News & Politics

A longtime conservation advocate warned on Saturday that President Donald Trump’s recent park policies will likely take a toll on an innocent party — Yosemite Park wildlife bears.

Recalling a 2021 incident in which a mother bear stayed by her dead cub for hours after it was hit by a car, conservation advocate Beth Pratt wrote for the San Francisco Gate that Trump’s new Yosemite Park superintendent, Ray McPadden, has imposed a new policy which makes it likely future incidents like that will occur much more often.

McPadden recently claimed that there is “zero evidence” crowds adversely impact Yosemite’s ecosystem or landscape in “any consequential way” to explain removing the park’s reservation system.

“As someone who has spent the past 30 years documenting and studying Yosemite’s remarkable wildlife, I was astounded by the claim of ‘zero evidence,’” Pratt wrote. “I have witnessed it firsthand. And decades of park research and rigorous planning efforts demonstrate that there is substantial evidence that overcrowding in Yosemite has a profound impact on the park — and the bears and other wildlife that call it home.”

Pratt continued, “Sadly, dozens of bears are hit, and sometimes killed, on park roads each year. Vehicle strikes are now one of the leading causes of death for bears in Yosemite. The park has posted warning signs at hot spot collision areas, attempting to compel visitors to slow down for the wildlife, typically to no avail. And as visitation increases, the chance of a bear being hit by a vehicle also typically increases, according to my analysis of visitation trends and bear collisions. Keep adding more cars, and you’ll likely be causing the death of more bears.”

McPadden is not alone in claiming there will be no harm to wildlife in increasing tourism to Yosemite. Pratt also quoted Congressman Tom McClintock, who wrote on Facebook that the closure “is good news … for the gateway communities that depend on Yosemite commerce for their livelihoods.” Pratt begged to differ.

“Despite these misguided celebrations over the reversing of our reservation system in pursuit of greater business profits, in Yosemite, overcrowding can mean a wild bear who once frolicked in a meadow is mangled and killed by a car,” Pratt wrote. “Shouldn’t reducing overcrowding and saving the lives of the park’s bears be what we celebrate in our national parks?”

Trump’s opposition to strict conservation policies at Yosemite is consistent with his larger anti-environmentalist philosophy. Writing for The Guardian earlier this week, Damian Carrington reported that Earth is passing a “point of no return” toward becoming a “hothouse planet” due to climate change. Trump, like most of the Republican Party, denies the scientific reality of climate change and supports enriching the fossil fuel industry.

Additionally, Trump has used his power over the Interior Department to take down hundreds of signs, merchandise and presentations by the National Park Service that run counter to the administration’s ideological agenda. This includes content about climate change, slavery and Native American issues were among the subjects to come under scrutiny. For this reason, the Interior Department is currently being sued by the National Parks Conservation Association.

Outgoing Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem is embroiled in a scandal involving public contracts for the millions she spent on ads for recruitment videos for Immigration and Customs Enforcement. It has now been revealed that the staffer whom Noem tapped to her former political director, Madison Sheahan, to handle funding.

NBC News reported on Thursday that the sum she managed was $100 million, but Washington Examiner reporter Anna Giaritelli noted on Friday that they "did some digging" and found that Sheahan oversaw the entire budget of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).

"The random helper was Madison Sheahan, a 2019 Ohio State University graduate who worked as Noem's political director when she was South Dakota governor. Sheahan was roughly 23-25 years old at the time. Last year, at the approximate age of 28 (give or take a year) and with no immigration law experience, Sheahan was tapped by Kristi Noem to oversee ICE's $9 billion budget," wrote Giaritelli.

She was responding to a comment from the Daily Wire's Luke Rosiak, who discovered that Sheahan didn't handle just one $100 million contract. She ordered that a second contract be given to the same firms.

"The contracts scandal at DHS is extremely bad, possibly criminal," wrote Rosiak on X.

"Noem claimed that 'career officials' somehow picked three firms connected to her politically as the only ones who should be able to bid on the $200M ads, just like 'career officials' kept [Corey] Lewandowski's time to make sure he didn't work more than 130 days per year, which would violate [Special Government Employees] SGE rules," he added.

Sheahan is now running for Congress in Ohio.

There have been huge conflicts at the Department of Homeland Security's Office of the Inspector General. The IG, appointed by President Donald Trump, wrote a letter saying that leaders under Noem "systematically obstructed" his inquiries, including a "specific pending criminal investigation."

"Does anybody have any idea how bad it has to be for the OIG in this agency to come out and do this publicly?" asked Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.) during a hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee on Tuesday. “That is stonewalling, that’s a failure of leadership, and that is why I’ve called for your resignation."

With Sen. Markwayne Mullin (R-Okla.) taking over the department, the IG will have a new opportunity to investigate any allegedly questionable behavior under Noem's leadership.

Republicans are attempting to rewrite the narrative of the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol, but Virginia is not letting that narrative permeate public classrooms.

The Washington Post reported Friday that the Virginia state governor will likely sign a measure that was passed by the state House of Delegates and Senate that bars any public schools from teaching that the attack was a "peaceful" protest. President Donald Trump has long maintained that the violence was peaceful. Other Republicans have referred to it as nothing more than a "tourist visit."

One lawmaker complained that the White House webpage calls January 6 "a peaceful protest, and people who instigated it were the police and National Guard,” said Delegate Dan Helmer (D).

“This is a preventative measure against a massive disinformation campaign on the part of the White House," he added.

Republicans are calling it "mind control," the report said.

"It tells us what we’re not allowed to say, and it tells us what we must say,” complained Del. Tom Garrett (R) in a floor speech. He said that the bill was "evil" and akin to "Nazi Germany" and "Soviet Russia."

In 2022, Virginia's Republican Gov. Glenn Youngkin proposed new teaching requirements for those discussing the history of the U.S. around slavery and the Native Americans. Laws in Germany today bar expressions of Holocaust denialism in public.

Trump pardoned 1,500 people charged with crimes related to Jan. 6, even if they accepted their guilt.

On Friday morning, March 6, National Public Radio (NPR) reported that the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) had published "additional Epstein files related to allegations" that President Donald Trump "sexually abused a minor[,] after an NPR investigation found dozens of pages were withheld."

That includes "16 new pages that cover three additional FBI interview summaries with a woman who accused Trump of sexual abuse decades ago when she was a minor," according to NPR reporters Stephen Fowler and Saige Miller.

MS NOW legal analyst Lisa Rubin discussed these developments during a Friday afternoon conversation with host Chris Jansing, arguing that Trump-era DOJ's explanation is falling flat in light of the "salacious" allegations in the files.

"With respect to this Trump accuser," Rubin told Jansing, "she is now detailing, in these documents, how she came to meet Donald Trump — the assault that she says she experienced at his hands. And perhaps, maybe most importantly of all, we understand now why the FBI might have stopped talking to her in October of 2019. This woman told the FBI that she understood that the statutes of limitations with respect to her allegations against both Jeffrey Epstein and Donald Trump had long since passed. And therefore, she said to them, what's the point of my giving you any more detail?"

Jansing asked Rubin if "we know why" the DOJ files in question are "just being released" — to which she responded, "No. I mean, I can tell you what the Department of Justice has said."

"The Department of Justice's public explanation is that these are documents that were inadvertently marked as duplicates during their review and production procedure," Rubin told Jansing. "However, it's unclear to me, given some of the allegations here, whether that is a plausible or even a truthful explanation. As you and I were discussing before the segment started, there are some allegations in some of these other new documents that concern other public people."

The MS NOW legal analyst continued, "That's not to say that the produced files don't contain allegations against public individuals. But given the vivid nature of some of these allegations and how salacious they are, it also seems like this might not be the story of what actually went down."

Hundreds of signs, merchandise and presentations by the National Park Service have been flagged by President Donald Trump’s administration for possible removal as part of its war against “ideological indoctrination.”

According to a NOTUS review of the material, an evaluation reveals that "in many instances, park staff acknowledged" the material was factual.

The removal reports were recently published online by an anonymous federal government employee and first reported by the Washington Post.

The removal requests were made to national parks, monuments and other sites. The order targets content that the administration deems “partisan” or “disparaging," according to Trump's executive order. Slavery, climate change and Native American issues were among the subjects to come under scrutiny.

The National Parks Conservation Association sued the Interior Department this month over removal of such content from park sites.

Whether the Interior Department and National Park Service subsequently reviewed each of the content reports isn’t clear. It has also avoided specifics on how much content is being removed or altered.

Molly Blake, a team member at Save Our Signs, told NOTUS the group has tracked hundreds of signs, displays and other material removed since Trump issued the executive order.

“The spreadsheet shows that the message that was sent is that we can’t talk about times in American history where people in power hurt other people. We can’t talk about times in American history where people’s civil rights were violated,” Blake said. “And that’s a really killing and disturbing development.”

A National Park Service spokesperson issued a statement calling such claims false.

The executive order has already had a chilling effect in some cases.

An exhibit at the Chesapeake and Ohio Canal National Historical Park that explores how people from different backgrounds can interpret archaeology in different ways was flagged as “factually accurite [sic], but submitting for review out of an abundance of caution,” the report said.

Another report that mentioned how Native American people were removed during development of the Transcontinental Railroad was also flagged, despite also being tagged as accurate by the reporting party.

“We understand a lot of folks are responding under duress, and I think that kind of comes out of some of the comments that have been leaked,” Blake said. “What I think is also just especially insidious is there’s no clear shared understanding of what it means to be quote-unquote ‘disparaging or inappropriate.’ And so then you get into these absurd situations where you’re reporting things that are historically accurate.”

A report in the Washington Post reported Friday described the government purge at the FBI and Justice Department, noting the loss of decades of experience and has left some key positions either unfilled or otherwise occupied. And according to the Post, President Donald Trump's administration might be woefully unprepared for the fallout.

For the past six months, Matthew Blue, the chief of the Justice Department’s counterterrorism section, has been deployed to "protect" Washington, D.C. Trump called in the D.C. National Guard to handle "out of control" crime in the city. While many have been deployed elsewhere, Blue remains on duty and not at the Justice Department.

About three days before the bombing campaign began in Iran, FBI Director Kash Patel fired the agents who "specialized in addressing threats from Iran and its proxies."

Speaking with current and former officials familiar with the firings, the Post reported that there are still some skilled leaders in top posts, but the "bench of expertise has significantly thinned," particularly among those with a history of handling domestic threats.

The report explained that when the U.S. goes to war or engages in a conflict elsewhere, domestic law enforcement keeps its ear to the ground about possible threats at home out of fear that terrorist groups abroad can trigger anyone who might be in the U.S. But now, those prosecutors and agents are scarce.

One ex-prosecutor who refused to give his name was fired out of the blue despite working on the surveillance of a man the FBI feared may have been plotting a violent attack. Patel reassigned the FBI agents to focus on immigration instead.

FBI spokesman Ben Williamson told the Post that anyone who they fired were found to have "acted unethically" either on the Jan. 6 investigations or with probes into Trump.

“While we do not comment on personnel matters, the FBI maintains a robust counterintelligence operation, with personnel all over the country, who delivered record results in 2025 — including a 35 percent increase in counterintelligence arrests, six of the Ten Most Wanted Fugitives captured, and multiple foiled terrorism plots just in December alone,” Williamson said in a statement. “Our teams remain fully engaged across the country and prepared to mobilize any security assets needed to assist federal partners — as well as state and local law enforcement."

But one former and longtime senior national security official warned, “We are now in a heightened-threat situation, not just in the Mideast but also here in the U.S. Iran, acting through its proxies, has long sought to carry out a terrorist attack or assassination inside the country."

Washington Post readers are pushing back against the paper and an op-ed that laments what its author sees as a shortage of evangelical Christians in the “halls of power.”

“Evangelicals are 23 percent of U.S. adults and one of the most loyal Republican voting blocs, with 81 percent backing Donald Trump in 2024,” writes author Aaron M. Renn. “Yet despite six of the nine Supreme Court justices being appointed by Republican presidents, there are no evangelicals on the Supreme Court.”

The Supreme Court “is just one of the many elite institutions in which evangelicals are absent or underrepresented,” he continues. Declaring that evangelicals “have excelled in politics,” he points to U.S. Senator Josh Hawley (R-MO) and House Speaker Mike Johnson as examples.

Arguing that evangelicals “are also prominent in well-run and profitable businesses with relatively low cultural impact, such as food processing (Tyson Foods) and retail (Hobby Lobby),” he says that “they are all but absent from the leadership of prestigious universities, major foundations, Big Tech companies, leading financial firms and large media companies.”

“A stronger evangelical presence in elite institutions could strengthen them while addressing polarization and public mistrust,” he continues. “The lack of evangelicals in the halls of power contributes to anti-institutional public sentiment. It also deprives those institutions of an important pool of talent.”

Washington Post readers scorched the op-ed and the paper.

“The author remarked, more than once, of the lack of formal education among the vast numbers of evangelicals,” wrote one reader. “He then questions the lack of said evangelicals on corporate and college boards and in executive offices. Am I the only one seeing a connection here?”

“Is this not a request for a new DEI program to benefit evangelicals?” asked a reader.

“I am an evangelical Christian,” said a critic. “Please don’t hold up Mike Johnson or Josh Hawley as an example of what Christ calls us to be. Perhaps the reason for our absence in the halls of power is the fact that the majority chose to elect an amoral, corrupt narcissist to be president. We should be absent from that depth of depravity.”

One reader encouraged the author to “go see the musical Godspell and see just how far off the mark the American Evangelicals are.”

“Since when did adherence to fundamentalist religious beliefs become a litmus test for government or institutional leadership?” asked a reader. “Aren’t we currently bombing a country based on that system? This ‘newspaper’ is devolving into an internet forum.”

“So now MAGA wants DEI for Evangelicals,” said one reader. “This is fantastic stand-up comedy material.”

“In some cases, not all, the author is confusing evangelical with fundamentalist,” wrote one critic. “The author is also narrowing the meaning of evangelical by using a political frame, not a theological frame. Many evangelicals define themselves via strict adherence to Jesus’ Sermon on the Mount (or the Plain) … I wish the author had explored at least modestly the increasing breadth of what the designation ‘evangelical’ represents in Christianity, not on Capital Hill.”

“Do you expect to be trusted in fields of science when you deny evolution?” asked a reader.

“Evangelical Christianity is the antithesis of intellectual pursuit, science, and progress,” wrote a reader.

And one critic, appearing to refer to “The Handmaid’s Tale,” charged: “Dreaming of Gilead, are you?”

"Aghast" federal judges are increasingly angry at President Donald Trump's Departments of Justice and Homeland Security for immigration judges making decisions they believe do not comport with the evidence, much less the law.

Legal reporter Kyle Cheney wrote for Politico on Friday that Trump's "unprecedented campaign to lock up thousands of immigrants with longstanding roots in the United States" is forcing families and even children to face off against these judges for trials that "have been fundamentally flawed or even pre-cooked." Some judges even decide that the individuals are a "danger to the community" or a "flight risk" without hearing evidence.

One immigration judge allegedly relied on "uncorroborated police reports" given by the detainee himself. He was released. Another, in Missouri, found that Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officers called the migrant a flight risk "without sufficient evidence."

The ready-made rulings are starting to infuriate federal judges, who are demanding "do-overs," the report said. In some cases, the judges don't even do re-trials; they simply order the person to be released. U.S. District Judge Irene Berger, a Democratic appointee, concluded a bond hearing by saying it would be pointless. Her GOP-appointed counterpart agreed, saying it “would be futile."

“The bond hearing has indications of predetermined outcome,” complained U.S. District Judge Douglas Harpool. “The [immigration judge’s] order enumerates that Petitioner: has been in the U.S. for 9 years, has not missed a court hearing, has family in the U.S. (husband and 3 children), and owns a home and operates a business in the U.S. The IJ’s determination regarding flight risk is clearly untethered by the facts and any logical conclusion to be determined from the facts.”

Cheney wrote that federal law forbids the courts from second-guessing “discretionary” bonds made by the "immigration judges."

“These federal judges simply disagree with the outcomes of the immigration judge bond decisions,” a Justice Department spokesperson told Politico. “They are impugning the integrity or competence of our immigration judges solely to give them a hook to review the IJ decisions they disagree with but would otherwise be unable to directly review.”

Veteran economics reporter Catherine Rampell warns of “Warflation” in the weeks ahead.

In a post to The Bulwark, Rampell predicted higher prices are on the horizon for “anything that needs to be transported anywhere.”

“The top crude oil expert at S&P Global Energy warned that the military conflict has the potential to become 'the largest oil supply disruption in history,'" she writes. "That’s because about a fifth of the world’s oil passes through the Strait of Hormuz, on Iran’s southern coast.”

Oil prices are already skyrocketing, a reversal of a previous bright spot in affordability.

“But since we bombed Iran, energy costs have risen sharply. To put things in perspective: oil prices are up about 20 percent so far just this week," Rampell adds.

The downstream effect on various pricing issues will soon follow.

“Downstream firms that require [liquefied natural gas] to operate are closing shop, too. For example, the Gulf region is responsible for nearly a tenth of the global aluminum supply," according to Rampell. "Already this week, multiple major aluminum smelters had to initiate shutdowns; one company says it may take up to a year to restart production.”

Adding to the cascade are methanol and other chemicals, including fertilizers used to grow food supplies. “American farmers are freaking out,” Rampell claims, and buttressed the point by talking to an analyst.

Consumers may see “higher prices for bread within six to 10 weeks, eggs within a few months and pork and broiler chicken within six months,” according to an estimate from food-system expert Raj Patel.

Those are the obvious targets. But on the horizon are other products that will soon feel the effect of chemical price hikes.

Rampell writes, “Then there are the gazillions of consumer goods that people may not realize use petrochemicals as inputs. Those include clothes, iPhones, candy, dentures, dishwashing liquid, footballs, shampoo, toothpaste, lipstick, plastic toys, trash bags, umbrellas, tires — you name it.”

Not everyone is sounding the inflation alarm.

Forbes reports LPL Financial analysts have noted, “Across more than two dozen events since World War II, the S&P 500 averaged a one-day decline of about 1 percent, analysts said, adding markets tend to “absorb shocks” quickly before stabilizing and recovering “within a matter of weeks.” The S&P 500 dropped 1.2 percent when Iran attacked Israel in April 2024 and took just over two weeks to recover the loss, whereas the index rose 1 percent after the U.S. and Israel last struck Iran in June 2025.”

The underlying state of the economy, such as the health of the job market, interest rates and inflation, “matters more than the event itself,” LDL writes.

CNBC notes, “most economists say the impact from higher oil prices is difficult to gauge and could ultimately prove temporary, as has often been the case with past Middle East conflicts.”

Moreover, with the U.S. producing a larger share of its own energy, the broader economic impact of oil price spikes is not what it once was.

“In today’s American economy, spikes in oil prices do not present the same significant downside risk to top-line economic growth or inflation as they did a half century ago,” said Joseph Brusuelas, chief economist at RSM. “The American economy is far less exposed to economic and inflation disruptions while its overall size has tripled.”

Rampell says Trump isn’t deliberately trying to raise prices, and acknowledges that presidents really don’t have a lot of tools to fight inflation.

“But between tariffs, mass deportations (and a resulting depletion in the agricultural workforce), politicizing the Federal Reserve, and bombing Iran, Trump seems intent on proving us wrong.”

Friday nights are typically time for HBO’s “Real Time with Bill Maher.” But President Donald Trump decided to get an early jump on things before the show airs, reposting four times on Truth Social with various stories quoting him in unflattering terms about the comedian and host.

Trump may have been trying to get out in front of what should be a roast on the next version of the show. Maher’s guests for March 6 include author/TV host Annabelle Gurwitch, former CNN anchor Don Lemon and California Sen. Adam Schiff.

Despie Maher's moderation efforts in the wake of meeting Trump over dinner, the president has not stopped his criticism. Trump acknowledged following the dinner that he enjoyed Maher’s company, but that feeling appears to have swiftly deteriorated.

The Trump tweetstorm on Maher had several nuggets highlighted from stories that previously ran on KUTV.com, NewsMax.com, the NY Post and latenighter.com, along with his signature prose, including hits like:

Calling Maher “a jerk,” and said his much-publicized dinner with him was “a total waste of time.” He later retweeted a story from Newsmax repeating those comments.
... Saying Maher is “no different than Kimmel or Colbert,” two other talk show hosts who have taken shots at the president.
... And characterizing Maher as “extremely nervous” with “ZERO confidence in himself.”

The reposted stories with highlighted quotes date to an event organized last year by singer Kid Rock.

In addition to his work as a journalist, British reporter Ben Judah is known for his work in the U.K. government — where he served as a special adviser to David Lammy in the Foreign Office. And in an article published by the i Paper in the UK on March 6, Judah recalls his initial reaction after learning that U.S. President Donald Trump had chosen real estate mogul Steve Witkoff as a special envoy to the Middle East.

"Had Trump really appointed some real estate pal of his to wrap up the Gaza War?," Judah remembers. "There was a mixture of shock and scorn in the ranks at how this could possibly have come about. A few old hands predicted his time in diplomacy would be a failure. He'd fail to launch. But Witkoff kept on rising, as the Democrats levelled accusations he sought to enrich himself and the Trump family with fabulous real estate deals in Russia, even Iran, once he'd landed those prize-winning peace deals."

Judah recalls that native New Yorker Witkoff was quite "globalized" when Trump appointed him yet is "very different from a diplomat" in his outlook.

Witkoff, Judah argues, is very much a reflection of the second Trump Administration —which, he warns, is showing a total disregard for diplomacy during its war against Iran.

"The fact is that Trump is not running an administration but a court — where the closeness and confidence of the king is key," Judah laments. "A court where (Israeli Prime Minister) Bibi Netanyahu would turn out to be the greatest courtier. The rise of Witkoff was a story of taking on more and more for the boss. The truth is, in politics, that's not always a good thing. Because when it goes wrong, it's suddenly all on you. There was no grand deal to trumpet for Trump on Fox this week."

Judah continues, "Instead, Witkoff marched through making a series of nuclear justifications that will be pored over by Democrats, historians and journalists like Colin Powell’s at the United Nations on the eve of the Iraq War. Whatever happens now, Witkoff's rise will never end at a Nobel gala night in Oslo. Instead his name will forever be linked to a cataclysmic failure of diplomacy. Then again, maybe it was always thus. No crying in the casino, as they say. One's rise and success can easily turn into catastrophic disaster, with you owning the mess, if you play at the highest stakes on the world stage."

Former Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales penned a guest post for the Substack "Checks and Balances," lamenting the destruction of the Justice Department under President Donald Trump's administration.

The Republican from President George W. Bush's administration wrote that he'd always upheld the DOJ and those who worked there as a kind of "cathedral of justice." No longer, however, as it "is being dismantled stone by stone."

Many of the career lawyers at the Justice Department have either been fired, shoved out or quit very publicly under the leadership of former Trump lawyers Todd Blanche, Emil Bove and Pam Bondi.

"Prosecutors appear to no longer enjoy prosecutorial independence," he said as an example. "Prosecutions at the federal district level against perceived political or personal enemies of the administration’s leadership are, in many cases, now directed by senior leaders at the Department or by subordinates at the White House."

This only adds to Trump's assault on law firms. He issued an executive order last year, giving him the legal authority to personally target the firms he didn't like. While many ran scared, there are still several fighting back.

Then there is the "politically motivated criticism of our judges, as well as threats to their families," which he wrote "threaten to undermine the independence of the courts. Recently, it was reported that leaders in the various 93 US offices were told to provide DOJ headquarters with examples of perceived judicial activism that would serve as the basis for referral to the House of Representatives for possible impeachment proceedings. There are growing complaints about executive branch defiance of court orders."

It's proof that prosecutions are coming not from a striving for justice but from politics, he said. However, most of them "have all failed to an embarrassing level."

Like many, he wants to see norms reestablished and a return to the rule of law. But he remains fearful about the "pace at which norms and traditions are being abandoned." He called it outright "dangerous." He lamented that it will likely take "time and hard work" to rebuild the DOJ once Trump is finished with it.

When Democratic strategists are asked about the challenges they face, one of the things that often comes up is the GOP's dominance of Rural America. Democrats in Texas, for example, perform well in major urban centers like Houston, Austin and El Paso, but the state's many rural counties give Republicans a huge advantage in statewide races. And in Pennsylvania, the GOP's domination of rural areas is a sharp contrast to Democrats' domination of Philadelphia.

Farmers, from Pennsylvania to Iowa, are a crucial part of President Donald Trump's base and help the GOP maintain its advantage among rural voters. But according to Politico reporters Daniel Desrochers and Grace Yarrow, frustrations among farmers —including Trump's trade policy — could hurt GOP voter turnout in the 2026 midterms.

"President Donald Trump promised a 'golden age' of American agriculture," the Politico journalists explain in an article published on March 6. "Farm-state Republicans are feeling pressure to make a down payment before the midterms. Over the past five months, the Trump Administration has rolled out trade agreements it says will give farmers access to new markets and reopened Chinese purchases of millions of pounds of soybeans after a trade war-induced, monthslong boycott. It also spearheaded an effort to get $12 billion in direct payments to farmers to recover some of their losses amid the president's trade war…. Republicans from Rural America are warning that one of their key voter bases could sit out this election year — a blow for a party already facing stiff political headwinds."

According to Desrochers and Yarrow, new data shows "farm bankruptcies soaring." And Sen. Jerry Moran (R-Kansas) is among the Republicans who is sounding the alarm about farmers' worries.

Moran told Politico, "The anxiety, the anxiousness, the angst, the timing is all something that is really weighing on producers."

Sen. Jim Justice (R-West Virginia) is speaking out as well and told Politico, "We have got to do more now. If Republicans are not worried about the midterms, then they're living in a cave."

Rural voters — whether farmers themselves or simply adjacent to the industry — have repeatedly turned out in droves to support Trump in the past.

Desrochers and Yarrow report that although "rural voters turned out in droves to support Trump in the past," former GOP consultant Brian Reisinger fears they will sit out this year's midterms.

Reisinger told Politico, "The question is not, 'Are they going to suddenly flip to Democrat?' The question is, 'Are they going to be as motivated and as moved by the direction of (Republicans') policy agenda now as they were in 2016 or in 2024?'"