Author Archive: Ed Driscoll

WE’RE WATCHING DOWNFALL, BUT WITH MASS NOTIFICATION SYSTEMS AND PCs TO CRANK OUT AI SLOP IN THE AYATOLLAH-BUNKER:

GONE IN 60 SECONDS: Noem’s deputy director of ICE bought thousands of vehicles that officers can’t use.

A former Trump administration official wasted millions of taxpayer dollars given to U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement to purchase thousands of employee vehicles that the agency cannot use to arrest illegal immigrants, according to three sources.

ICE’s top brass are quietly searching for a way to amend the remainder of a massive order of pick-up trucks and SUVs that were ordered last year and slated to be wrapped with the agency’s name, logo, and motto, as well as storing away many vehicles that have been delivered to ICE facilities across the country, the Washington Examiner has learned.

“ICE has never had marked vehicles,” the first person familiar with the purchases said in a phone call. “In talking to people, they’re like, ‘We don’t want to use these, we can’t.’”

The saga is the latest controversial expenditure of taxpayer money within the Department of Homeland Security and speaks to the different ways political appointees at the department have tried to approach operations versus how career law enforcement officials have historically done so.

Over the past year, assaults against ICE personnel have risen 8,000%, according to the DHS, and federal police have opted to hide their faces and identities while working in public. They have frequently switched license plates on rental vehicles to avoid detection by activists, who track the license plate numbers of suspected ICE vehicles in massive crowdsourced databases.

Despite the growing number of ways ICE employees have sought to protect their identities, ICE’s former deputy director, Madison Sheahan, placed a bulk order for vehicles clearly marked with ICE’s logo.

Exit quote: “‘If leadership would have been consulted — leadership being the executive assistant directors, do you need marked vehicles, the people that have done this job would have said, ‘We don’t need marked vehicles, because you’re not going to use them,’ the first person said.”

UPDATE Why would ICE need unmarked cars? Oh, right:

METAPHOR ALERT:

GENTLEMEN, YOU CAN’T COMMIT JOURNALISM HERE, THIS IS CBS NEWS!

Oh no, not a political adversary to a politician! And yet, “It is the prime function of a really first-rate newspaper to serve as a sort of permanent opposition in politics,” H.L. Mencken wrote in 1920s, in sharp contrast to the vast majority of today’s “journalists,” who view themselves as Democratic Party operatives with bylines.

THE WORLD THE FATWA MADE:

A mysterious feature of the fatwa was the way it brought out apologists, appeasers, and peacemakers who misunderstood its motivations. Former President Jimmy Carter blamed Rushdie in The New York Times for “vilifying the Prophet Mohammed and defaming the Holy Koran.” The former president, who had been in office when the ayatollah held American citizens captive, blindfolded and abused for 444 days, did not seem to recognize the nature of the trap he was falling into. “While Rushdie’s First Amendment freedoms are important,” Carter wrote, he nevertheless agreed the work of fiction was a “direct insult” to Muslims whose sacred beliefs had been “violated.”

Those like Carter, who approached the fatwa with rational expectations, wound up saying irrational things, ratifying its terms even if they quarreled with them. Blaming Rushdie’s novel for inflicting “the kind of intercultural wound that is difficult to heal,” as though the author had assassinated an archduke, Carter chose to see the fatwa as a mirror of offended religious sentiment, even though it was a license to commit transnational murder issued by a cleric who had named a street after Anwar Sadat’s assassin.

Carter’s hope that “tactful public statements and private discussions could still defuse this explosive situation” was like waiting for a hostage to be released. He failed to understand that the fatwa’s rejection of borders, laws, national sovereignty, and individual autonomy was the whole point. Or that a decree that made the victim the aggressor, murder a virtue, and suicide a sacrament did not permit common ground.

The message Carter failed to understand was received loud and clear by a 24-year-old American named Hadi Matar.

Thirty-three years after Rushdie was sentenced to death, Matar traveled from Fairview, New Jersey, to Chautauqua, New York, where he attacked Rushdie with a knife from behind as he sat onstage at the Chautauqua Institution waiting to give a speech about free expression and the importance of keeping writers safe. Matar, who told a reporter that he had only read “a page or two” of The Satanic Verses but knew it was an “attack on Islam,” stabbed the 75-year-old writer in the face, the eye, the neck, and the midsection, 15 times before being tackled by bystanders.

That was the logic of the fatwa. Khomeini hadn’t read The Satanic Verses either but had revoked its creator’s right to exist anyway. This helps explain how Matar, who was found guilty of attempted murder last year, could tell the court before his sentencing: “Salman Rushdie wants to disrespect other people. He wants to be a bully; he wants to bully other people. I don’t agree with that.”

You don’t need magic to turn a writer into a monster; the sleep of reason will do, and the overriding presence of conspiracy theories that do the thinking for you, and turn whole categories of humanity into stock villains in a long-running play.

On Thursday, Erik Florack described Carter as “The Father of the Islamic Revolution.” A decade later, he was quite happy to keep stoking it along.

FAFO:

DAY SEVEN OF THE U.S.–ISRAEL WAR: The Strategy Appears to Be Working, and Iran Is Losing.

“War is the continuation of politics by other means.” – Carl von Clausewitz

Seven days into the U.S.–Israel war with Iran, the central question is not simply what has happened on the battlefield, but whether the strategy behind the war is working.

In classical strategic terms, war must always be evaluated through the relationship between political objectives and military action. The Prussian military theorist Carl von Clausewitz argued that the political objective determines the military means used to achieve it. The success of a war cannot be measured simply by explosions, missile launches, or headlines. It must be measured by whether the use of force achieves the political objectives of the war, whether through territorial control, destruction of military capability, or compelling the enemy to change its behavior in accordance with those objectives.

The first task, therefore, is to identify what those objectives actually are.

Thus far, the United States has been consistent in publicly stating its goals. President Donald Trump’s March 1 statement announcing the start of operations made clear that the war is aimed at ending the Iranian regime’s nuclear weapons pursuit, destroying the missile capabilities that Tehran has long used as a shield for that nuclear ambition, and eliminating Iran’s ability to threaten global commerce through the Strait of Hormuz.

Long, but well worth a read.

REPORT: Iranian F-14 fleet attacked at a base in central Iran believed to host all the remaining F-14s in Iranian service.

Early in the morning on Mar. 8, 2026, the IDF announced that Iranian Air Force F-14 Tomcats at the 8th Tactical Fighter Base in Isfahan (or Esfahan), in central Iran, home to the 81st, 82nd and 83rd Tactical Fighter Squadrons, had been obliterated in an air strike part of the Operation Roaring Lion.

* * * * * * * *

However, the latest attack is something different: the 8th Tactical Fighter Base, which was also targeted last year, is believed to host all the remaining F-14s in Iranian service, meaning no Tomcat (or very few, maybe hidden in some underground facility) may have survived anywhere in the world.

Well, only in museums:

OH NO, SOMETHING NEW TO “INFURIATE LIBERALS!” Gwen Stefani’s ‘Maga Barbie’ transformation has infuriated liberals.

Thirty years ago, an edgy new pop star looked set to take over the world. With her peroxide blonde hair, camo trousers and rebellious spirit, No Doubt frontwoman Gwen Stefani seemed like a breath of cigarette-smoke-tinged air: cooler and sexier than Britney Spears, but not quite as chaotic as Courtney Love; an artist who appealed to both rock and pop fans.

No Doubt’s third album, Tragic Kingdom (1995), sold more than 16 million copies, earned the band two Grammy nominations (for best new artist and best rock album) and spawned the colossal hit single Don’t Speak. Stefani’s decision to go solo in 2004 catapulted her to the A-list, with number one singles, sold-out tours and countless magazine front covers. She was the US’s favourite cool girl, whose empowering songs formed the soundtrack of millennial adolescence. Until she wasn’t. Two decades later, Stefani has found herself with a very different identifier: enemy of liberals everywhere.

Leftists with far too much time on their hands spent Trump’s first term trying to decode hidden Nazi symbolism out of everything Taylor Swift did, until moving on to Sydney Sweeney last year, and now I guess it’s Stefani’s time in the barrel. But as the London Telegraph concludes, “One imagines Stefani isn’t too bothered by the drama. She has a net worth of $160m (£120m), a secure marriage and three healthy children. In May, No Doubt will begin their summer-long residency at the Sphere in Las Vegas, following in the footsteps of U2, the Eagles and the Backstreet Boys, after netting $10m to reunite at Coachella in 2024.”

WELCOME TO THE PARTY, PAL! NY Times Discovers Woodrow Wilson’s Racism to Smear Trump; Defended Him in 2010.

New talking points ahoy! The liberal New York Times now condemns former Democratic and “progressive” President Woodrow Wilson, founding father of the modern-day liberal state, for his deep racism and segregationist policies he pushed as president of Princeton University and president of the United States from 1913-1921.

But that permission applies only to woke Democrats and reporters using Wilson to smear President Trump — no credit is given to conservatives for initially pushing the anti-Wilson argument into the mainstream. In fact, the paper mocked conservatives for speaking that truth, including in an infamous New York Times symposium reacting to Jonah Goldberg’s 2008 book Liberal Fascism and his thoroughly researched condemnation of the racist Wilson.

White House correspondent Erica Green unloaded her hysterical 1,800-word hit job in Thursday’s paper under the headline “Trump Says He Is the ‘Least Racist’ President. But His Term Echoes a Grim Past.”

As Byron York wrote on September 24th of 2008, “Today is a red-letter day for the New York Times. For the first time, the paper has reported in its news section that the Rev. Jeremiah Wright once uttered the phrase ‘God damn America.’”

It took the Times a year to “break” the story of Andrew Cuomo hiding the Covid death toll in nursing homes after the Daily Caller initially reported it in May of 2020, and Scott Bessent rhetorically asked Timesman Andrew Sorkin in December, “You had what was one of the greatest scandals of all time… Joe Biden’s diminished capacity and the cover-up. Where was the New York Times?” 

But of course, we know the answer to that:


No word yet if David Frum will re-reversing his opinion on Wilson now that the 28th president been finally rendered doubleplus ungood by the Gray Lady: “Frum’s article, ‘Uncancel Woodrow Wilson,’ appears in the March 2024 issue of the Atlantic. How perverse a choice is it to write on this now?” Particularly so when Frum himself correctly noted in 2013 that “Wilson was also the most disdainful racist to hold the presidency since Andrew Johnson in the 1860s.”

Flashback: The Hater’s Guide to Woodrow Wilson. “I come now not to explain Wilson, but to hate him. A national consensus on hating Wilson is long overdue. It is the patriotic duty of every decent American. While conservatives have particular reasons to detest Wilson, and all his works, and all his empty promises, there is more than enough in his record for moderates, liberals, progressives, libertarians, and socialists to join us in this great and unifying cause.”

TWENTY MINUTES INTO THE FUTURE: Politico founder plots new Washington newspaper war.

One of Washington, DC’s biggest media investors plans to revive one of the US capital’s great historic rivalries with a direct attack on the limping Washington Post.

Robert Allbritton, who founded Politico and NOTUS and whose father owned the Post rival Washington Star, has discussed taking advantage of the Post’s large-scale layoffs and damaged brand by significantly expanding NOTUS, a public-spirited and education-oriented source of government coverage, into a full-scale news operation, potentially even under a different name, three people with direct knowledge of the conversations said.

NOTUS Media in February filed an application to trademark a new name — The Washington Sun — according to filings.

The Politico founder and NOTUS editor-in-chief Tim Grieve have aggressively privately pursued many of the top remaining names at the Post, hoping to peel off a significant number of top journalists to help the publication become an immediate player in DC.

Allbritton and Grieve have approached senior congressional correspondent Paul Kane, White House bureau chief Matt Viser, chief economics correspondent Jeff Stein, tech reporter Drew Harwell, White House reporter Dan Diamond, and columnist Carolyn Hax, among others.

The publication could replicate some of the success of Politico by launching an events and pricey subscription business. The DC billionaire — his family owned and sold Riggs Bank and WJLA, as well as selling Politico for about $1 billion to Axel Springer in 2021 — has told people that he is willing to invest a significant amount of money on the venture for years in order to stand up the publication.

As for Germany’s Axel Springer, besides owning America’s left-leaning Politico and Business Insider, they’ve just acquired the nominally center-right London Telegraph: Axel Springer Will Buy The Publisher Of UK’s Daily Telegraph For $766 Million.

ROGER KIMBALL: Unconditional Surrender: When Wars Are Fought to Win.

“There are decades where nothing happens,” Vladimir Lenin is supposed to have said (but didn’t), “and there are weeks where decades happen.” Welcome to the beginning of March, Anno Domini 2026.

One week ago, on February 28, the United States and Israel commenced an attack on Iran. At first, it seemed to be merely a ramped-up continuation of Operation Midnight Hammer, the raid conducted last June when the United States, following up on Israel’s preliminary attacks, destroyed (“completely and totally obliterated”) three key nuclear sites at Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan. It was an extraordinary operation, in which four B-2 bombers, having flown for 30 hours from the United States, mounted an astonishing precision strike with fourteen 30,000-pound bunker-buster bombs, together with submarine-fired Tomahawk cruise missiles.

But Midnight Hammer was merely a preliminary salvo compared to Epic Fury, the pulverizing assault that the United States and Israel (under the name “Roaring Lion”) launched last Saturday. The world has not seen anything like this since 1945, when the United States and its allies crushed Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan. Having learned from the aftermath of the Great War that armistice is often but another name for false victory, President Trump adopted as his motto the phrase that definitively ended World War II: “unconditional surrender.”

In the meantime though: Iran Has a New Supreme Leader, but They Won’t Tell Us Who It Is.

Unexpectedly:

 

R.I.P. THE MODERATE DEMOCRAT:

Here we go again. Minnesota’s elected officials have proven that the extreme progressives are in charge in the North Star State, beholden to the radical progressive activists who crawl out of every nook and cranny of the Twin Cities’s prestigious, white, liberal suburbs and exurbs.

If you thought this was still the land of the milquetoast, “Minnesota Nice,” I have a bridge in Brooklyn I’d like to sell you.

In the aftermath of the Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) operation that began last summer and ramped up as the White House began cracking down on widespread fraud, Minnesota has been ground zero for purity tests of the far-Left regime. Now, there’s a horse race for the Democrat Farmer Labor candidate for Minnesota’s Senate seat, after current Senator Tina Smith announced her retirement at the end of this term.

The race to the Left — or the bottom, depending on which way the political winds are blowing — is between current Lt. Gov. Peggy Flanagan and Rep. Angie Craig. Both women flash their “girl power” bone fides at every chance, except when they’re appealing to the trans-affirmative activists who claim sex is a social construct, or to the abortion rights radicals who endanger women’s health and applaud the death of baby girls up to the moment of birth.

The latest show of extreme views comes from Craig, who, in a commentary in The Minnesota Star Tribune, writes of her “regret” in voting for the Laken Riley Act, the first bill that President Donald Trump signed into law in his second term.

Related:

JULIE BURCHILL: Mary Beard: a feminist for Islam?

Two-thousand, nine-hundred and seventy-seven people were murdered on 9/11, including more than 400 first responders (among them 343 firefighters and paramedics) and hundreds of plane passengers. Many more have since died due to illnesses linked to toxic exposure at the site of the Twin Towers. They came from 77 different countries – truly ‘diverse’, as opposed to their 19 killers. Colm Tóibín wrote an excellent letter to the LRB about Beard’s essay:

‘Over the past 25 years in Ireland I have made a point of asking anyone who was at school with members of the IRA, the INLA, the UDA and the UVF what these people were like at the age of 10. All have agreed that each child displayed a nasty early sign of terrorism long before he had a “cause”. Had a cause not come their way, these people would have beaten their dogs or their wives and children, attacked one another at hurling matches or taken out their resentment on a long back garden. Would Mary Beard refer to these actions as “extraordinary acts of bravery”?’

As if it couldn’t get worse, AI tells me that Beard is ‘celebrated for her sharp insights, especially on Roman life, women in history and bringing classical studies into mainstream culture, making her a “national treasure”’. Of course she is. The watchwords of NT-ism are ‘diversity’ and ‘inclusivity’ – but the approved views on everything from breakfast to Brexitpenises on women to Palestine, must be held. NTs are the cuddly face of the enemy within, part of the never-ending war against anyone who dares think differently from their betters and wetters. Many are little more than peppy propagandists, there to make us swallow through the medium of sport and entertainment what we have already choked on and vomited up when it was fed to us straight. The UK National Treasure gang can easily embrace a woman who, if she saw her best female friend being ‘done’ by a member of Hamas at one end and a member of Hezbollah at the other, would probably ask the poor woman what she said to provoke them.

As Mark Steyn wrote 20 years ago, “our tolerance of our own tolerance is making us intolerant of other people’s intolerance, which is intolerable. And, unlikely as it sounds, this has now become the highest, most rarefied form of multiculturalism. So you’re nice to gays and the Inuit? Big deal. Anyone can be tolerant of fellows like that, but tolerance of intolerance gives an even more intense frisson of pleasure to the multiculti masochists.”

ILYA SHAPIRO: Two Decades in the Swamp.

On Election Night, you could barely think over the sound of people rushing to update their résumés. Uber drivers found themselves doing more therapy than driving. George Washington University administrators scrambled to set up “support rooms” with puppies and crayons. Democrats resumed questioning the legitimacy of presidential elections.

Trump entered office promising to “drain the swamp,” which, in practice, meant hiring half of it, firing a quarter, and leaving the rest to leak confidential information to cable news. He governed like someone live-tweeting a traffic accident he was also causing. Every 3 am post was an experiment to see how much chaos the bond market could absorb before breakfast.

Then came the Russia investigation—America’s performance-art piece about alleged collusion with ex-Commies. Half the city believed that the Kremlin had written Trump’s speeches; the other half believed that the deep state had orchestrated the whole thing to relive Watergate and get book deals. The only clear winners were white-shoe law firms that now had “Special Counsel” on speed dial.

The opposition rebranded itself as the “Resistance,” though having the media, universities, Hollywood, Silicon Valley, and the federal bureaucracy on its side didn’t make much of a case for heroism. Women’s marches filled the city with pink hats, while cable news operated on the premise that every Trump tweet was a constitutional crisis—even as the Mueller Report landed like overcooked lasagna at Cafe Milano.

The Right discovered it liked having a brawler in the White House. Years of media bias, bureaucratic overreach, and cultural condescension had primed GOP voters for someone who would punch back. Trump supporters flocked to the Trump International Hotel, which served as a kind of embassy for Red America.

In 2018, Trump seated a Supreme Court justice, Brett Kavanaugh, after confirmation hearings that began like a poorly conceived political drama and ended with protesters in Handmaid’s Tale costumes. He would appoint two more justices who’d also read The Federalist Papers. Combined with tax reform, deregulation, and a deep bench of originalist judges, the Court picks were his most durable achievements. My book on the politics of judicial nominations, Supreme Disorder, came out four days after Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg died. The timing was morbidly auspicious, but my publisher claims he has an alibi.

At home, our first child arrived just in time for that crazy 2016 election. Our second commemorated the 2018 midterms. Nothing sharpens your view of public policy like strapping toddlers into car seats as you listen to a podcast about the Administrative Procedure Act. And the boys’ earliest memories of civic life involve adults shouting about collusion, impeachment—something about a phone call to the Ukrainian president and a possible Netflix pitch—and whether the president had been too harsh to a CNN correspondent.

Then came 2020.

Read the whole thing.

AMERICA’S NEWSPAPER OF RECORD:

I wish it were that easy:

Further thoughts from Ace: Megyn Kelly, The Chameleon Princess of Pop Politics.

TRUMP TO RUPTURING IRAN: Here It Comes!

Pezeshkian claimed that the “Guardian Council,” a triumvirate which includes the president and ostensibly holds power until a new Supreme Leader is chosen, had told the IRGC to stop firing at other countries unless they attacked first. The IRGC then completely ignored Pezeshkian’s orders:

Huge explosions were heard across Iran as Israel carried out a “broad-scale wave of strikes” using 80 fighter jets targeting Tehran and Isfahan, where key nuclear facilities are located, as the war entered its eighth day. On the other hand, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Bahrain and the UAE saw fresh drone and missile attacks on Saturday, even as Iran’s president apologised to the Gulf nations for the strikes.

Translation: The Islamic Republic has ceased to be. Iran is now a flat-out military dictatorship. The IRGC no longer takes orders from the theocratic government that it supposedly serves. They have used this crisis to seize power, and they will not hand it back. Pezeshkian is now an irrelevant figure, as is Larijani and anyone else outside the armed services of Iran.

The death of the Ayatollah(s) is making the Economist, and other publications on the left quite sad:

BRYAN CALLEN: Hollywood Did Stunning 180 on Pronouns. Veteran comic, Hangover alum shares fallout from Trump support, Biden critique.

Later, Callen shared why the cultural winds are shifting in Tinsel Town. Turns out a movie or TV show set is no place for a prima donna or someone who demands special treatment – think unconventional pronouns.

“Anybody who creates any of that kind of energy, it becomes problematic,” Callen explained. “When Hollywood hired all those DEI officers, movies started losing money.”

And, as a result, many were “quietly fired,” he said. That was then, albeit a few short years ago. The professional climate today is different, he explained.

“Now, the minute you apply for a job in Hollywood … if you wanna work on the set, if you put your pronouns down [on your resume], you ain’t getting the job. Nobody wants to deal with that maintenance,” he said. “I’ve been in those rooms [where decisions are made]. ‘Nope, I don’t wanna do any of that pronoun stuff.’”

“You can’t afford to have somebody sue or make a scene,” he added. “You’re dealing with too much money. You got 23 days to shoot this thing … nobody wants that [drama].”

But it sounds like plenty of pronoun people are still writing the material that’s filmed on those sets, according to veteran producer Jim Agnew, who may have just, as Roger Simon would say, blacklisted himself: “I’ve been in the WJ like 15 years. And let’s just say, because I have nothing in common with 99% of the people in the Writers Guild, let’s just say that in the last five or six years it looks like Starfleet Academy in real life. No, I’m not kidding. I’m not kidding. I mean, listen, I don’t think they can throw me out for making fun of other members and I’m too old to be hired on a TV show from some young show-writer. So, yeah, it looks like, you know, blue hair, lots of covid masks, beta males. Yeah. Pronouns everywhere. It’s literally is reflective of like 2,000 people who look like they’re in Starfleet Academy.”

TUCKER CARLSON’S ABSURD CHABAD CONSPIRACY:

When you tell your millions of followers that a shadowy Jewish organization is secretly orchestrating a villainous plot to drag the United States into war and overthrow a historic Muslim religious site, you are not merely speculating. You are not merely “asking questions.” You are placing a target on the backs of ordinary people whose only crime is hosting Shabbat dinners, visiting the sick, or making sure a stranded traveler can find a place to pray.

Chabad isn’t only on college campuses or in Jewish population centers like New York or California. It also operates in some of the most remote places on earth: Tanzania, Ghana, Cambodia, Thailand, Brazil, China. Anywhere they could possibly support Jewish life, they have a presence.

In many cases, a Chabad House is the only Jewish institution in an entire region, serving tourists, students, or travelers. In other words: It is a safe haven.

“Can you imagine being a tiny minority and being able to travel anywhere in the world knowing you can find a Shabbat meal or a place to pray? ” wrote Daniella Greenbaum Davis on X. “That’s Chabad.”

And indeed, that’s exactly how most Jews experience it. But for the Chabad families themselves, the flip side is stark. Their mandate, after all, is to design their homes to be accessible and welcoming in some of the most isolated—and dangerous—places on Earth.

Why, it’s as if: Tucker Has Become Tehran’s Most Effective English-Language Propagandist.

THE CORBYNIZATION OF THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY CONTINUES APACE: Zohran Mamdani’s wife liked social media posts celebrating Oct. 7 attacks.

UPDATE: “The ethno narcissistic tableau she presents and her centering of herself in her art are markers of the terminal cultural exhaustion that afflicts these people rather than any authentic ideological zeal (which would be much more interesting). Invoking the latter is actually a form of undue flattery and implies there’s more there than there actually is.”

Meanwhile, Ben “Hamas” Rhodes, who famously said, “The average reporter we talk to is 27 years old, and…They literally know nothing,” is angry that CBS is doing journalism:

No wonder Rhodes is so furious about this story being covered:

JOSEPH CAMPBELL: Will the 2026 midterms be a ‘blue wave?’ Here’s what to watch as polling ramps up.

One of the safe wagers about this year’s midterm elections is that polling of competitive congressional races will be frequent and abundant — and maybe even misleading. After all, the “red wave” of sweeping Republican victories anticipated four years ago turned out to be a very modest “red trickle.”

While Democrats are favored to win control of the House of Representatives this year, it may be months before clarity emerges about how November’s congressional elections will turn out. Even so, it is none too early to be aware of some realities about election surveys this year, especially as polling already has been conspicuous in unfolding U.S. Senate races in Maine, Michigan, New Hampshire and Georgia.

Pollsters in 2026 are coming off back-to-back disappointments. In 2024, polls overall understated Republican Donald Trump’s support for the third time in as many presidential elections, despite modifications to survey techniques that sought to avoid such an outcome. In 2025, polls collectively underestimated support for victorious Democrats in gubernatorial campaigns in New Jersey and Virginia — the year’s two most prominent statewide races.

Of course, past results are no sure indicator of future polling performance, as the recent experience of AtlasIntel makes clear.

Read the whole thing.