)(b)(ii) of the Rome Statute) and the war crime of causing excessive incidental harm to civilians or damage to civilian objects (article 8(2)(b)(iv) of the Rome Statute), and the crime against humanity of inhumane acts under article 7(1)(k) of the Rome Statute.”

Among the “civilian objects” that these Russian officials ordered attacked in Ukraine were power plants and structures such as the Kryukovsky Bridge.

So Trump is talking like a war criminal, which tells you why he has placed sanctions on International Criminal Court judges.

Trump already struck the unfinished B1 bridge linking Tehran to Karaj. Since it was not finished, it could not possibly have had a military purpose, contrary to the lies of the lying liars in the Trump administration who gave that as the excuse for hitting it.

Trump continued, “Open the Fuckin’ Strait, you crazy bastards, or you’ll be living in Hell– JUST WATCH!

It is not clear how a body of water such as a strait could copulate. However, it can engender revenue, and does so for Iran. A lot of revenue.

Iran has not actually closed the Strait of Hormuz entirely. It is exporting its own petroleum through that narrow aperture, mainly to China. Trump has been forced by the global oil shortage to lift sanctions on the Iranian tankers, and so Iran is also selling again to India. Before Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu rushed Trump into war on Iran on February 28, Iran was exporting about 1.4 million barrels a day to China. The price of petroleum was about $67 a barrel then, but Iran had to offer a steep discount to offset American sanctions, and so was probably only getting $57 or less a barrel. So Iran was getting something like $29 billion a year for its petroleum from China and a few other customers (90% goes to China).

China is now likely having to pay $110 a barrel for Iranian petroleum.

Iran’s oil income just went up to $55 billion a year if these prices and this volume of trade persists, which is plausible. So the “crazy bastards” in charge of Iran have nearly doubled their income off the Netanyahu-Trump war because of the fertility, under their control, of the “fuckin’ Strait.” The Iranian oil industry is state-owned, so all the money goes to the clerics and the Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corps, as well as to the conventional army and the elected institutions, the parliament and president. This extra income helps the government tamp down resistance, strengthening it against civil society. In any case, many Iranians under foreign attack are rallying around the flag. Of course there are also tax losses from the economic disruption of the war, but the vastly increased oil income helps make up for them as far as the government is concerned. If the price of oil goes to $200 a barrel, as it may well, Iran’s government could get $100 billion a year for its petroleum.

Not only that, but Iran has instituted a toll system, wherein countries that have good relations with Iran and pay a fee can transit the Strait without fear of an Iranian drone attack. In contrast, countries that Iran believes contribute to the American war effort against Tehran such as the Emirates and Kuwait, are blockaded by the threat of such strikes. These tolls could be an ongoing and lucrative source of income for the government. Before the war, 138 ships transited the Strait daily. If that traffic resumes but each has to pay Iran a $2 million toll, that would bring in $96 billion a year, i.e. four times what Iran was getting for its petroleum before the war.

So here’s the thing. With the advent of Iran’s Shahed drones, which can be manufactured inexpensively and of which it has tens and thousands, there is no way for anyone, including Trump and the US military, to stop Iran from sabotaging ships that won’t pay the $2 million. At least, I don’t see how it could be done. You’d need tens of thousands of interceptors, and we hardly have any left. Moreover, interceptors cost $1.5 million apiece, so it makes much more sense to allow each ship to pay Iran the $2 million.

Container ship in Strait of Hormuz. (U.S. Navy photo by Mass Communication Specialist 2nd Class Indra Beaufort).Public Domain. Via Picryl .

Trump has shown Iran how it can go into the protection business in the Gulf for the long term. Nice oil shipping industry you have here, it would be a shame if anything happened to it. And off that, Iran actually increases its GDP substantially.

If Trump takes out Iran’s electricity and bridges, he can interfere with its economy and its society in a big way. But he can’t stop the drones or the protection racket that way. Moreover, Iran has made it clear that its response will be to take out the power plants in the Gulf Arab states as well as in Israel. Since the US and Israel are running low on interceptors, and since even small Shahed drones have great range and can do a lot of damage, Iran’s threat is credible.

If Trump takes out Iran’s petroleum-production capability, Iran will crash oil production in the Gulf, taking 20 million barrels a day off the market for years to come. That would certainly be another Great Depression and likely would spell the end of the oil industry, since everyone in the world would migrate to electric vehicles quickly.

So although Trump meant the phrase ironically and blasphemously, the Iranian authorities may well end up saying “Praise be to Allah” over Trump’s monumental stupidity.

https://www.juancole.com/2026/04/trumps-vulgar-criminal.html

From The “MUTTS” Blog:

Helping Pets and People When the World Feels Uncertain

There are many ways in which the world feels uncertain, and with every news update, we ask ourselves questions: What role do we play? How can we help? We know many readers turn to Mooch and Earl for a daily dose of comfort and joy. Recently, someone told us MUTTS is their “place to go for a warm hug each day.” Will raising a particular issue interrupt that sense of refuge that readers value here?

Not long ago, we received a letter from a reader named Tyla. With her permission, we’re sharing part of it below.

“With recent ICE raids impacting Minneapolis and communities across the country, some families are being separated very suddenly, and in many cases this has meant pets are left without caregivers. Animal shelters and rescues have shared that they’re seeing more animals being taken in or surrendered unexpectedly, and in some situations, people have stepped in to foster or adopt pets whose families were detained.

“The health and well-being of both people and animals isn’t always part of the conversation when issues like this come up, even though both are affected. Animals, especially, rely entirely on their families for care and stability, and sudden disruptions can be very hard on them.

“I was wondering if this is something the [MUTTS] team might feel comfortable acknowledging this, specifically from the perspective of how animals are affected.

“I understand this is a sensitive and complicated topic … I also know that many readers, including myself, turn to MUTTS as an escape from the real world, and I truly respect that. I just wanted to offer this suggestion thoughtfully, since when people are affected in situations like these, animals are often affected too, and their needs can easily be overlooked.”

Tyla’s letter moved us. We’d been thinking about this, too. We started drafting a blog post based on one specific concern: What happens to pets when their families are detained or deported? We were discussing this internally, and considering ways to help, when the scope widened. The news headlines, unfortunately, have not slowed down.

The world feels increasingly uncertain, but one thing we know for sure is that pets depend on the humans who love them. They don’t understand geopolitics or political parties. And the truth is, preparing for any unexpected event — from a natural disaster to a family emergency or something else — is an act of love and responsibility.

At MUTTS, we believe in compassion for all creatures. With that spirit, here are practical ways we can all help our human and animal neighbors.

If You’re a Pet Parent: Plan Ahead

Choose a backup caregiver. Identify a trusted friend, neighbor, or family member who could step in temporarily if you can’t be home. Make sure they’re willing and understand what would be involved. Share basic care information in advance so nothing is left to guesswork. If you’re comfortable with it, you may even want to give them a spare key to your home (or tell them where one is hidden).
Keep identification current. Ensure your pet’s tags and microchip records are up to date. Consider listing a secondary contact (such as your backup caregiver) on file with your vet.
Prepare a small “just in case” kit. Put together a bag with essentials: medications, vaccination records, feeding instructions, favorite comforts like a blanket or toy, and a short written profile of your pet’s personality and needs. Think of it as something you’d want ready in any unexpected situation.

If you currently need assistance caring for your pet, know that there are many community resources around the country that may be able to help. You can start your search with PetHelpFinder.org, which allows you to search for pet pantries, affordable veterinary services, and other resources in your area. You might also contact your local animal shelter for guidance. Many shelters offer community assistance — and even if yours does not, it’s very possible they can help point you in the right direction.

If You Want to Help In Your Community

Volunteer at a local shelter. Many animal shelters are already stretched thin, and shelters across the country are receiving pets whose guardians were detained or unexpectedly displaced. Time, donations, and supplies all help.
Consider fostering. This is an incredibly impactful way to help pets in your community, especially right now. Fostering gives an animal stability during a time of upheaval. In some cases, it provides time and space for an eventual reunion with their family. It also helps shelters by freeing up room so they can care for more animals.
Offer to be a backup pet caregiver for friends, family, or neighbors. You don’t need a specific reason to make this offer. You can simply say you’ve been thinking about family preparedness and realized how comforting it would be to know someone nearby could step in for your own pet if needed. Sometimes people hesitate to ask for help, and by offering proactively (and gently), you can remove that barrier and replace it with reassurance.
Create or strengthen local support networks. If your area doesn’t have a pet food pantry, consider starting one. Offer to deliver pet food or walk dogs for families facing temporary hardship. Some communities have organized quiet grocery or supply deliveries for neighbors who are unable to leave home. No pet should go hungry because their family is going through a difficult time.

Build Real Connections In Your Community

This may sound simple, but it really matters. Support systems don’t appear overnight. They grow from familiarity and trust. If you don’t already have a close-knit community, consider planting the first seed. For example:

Start a “take one, leave one” table or box. This could include books, baked goods, even extra apples or herbs from plants in your own yard.
Bring back front-yard or porch time. Read or drink your coffee outside. Smile and wave at anyone who passes. This invites casual conversation without any pressure.
Check on neighbors during extreme weather. A quick knock before a storm or heat wave can go a long way.

Remember that when communities feel connected, pets are safer too.

Share Your Ideas to Help Pets and People

If you have ideas we haven’t mentioned, we would love to hear them. In the spirit of MUTTS, we ask that comments remain friendly and constructive, aimed at helping animals and strengthening compassion. That’s something we can all stand behind.

— Ali Datko

This Week, From Joyce Vance

The Week Ahead

Joyce Vance

The president of the United States greeted the country with this Truth Social post about his intentions in Iran on Easter Sunday: “Tuesday will be Power Plant Day, and Bridge Day, all wrapped up in one, in Iran. There will be nothing like it!!! Open the Fuckin’ Strait, you crazy bastards, or you’ll be living in Hell – JUST WATCH! Praise be to Allah. President DONALD J. TRUMP

No one seems to have got so far into the post as to notice that he said “Praise be to Allah,” which he would most certainly say was a jest, if asked. But imagine Joe Biden, or worse still, Barack Obama, saying that “in jest” and how Republicans would have responded. Trump is completely off the rails and Republicans are turning a blind eye, pretending it’s not happening.

Earlier this week, Trump’s “spiritual advisor” Paula White-Cain compared him to Jesus. Trump, too, was “betrayed and arrested and falsely accused,” she said. No one in the Republican Party seems to have believed they need to strenuously resist that characterization.

And so, we enter the new week with an unstable president at the helm in wartime. Meanwhile, at home, there are plenty of issues mounting. But Trump seems to have largely gotten away with knocking his connection to Jeffrey Epstein and allegations about his personal conduct off the front burner.

Laura Loomer is influencing policy changes at DOJ

After Trump fired Attorney General Pam Bondi, there appears to be another significant personnel change in the works at DOJ, this one inspired at least in part by Laura Loomer’s dislike of the number three official at DOJ, Associate Attorney General Stanley Woodward. Trump appears to be on the verge of replacing him with the current Assistant Attorney General for the Civil Rights Division, Harmeet Dhillon, who has upended its work and overseen a mass exodus of career personnel.

Woodward was the defense lawyer for one of Trump’s co-defendants in the Mar-a-Lago case, Walt Nauta. His client hung in there with Trump, instead of flipping and offering testimony against him in exchange for a deal. That worked out well for Nauta, but only because Trump won the election. Most lawyers acting in the client’s best interests in that type of situation would have worked toward a plea. Lost in the plot from that case was the conflict of interest Woodward had that could easily have kept him from representing Nauta and might have resulted in another lawyer voluntarily stepping aside. Woodward had previously represented one of the witnesses who decided to cooperate with the prosecution after receiving advice from a lawyer who wasn’t connected to other defendants. Judge Cannon permitted Woodward to represent Nauta despite that conflict, after Nauta waived it. Woodward has also represented White House adviser Peter Navarro, who was prosecuted for obstructing Congress when he ignored a subpoena from the January 6 committee, FBI Director Kash Patel when he testified before a grand jury about Trump’s retention of classified documents, and one of the defendants in the Oath Keepers prosecution.

All that to say, Woodward was a known quantity for Trump when he appointed him. But that doesn’t seem to have been enough to save his job, just over a year into it.

There’s been some suggestion on social media that Laura Loomer is, at least in part, responsible for the change. Loomer is a conservative activist and online influencer who has claimed the ability to impact Trump’s hiring and firing decisions in the past. Last August, Trump was asked about that and said, “She makes recommendations on things and people. And sometimes I listen to those recommendations, like I do with everybody. I listen to everybody. And then I make a decision.” Loomer has never been a fan of Woodward’s.

Her concerns center on Woodward’s wife, apparently, not Woodward. She has had them since before he was confirmed.

Woodward’s wife apparently has the audacity to have her own views on issues, and they are…not racist. Loomer reiterated her take just before Trump made his move at DOJ, also attacking Todd Blanche, the former Trump criminal defense lawyer who is now in charge of the Justice Department in an acting capacity. Blanche and Woodward may have been surprised to learn that, according to Loomer, they’re now Democrats.

That’s a lot of maneuvering, that benefits Dhillon, who has overseen the dismantling of much of the Civil Rights Division’s work, including voter and election protection, and gone on the attack for the administration. That might have made her an attractive candidate for the position to Trump without more. If confirmed by the Senate as “the Associate,” as the number three position at DOJ is called, Dhillon would supervise her old division, Civil Rights, as well as the Civil Division, the Antitrust Division, the Environment and Natural Resources Division, and an administrative division that oversees grant funding. It’s a substantial role and could be a stepping stone to a still higher office.

This is more than a personnel squabble within DOJ and warrants our close attention. Since taking over the Civil Rights Division, Dhillon has made a number of decisions with significant consequences that run contrary to the history of the Division, including:

Setting priorities for the Division that included putting an end to DEI, supporting gun rights, protecting religious liberty by filing lawsuits challenging what DOJ views as anti‑Christian discrimination, and opposing transgender participation in women’s sports.
Pressuring colleges and universities over DEI programs and allegations of antisemitism. In one notable instance, the president of the University of Virginia was forced out for failing to move quickly enough to end DEI.
Ending, as her predecessor Jeff Sessions did, consent decrees with Police Departments. In her case, it was Minneapolis (George Floyd) and Louisville (Breonna Taylor), in cases involving systematic misconduct. She ended investigations in other jurisdictions, changing the environment to one that is far more tolerant of police misconduct.
Abandoning employment discrimination cases, as well as the work of the disability section to protect access, and work combating housing discrimination.
Countermanding early work in the U.S. Attorney’s office in Minneapolis to investigate ICE agent Jonathan Ross, who fired the shots that killed Renee Good. Much of the career leadership in that office resigned in the wake of that decision.

We don’t yet know who Trump will nominate to be the next Attorney General. Dhillon was confirmed 52-45 for the Civil Rights job, garnering no votes from Democrats but mustering support from every Republican. She’s been effective at pushing her priorities, which are Trump’s priorities, and at pushing career people out the door. A Justice Department under her leadership might make people long for Bondi’s simpering incompetence.

To come full circle, this was Dhillon’s response to Trump’s “Fuckin’ Strait” post this morning:

The Trump Administration appeals Anthropic’s victory.

Thursday morning, the government filed its notice of appeal after Anthropic won a victory against it in the lower court. That means it will try to overturn Judge Lin’s injunction, which prevents Trump/Hegseth’s designation of Anthropic as a supply-chain risk. We’ll likely see an effort to get an order from the Ninth Circuit to set that injunction aside while the litigation is underway this week

The federal civil rights investigation and prosecution we won’t see.

The Buffalo Medical Examiner ruled that the death of a legally blind elderly Burmese refugee dropped off by Border Patrol at a closed shop late at night in winter was a homicide. The facts of the case are terrible. And there’s a federal criminal law designed to address this kind of civil rights violation by federal agents acting “under color of law.”

NBC reported that Nurul Amin Shah Alam died of a burst ulcer caused by severe stress brought on by dehydration and hypothermia, which was brought on by the agents’ abandonment of him. The statute permits prosecution of agents who deprive a person of their rights because they are an alien. If DOJ were operating properly, there would be an open investigation. The potential charge is a serious one, based on the denial of rights, not a homicide. The punishment under the law, “if death results” from agents’ actions, can be life imprisonment or even the death penalty. Any other DOJ would be focused on getting this case and doing justice.

The DHS shutdown is still on.

The House failed to take action to pass the Senate’s bipartisan funding deal to reopen the Department of Homeland Security last week. That means the shutdown will continue at least until Monday, when Congress is back in Session. The Senate compromise withhold money the administration wanted to push Trump’s immigration agenda, but would fund DHS until the end of the fiscal year.

TSA workers in the Portland, Maine, airport cheerfully told me last week that they had received some back pay, but had no assurances of receiving paychecks going forward. Hard-working TSA employees are being forced to bear the brunt of Trump’s inability to run the government. It’s surprising Democrats aren’t driving this message every day. And, with hurricane and fire seasons approaching, FEMA funding is sure to be an issue soon, as well.

And, DOJ still hasn’t released all of the Epstein Files.

I have no intention of forgetting that there is more to that story.

Thank you for being here with me at Civil Discourse. It’s going to take all of us, staying informed and working together, to keep the Republic. If you’ve been enjoying the free posts, upgrading to a paid subscription is a great way to help keep the newsletter coming and to contribute to the time and resources it takes to stay on top of law, politics, and this administration.

We’re in this together,

Joyce

For Those Of US Who Wondered…

Scottie mentions restroom etiquette sometimes. Turns out, there’s an actual etiquette, as he says, and here’s a story about it!

1976 research study confirms science behind ‘urinal etiquette’

The “buffer urinal” is more important than we realize.

By Evan Porter

There’s a theory that most men, and people in general, intuitively understand “urinal etiquette.” It’s the art and science of where to stand in relation to other men when using a public restroom. Stand too far away, and you risk coming across as standoffish or rude. Stand too close, and you’ll make the other person uncomfortable.

Most people prefer to have a “buffer” between themselves and strangers, and it’s not limited to urinals or public restroom stalls. When given the option, most of us will sit at least one seat away from the nearest stranger in a movie theater or auditorium. We’ll leave a bench or treadmill between ourselves and a fellow gym-goer.

The buffer may seem like common decency and consideration for the people around us, but there could be more to it than that, according to a decades-old research study.

Scientists put theory to the test

In 1976, a team of researchers actually got the idea to test whether the proximity of a stranger had an effect on the way men urinated. Yes, really.

More specifically, they wanted to test what happens when someone invades your personal space. Do you just feel awkward or uncomfortable, or are there more measurable things happening in the body.

Objectively, the worst kind of urinal. Photo Credit: Photo credit: Wikimedia Commons

For the experiment, researchers began with a pilot study in a men’s public restroom. An observer stood by the sink, appearing to busy himself with washing and grooming, all while secretly keeping tabs on the men who entered. The published study takes it from there:

“When a potential subject entered the room and walked to a urinal, the observer recorded the selected urinal and the placement of the next nearest user. He also noted (with a chronographic wristwatch) and recorded the micturation delay (the time between when a subject unzipped his fly and when urination began) and the micturation persistence (the time between the onset and completion of urination). The onset an cessation of micturation were signaled by the sound of the stream of urine striking the water in the urinal.”

Ethical concerns about observing unsuspecting men in a restroom aside, the study found that none of the 48 subjects chose to stand directly next to another “user” at the urinal banks. The data also showed that men urinated longer the farther they were from the nearest person.

The study was repeated, but this time, confederates were involved. Volunteers were stationed at specific distances from unsuspecting bathroom users, while another observer hid in a nearby stall and used a “periscope” to get a clear sightline of the urine stream.

The surprising findings

Once again, the data was extremely conclusive: men who stood directly next to a confederate while urinating took longer to begin and also urinated for longer overall.

“These findings provide objective evidence that personal space invasions produce physiological changes associated with arousal,” the authors noted in their abstract.

It was an important, if controversial, study in advancing the field of proxemics—the study of physical space in human nonverbal communication. Research like this unusual bathroom study has helped us understand “intimate distance,” a space very close to our bodies that we reserve for romantic partners, children, and close friends.

Research in the field has also mapped the “personal bubble,” or “personal distance,” typically reserved for family members and friends. However, when strangers invade this space—in a crowded elevator, a packed subway car, or by standing next to us at the urinal—that’s when things get really interesting.

Our bodies respond, and MIT Press notes that people often deal with an invasion of personal space by “psychologically removing themselves from the situation” by listening to music or staring blankly at a wall.

Now we know a little more about the physiological response behind this aversion, and it makes urinal etiquette make much more sense. It’s not just “machismo” or homophobia—it’s a way of avoiding a serious stress and anxiety trigger. Or, at the very least, a way to have a much more satisfying pee.

Political Tests?

How gender-affirming care is becoming a political test for top medical groups

Orion Rummler

This story was originally reported by Orion Rummler of The 19th. Meet Orion and read more of their reporting on gender, politics and policy.

The largest medical association in the United States supports gender-affirming care — a stance it has reiterated in different ways over the last 10 years. But as Republicans press leading medical organizations on health care for transgender youth, the American Medical Association (AMA) is the latest group caught between political rhetoric and the complex realities of specialized care that few people receive.

As patients, families and doctors navigate this care in an increasingly confusing and hostile landscape, what medical groups say matters. But lately, what they’ve had to say — and how politicians interpret it — has only caused more uncertainty.

The AMA’s stance was already in question after a January meeting between leaders of major medical groups and Dr. Mehmet Oz, the head of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. After that meeting, which was first reported by The New York Times, one group in attendance — the American Society of Plastic Surgeons (ASPS) — muddied the waters about whether it had taken a more restrictive stance on gender-affirming care.

Questions soon followed for the AMA, the nation’s most prominent organization representing doctors.

Twenty Republican state attorneys general are pushing for the AMA to broadly oppose gender-affirming care for minors, in response to news coverage about their recommendations around youth surgeries. The attorneys suggest that the AMA may be violating state consumer protection laws by confusing, or even misleading, medical providers and patients about their stance. They mention wanting to “avoid a formal investigation” into the issue.

The attorneys, led by Steve Marshall in Alabama, wrote a letter in February asking whether the group recommends hormone therapy or puberty blockers to treat gender dysphoria in minors.

“If you agree that there is insufficient evidence to support using surgical interventions to treat gender dysphoria in minors — as your recent statement indicates — we do not understand how you can find that there is sufficient evidence to support using hormonal interventions to treat gender dysphoria in minors,” their letter reads.

This is an escalation of a familiar tactic, said Khadijah Silver, director of gender justice and health equity at Lawyers for Good Government. And if it works, it will be a major weapon in the political fight to delegitimize gender-affirming care, they said.

“If you can convince the public that they have shifted stance, that’s extremely powerful,” they said, referring to the AMA.

In some ways, that impact is already being felt.

In a recent congressional hearing on rising health care costs, the board of trustees chair for the American Medical Association was asked about how patients across the country are struggling to find doctors. Two hours into the hearing, he was also asked about gender-affirming care for trans youth — a topic that affects few Americans, but takes up a lot of political air.

Rep. Erin Houchin, a Republican from Indiana, asked why the medical group changed its position on surgeries for trans youth.

But the AMA maintains that it has not changed its position.

“In surgery and minors, our belief is that it should generally be deferred until adulthood. But, we respect the physician-patient-family relationship in determining that,” Dr. David H. Aizuss answered in response to the question from the congresswoman.

That exchange took only a few minutes out of a hearing that spanned the gamut of crises facing the U.S. health care system, like skyrocketing insurance premiums and a worsening physician shortage. But it represents a growing tension between Republicans and medical groups, as elected officials who oppose gender-affirming care push for major health care organizations to do the same.

The American Medical Association declined to comment on the attorneys general’s letter, which had asked for a response by March 25. In a broader statement, the medical group said it supports gender-affirming care.

“We support evidence-based treatment for medical care, including gender affirming care,” an AMA spokesperson said in an email. “Currently, the evidence for surgical intervention in minors is insufficient for us to make a definitive statement. In the absence of clear evidence, surgical interventions in minors should be generally deferred to adulthood. Treatment decisions should be made between the physician and the patient (and family) based on the best medical evidence and clinical judgment.”

That position aligns with the World Professional Association for Transgender Health (WPATH), an authority on medical care for trans people. WPATH recommends that patients generally wait until adulthood before seeking surgery. Trans youth rarely undergo surgery of any kind; of the small number performed on adolescents, the majority are mastectomies.

If an adolescent does need surgery, WPATH recommends they meet extensive criteria — including a full understanding of reproductive side effects, a year’s worth of hormone therapy, sustained gender incongruence, plus emotional and cognitive maturity.

The questions surrounding surgery come on the heels of the American Society of Plastic Surgeons’ response to the January meeting with Oz. In what the Times described as a “tense” meeting, Oz pressed leaders of organizations including the AMA and the ASPS on why they recommend gender-affirming care for trans youth. At that meeting, the surgeons group said it would be changing its position, per the Times.

Weeks after the meeting, ASPS released a nine-page statement saying that gender-affirming surgery should be delayed for minors until a patient is at least 19. The surgeons’ group cited insufficient evidence that benefits for surgery outweigh risks, and pointed to a controversial report created by the Trump administration to back its position.

The surgeons group noted that it still opposes criminalization of such medical care. The Trump administration celebrated the announcement.

“Today marks another victory for biological truth in the Trump administration,” said former Deputy Health and Human Services Secretary Jim O’Neill, in a press release. Oz, who has compared gender-affirming care for minors to lobotomies, applauded the American Society of Plastic Surgeons “for placing itself on the right side of history.”

In the following days, the surgeon’s group appeared to backtrack. The American Society of Plastic Surgeons reportedly told NPR that its position “does not include a blanket recommendation for surgery for minors.” The ASPS did not respond to a request for comment on this story.

The AMA has had its own trouble communicating its position. In a recent internal newsletter from the board chair, the association said that its policy on gender-affirming care has not changed at all; and that it requested a correction from The New York Times in response to the outlet’s coverage of its initial statement on youth surgeries. However, the Times says it has received no such requests.

This back-and-forth is taking place against an intense political backdrop: Six states have made it a felony for doctorsto provide gender-affirming care to trans youth. Hospitals across the country have shuttered gender clinics in response to pressure from the administration. As a result, some young patients are cut off in the middle of treatment and medical professionals are grappling with how the law impacts them.

And despite ample news coverage, gender-affirming care is still not widely understood.

Very few transgender youth seek and access surgeries. More rely on hormone therapy and puberty blockers to treat gender dysphoria, which is a medical condition that can cause significant distress for trans people.

Puberty blockers delay the hormones that cause kids to go through puberty, which can be an intense and emotionally fraught time for trans youth. Many families say this treatment is crucial for their child’s wellbeing and prevents distress caused by dysphoria. There are potential risks, like decreased bone density, which is monitored by medical providers. Some providers recommend weight-bearing exercise or diet optimization to boost calcium and vitamin D levels while on puberty blockers.

Hormone therapy, which involves taking testosterone or estrogen to cause physical changes that align one’s body with their gender identity, is another treatment that some trans youth receive to alleviate dysphoria. As with puberty blockers, clinics require a mental health assessment as well as parental or guardian consent for the treatment.

Multiple studies have found that access to these treatments decrease depression and anxiety for trans youth. Butthey are now banned in much of the country, after Republican politicians and conservative lobbying groups flooded statehouses with bills aiming to restrict the care for minors.

The Endocrine Society and the American Academy of Pediatrics are under federal investigation over their support for gender-affirming care. Both medical groups have sued, as the government seeks information to determine if they have made “false or unsubstantiated representations” regarding the care.

The attorneys’ general letter to the American Medical Association is leveling up that pressure on medical groups, Silver said.

“Because the care is so politicized, any association that stands up and asserts its support for physicians who provide the care, will be made an example of,” they said.

Internet Shutdowns Should Be Discussed

When repression meets resistance: internet shutdowns in 2025

PUBLISHED: 31 March 2026 LAST UPDATED: 31 March 2026

“Everyone is on high alert, constantly watching the sky with fright and exhaustion […] We also keep our eyes on our mobile phone connections — the moment the signal drops, we immediately take cover in underground shelters. We’ve come to understand that a loss of communication signals an impending airstrike.— Humanitarian aid worker on the internet shutdown that took place in Myanmar during air strikes near Tamu township in the Sagaing region.

The 2025 data and analysis confirm a horrific reality: internet shutdowns are increasing, not decreasing — and their impact on people’s lives is devastating. Shutdowns reached a new record high in the past year, continuing the steady increase since 2020. Our new report, Rising repression meets global resistance: Internet shutdowns in 2025, documents how democratic and autocratic governments alike deploy them to silence, collectively punish, and terrorize populations, as well as to hide human rights violations and killings. At the same time, we highlight how resistance is growing and people’s power is rising, and offer recommendations for stakeholders to push back. From Myanmar to Iran, Tanzania to Nepal, communities are challenging repression, demanding accountability, and devising new ways to reconnect during blackouts.

read the report

In 2025, Access Now and the #KeepItOn coalition documented 313 shutdowns in 52 countries, surpassing the appalling records from 2024 (304) and 2023 (289). Seven new countries joined the offender list in 2025, meaning that people in 100 countries have now experienced a shutdown since we started tracking in 2016. As 2026 began, there were 75 shutdowns in 33 countries that persisted from 2025, a significant increase from the 54 shutdowns in 26 countries that were ongoing from 2024 into 2025. This shows that perpetrators are increasingly attempting to permanently block communications platforms or even keep entire populations cut off from the internet indefinitely.

If you can’t see the highlights below, please check your privacy-enhancing browser extensions. Open in desktop view for the best experience.

(snip-go see. The site is Access Now, it’s safe, the subject of this story (internet access) is its specialty, and my Ad Blocker even shows no blocked ads on the page! Go finish reading this, because forewarned should be forearmed, as to organizing locally.)

https://www.accessnow.org/internet-shutdowns-2025/