Politics

By Patricia Zengerle

WASHINGTON, April 10 (Reuters) – President Donald Trump’s profanity-laced threats to wipe out Iran’s civilization have led some Democrats to discuss attempting to remove him from office by using the 25th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

Such an effort would be an uphill struggle, since doing so would require the support of Trump’s fellow Republicans, who control both chambers of Congress. Despite his falling overall public approval, some 82% of Republicans are happy with his presidency.

Trying to remove him from office could also hold political peril for Democrats – who twice tried and failed to remove Trump from office by impeaching him during his first term.

Here is a look at the amendment and the issues:

WHAT IS THE 25TH AMENDMENT?

The 25th Amendment was ratified in 1967. It was introduced after the assassination of President John F. Kennedy in 1963 and is intended to clarify the process of presidential succession, ensuring that the United States always has a functioning president and vice president.

The Constitution’s original presidential succession clause did not address vice presidential vacancies. Between President George Washington’s first term in 1789 and 1967, the vice presidency was vacant for more than 37 years cumulatively because of death, resignation, or succession to the presidency, according to the Congressional Research Service. 

HAS THE 25TH AMENDMENT EVER BEEN INVOKED?

Presidents have invoked Section 3 of the amendment – dealing with circumstances in which the president is unable to discharge their responsibilities – when they knew they would be incapacitated due to medical procedures, such as in 2021, when then-President Joe Biden underwent a colonoscopy.

But Section 4, covering the involuntary removal of a president, has never been invoked. Section 4 allows the vice president and a majority of the president’s cabinet, or, alternatively, the vice president and a majority of another unspecified body designated by Congress, to declare a president unable to discharge the powers and duties of their office.

However, if the president contests that decision, Congress must assemble to decide the issue within 48 hours and two-thirds majorities of both the Senate and House of Representatives must agree that the president is incapable. If not, the president resumes their duties.

HAS THIS BEEN TRIED BEFORE?

Some Democrats, including Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer of New York and then-House Speaker Nancy Pelosi of California, called for then-Vice President Mike Pence to invoke the 25th Amendment after Trump supporters stormed the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021.

But the calls came to nothing. Trump also was impeached twice by the Democratic-majority House, over charges he improperly withheld aid to Ukraine and over the Capitol riot, but there were too few Republican senators willing to back the charges to muster the two-thirds majority necessary to convict him either time.

Trump was elected to a second term in November 2024, winning 312 Electoral College votes to 226 for Biden’s vice president, Kamala Harris. 

Scott Anderson, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution, said an attempt to use the 25th Amendment would fail without a massive Republican defection, as it would need the approval of two-thirds majorities in both the House and Senate.

“It’s a political no-go,” he said.

Trump’s Republicans hold slim majorities in both the Senate and House.

WHAT IS THE POLITICAL RISK?

House Democrats planned a members-only briefing on Friday on “Trump administration accountability” and the 25th Amendment.

But as they fight for control of the House and Senate in November’s midterms, Democratic lawmakers have been trying to focus on policy – such as promoting job growth, fighting inflation and broadening the availability of childcare – rather than presenting themselves mostly as the resistance to Trump.

“We are in the minority. So bringing forward impeachment right now, while he is guilty of a litany of high crimes and misdemeanors, I don’t think is the best use of our time,” Democratic Representative Madeleine Dean of Pennsylvania told a news conference on Thursday.

Republican House Speaker Mike Johnson, a close Trump ally, criticized Democrats over the issue in a statement on Friday. “Congressional Democrats have no message, no vision, and no leadership, and they are offering nothing to the American people except an irrational hatred of President Donald Trump,” Johnson said.

(Reporting by Patricia Zengerle; editing by Michael Learmonth and Rosalba O’Brien)

source

NEW YORK (AP) — In his first 100 days in office, New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani has governed with a star power unusual in politics.

Crowds of supporters show up to his news conferences. Basic municipal services have been infused with newfound excitement. Celebrities help him promote his agenda.

In the process, he’s been able to notch a few notable early wins. And he’s reached a detente, at least for now, with President Donald Trump, a mercurial leader with an affinity for celebrities.

But as Mamdani, a Democrat, marks an early milestone in his mayoralty, it remains to be seen whether he’ll be able to leverage his fame into achieving the progressive policy proposals that propelled him to office.

Though he still has staunch critics, many of whom still view his past criticisms of the police department and Israel as major problems, Mamdani has been able to ease concerns among at least some skeptics.

“It’s early but so far, so good,” said Jay Jacobs, chair of the state’s Democratic Party, who made waves for not endorsing Mamdani during the election. “We may not agree on everything philosophically, but he is getting the job done.”

As the mayor approached his 100th day — long a benchmark for judging an administration’s opening vision — his team has moved to highlight the administration’s commitment to the everyday responsibilities of the job.

While much of those duties are typical for his local office — picking up trash, plowing snow and filling potholes — the 34-year-old mayor has leaned on his knack for viral content creation to drive interest and awareness of government programs.

To hype up his child care program for 2-year-olds, Mamdani recruited Cardi B to help judge a jingle contest that will determine the initiative’s theme song. His slick social media videos helped recruit thousands of new snow shovelers as a storm bore down on the city. A public service announcement he made brought more than 50,000 new subscribers to the city’s emergency alert system in a single week.

A few weeks ago, alongside Natasha Cloud of the New York Liberty, Mamdani announced a bracket-style competition where people could vote on small projects for him to come and personally fix on his 100th day.

On Friday, Mamdani selected a winner — a garbage-filled lot in the Bronx — and helped pick up some of the junk with a sanitation crew, following a celebratory event that featured an overflowing trash can mascot and a cheerleading squad.

“I think every single day it’s an opportunity to meet the needs of New Yorkers,” he said. “And what we’ve seen over the course of this 100 days is that New York City wants to see a city government that is able to meet the biggest needs and the smallest needs.”

The celebrity status, though, can also prompt backlash. During a bitter cold snap, his surprise appearance on “The Tonight Show” with Jimmy Fallon was seen by some as insensitive at a moment when the death toll of homeless New Yorkers was rapidly rising.

“Too much styling and profiling,” said Curtis Sliwa, a Republican who ran against Mamdani during last year’s election, noting longstanding problems with street homelessness, public housing and infrastructure.

Still, Sliwa, who hammered Mamdani during the campaign but recently appeared in a comedy skit with the mayor during the City Hall press corps’ annual roast, appeared to give Mamdani some credit, even if it came with a caveat.

“We just had Eric Adams, swagger man who’d party to the break of dawn, and now we have a guy who seems like he’s got a normal working schedule,” said Sliwa, referencing the city’s previous mayor. “So having Zohran as the alternative, I think for a lot of people even if they disagree with him, there’s some stability.”

On the night of Mamdani’s election party, hundreds packed the streets, some spontaneously, waiting for a glimpse of the mayor-elect leaving the venue. Departing campaign aides were cheered, by name, well after midnight. One attendee likened the street party to Beatlemania.

“I feel like I’m at a presidential inauguration,” said Medhavie Agnihotri, a 25-year-old tech consultant. “This is the first time in a while I’ve felt this hope.”

His star power has not appeared to wane since then.

Outside City Hall, New Yorkers and tourists frequently stop for selfies, peering through the iron gates in search of the mayor.

This week, on the mayor’s 97th day in office, a crowd gathered in the lobby of the busy Bellevue hospital in Manhattan to watch as Mamdani announced the city would start transferring Rikers Island jail detainees with serious medical illnesses to a specialized unit at the hospital.

He entered to woos and applause from the onlookers, as many held up cellphones to record videos of the mayor. Dozens more watched along from a set of elevated walkways.

One man, Ricardo Granados, a 67-year-old retiree, was on his way to take his son to a medical appointment but stopped to see what all the hubbub was about just before the news conference started. He appeared delighted to learn the mayor was going to show up, saying he met Mamdani previously when Mamdani was campaigning in his neighborhood.

“I’m extremely fond of him. I think he’s going to make a real difference,” Granados said. “He wants to find out who needs what and he wants to help.”

___

AP writer Jake Offenhartz contributed to this story

source

WASHINGTON, April 10 (Reuters) – Two Democratic U.S. senators have called on the federal commodities markets watchdog to investigate lucrative recent trading activity on oil markets since March 23 that closely coincided with White House moves in the Iran war, adding to pressure from opposition party members on possible insider trading, according to a letter released Friday.

* The letters from Senator Elizabeth Warren, the topDemocrat on the Senate Banking Committee, and Senator SheldonWhitehouse, cited reporting by Reuters and other news outlets onunusually large commodity and equities trades that closelypreceded major White House decisions on Iran, Venezuela andtariff impositions, which experts said was suspicious. * Representatives for the U.S. Commodity Futures TradingCommission did not immediately respond to a request for commentbut the agency’s new enforcement director said last month thatpolicing insider trading would be a priority. * The White House has denied wrongdoing and said Thursday ithad warned staff against leveraging inside information. * “This is now a recurring concern during the Trumpadministration,” the letter, dated Thursday, said, calling onthe CFTC to furnish answers to series of questions aboutinvestigative steps and market surveillance. * The letter follows last week’s query from DemocraticSenators Mark Warner and Adam Schiff to the Securities andExchange Commission and Defense Department Inspector General,raising similar questions.

(Reporting by Douglas Gillison in Washington; Editing by Chizu Nomiyama )

source

By Patricia Zengerle and Richard Cowan

WASHINGTON, April 9 (Reuters) – U.S. House of Representatives Republicans on Thursday blocked a Democratic effort to end U.S. attacks on Iran, as Donald Trump’s party continued to prevent efforts to rein in the Republican president’s war powers.

Representative Chris Smith, a New Jersey Republican, presided over an abbreviated “pro forma” House session, ending it before a group of Democrats could seek to pass by unanimous consent the resolution, which would have called for an end to the U.S. military operation.

While Thursday’s action was largely symbolic, top Democrats in the House and Senate have vowed to force war powers votes again when they return from recess next week.

Congressional Democrats have tried and repeatedly failed in recent months to pass war powers resolutions to force Trump to obtain lawmakers’ authorization before launching military operations, in both Venezuela and Iran.

Trump’s threat early this week that “a whole civilization will die” intensified concern among Democrats, dozens of whom called for Trump’s removal from office. The 1949 Geneva Conventions on humanitarian conduct in war prohibit attacks on sites considered essential for ‌civilians.

“Threatening genocide is not a negotiating tactic,” Representative Sara Jacobs, a California Democrat, told a news conference outside the Capitol after the pro forma session, held because Congress is out of Washington for the two-week Easter recess.

Trump announced that he had agreed to a ceasefire in the U.S.-Israel war on Iran on Tuesday, less than two hours before his deadline for Tehran to reopen the blockaded Strait of Hormuz or face devastating attacks on its civilian infrastructure.

The White House says Trump’s actions are legal and within his rights as commander-in-chief to protect the U.S. by ordering limited military operations. 

Iran says its nuclear program is peaceful. The Trump administration has sought to portray the war as a decisive victory, although the top U.S. general said U.S. troops stood ready to resume fighting. 

Trump’s fellow Republicans hold slim majorities in both the Senate and House, and have almost unanimously backed all of his policies. 

Although the U.S. Constitution says that Congress, not the president, can declare war, that restriction does not apply for short-term operations or if the country faces an immediate threat.

A RETURN TO IMPEACHMENT?

Almost since the beginning of Trump’s second term on January 20, 2025, Democrats have lashed out as they accused him of usurping Congress’ constitutional powers over federal spending and setting tariffs on foreign imports while testing limits on his military operations. Trump has also threatened to take over Greenland and end U.S. membership in NATO.

But one line nearly all Democrats in Congress refused to cross — until now — was even uttering the word “impeachment” in regard to Trump.

During Trump’s first presidency, representatives twice impeached him, only to see Senate Republicans acquit him of abusing his powers and other charges.

Now, Democrats are openly raising the question of impeachment and encouraging use of the U.S. Constitution’s 25th Amendment to relieve Trump of his duties, at least temporarily.

Their fears of voter backlash for again trying to impeach Trump have diminished since he threatened to bomb Iran into the “Stone Age” and wipe out all of Iranian civilization.

Impeachment “is a constitutional provision to rein in an unscrupulous, thoughtless president,” Democratic Representative Madeleine Dean of Pennsylvania said at the press conference.

“There is literally a list of high crimes and misdemeanors that he has committed,” she said, referring to the conditions for impeachment that could be weighed if Democrats win control of the House in November’s elections.

THE AFFORDABILITY ‘CRISIS’

Democrats are attempting to link their efforts to rein in Trump on Iran to affordability, as disruptions in shipments of oil and natural gas have caused a run-up in U.S. gasoline prices and agricultural products such as fertilizers — on top of the long list of other high consumer prices.

“We’re spending millions of dollars on Patriot missiles to intercept drones that Iran launches from the back of a pickup truck and costs ten or $20,000, while at the same time in our home state of Virginia 33,000 Virginians have lost our health insurance, said Democratic Representative James Walkinshaw.

He was referring to Republicans blocking the renewal of an expired federal subsidy that lowered Americans’ “Obamacare” health insurance premiums.

(Reporting by Patricia Zengerle and Richard Cowan, editing by Deepa Babington, Michael Learmonth and Cynthia Osterman)

source

A federal judge on Thursday dismissed a lawsuit from the U.S. Department of Justice seeking Massachusetts’ state voter rolls, marking the latest setback in a wide-ranging effort by the Trump administration to collect detailed data on the nation’s voters.

The ruling from U.S. District Court Judge Leo Sorokin marks at least the fifth time a judge has rejected similar attempts by the Justice Department. Sorokin, an appointee of former President Barack Obama, said the U.S. attorney general’s office did not take the necessary steps required to access voter rolls, as outlined in federal law.

“Put simply, the statute requires a statement of why the Attorney General demands production of the requested records,” Sorokin wrote. That statement has to be factual, “not just a conceivable or possible basis.”

In an emailed response, the Justice Department said it “does not comment on ongoing litigation.”

It has said it’s seeking the voter data as part of an effort to ensure election security, but Democratic and Republican officials in several states have refused, saying the demand violates state and federal privacy laws. Some have raised concerns that federal officials will use the sensitive data for other purposes, such as searching for potential noncitizens.

During a hearing last month in Rhode Island, a DOJ attorney told a federal judge that the department was seeking unredacted voter roll information so it could be shared with the Department of Homeland Security to check citizenship status. DHS over the past year has beefed up the Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements, or SAVE, program, for just this purpose.

“Our intention is to run this against the DHS SAVE database,” DOJ attorney Eric Neff told U.S. District Judge Mary McElroy during a March 26 hearing challenging the federal government’s authority to access the voter data.

The Justice Department has sued at least 30 states and the District of Columbia seeking to force release of the data, which includes dates of birth, addresses, driver’s license numbers and partial Social Security numbers.

At least 12 states have either provided or promised to provide their detailed voter registration lists to the department, according to the Brennan Center: Alaska, Arkansas, Indiana, Louisiana, Mississippi, Nebraska, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas and Wyoming.

In the Massachusetts case, the the judge found that the Justice Department failed to follow the requirements for demanding the voter rolls set by a 1960 civil rights law.

That law, enacted as part of an effort to end racial discrimination in elections, says state voter records must be made available for inspection by the U.S. attorney general if the office includes a statement outlining why the information is being demanded and how it will be used.

The department’s letter demanding Massachusetts’ voter data made no reference to the Civil Rights Act and didn’t cite any concerns about the way Massachusetts complied with federal voting laws, the judge said. Most importantly, it didn’t include any factual basis for the demand, Sorokin wrote.

In court documents, the Justice Department said it was demanding the data to check for “Massachusetts’ possible lack of compliance” with federal voter registration list requirements. It also said the Civil Rights Act was designed to be an investigatory tool to identify federal election law violations and argued that the U.S. attorney general can’t be required to prove a violation before seeking evidence of one.

“These arguments miss the point,” Sorokin wrote.

Massachusetts Attorney General Andrea Joy Campbell called the ruling a decisive win for voters and the rule of law.

“The privacy of our voters is not up for negotiation, and I will continue to defend the integrity and security of our elections from the Trump Administration’s cruel and harmful agenda,” she said in a news release.

Four federal judges in other states have dismissed similar lawsuits from the Department of Justice.

A federal judge in Michigan found the laws cited by the Justice Department do not require the disclosure of the voter records sought by the federal government. A federal judge in California said the administration “may not unilaterally usurp the authority over elections,” which the Constitution gives to the states and Congress. A federal judge in Oregon said the federal government was not entitled to unredacted voter registration lists containing sensitive data.

A federal judge in Georgia dismissed a DOJ lawsuit because he found it had been filed in the wrong city. The federal government then refiled the lawsuit in the city specified by the judge; that case is ongoing.

The Justice Department has appealed the Oregon, California and Michigan dismissals.

___ Boone reported from Boise, Idaho. Associated Press writer Kimberlee Kruesi in Providence, Rhode Island, contributed to this report.

source

By David Shepardson

WASHINGTON, April 9 (Reuters) – The U.S. House of Representatives is set to vote next week on a sweeping aviation safety reform ​bill to address dozens of recommendations issued after a January 2025 collision ‌of an American Airlines regional jet and a U.S. Army Black Hawk helicopter that killed 67 people.

Two House committees on March 26 voted unanimously on the legislation to require installation of collision-prevention technologies on all ​military aircraft by 2031, except fighters, bombers and drones, and establish requirements for equipping collision-mitigation ⁠technologies for civilian airplanes and helicopters.

The legislation, which is expected to be considered under fast-track House rules that require two-thirds approval, also addresses deficiencies in the Federal Aviation ​Administration’s safety culture, enhances air traffic control training and procedures, and strengthens the safety of ​airspace around Reagan Washington National Airport, where the fatal collision occurred.

The bill includes a review of flight frequency at Reagan – which has the nation’s single busiest runway – to determine if it can handle current ​traffic.

The House ​failed to pass a ⁠separate aviation bill in February after the Pentagon withdrew its support and despite pleas from lawmakers and relatives of those killed ​in the American Airlines collision, the worst U.S. aviation disaster since ​2001.

The ROTOR ⁠Act passed the Senate unanimously in December but needed a two-thirds majority in the House to ⁠pass under fast-track rules and ​it fell one vote short.

If the House passes ​the ALERT Act, the House and Senate would likely meet to work out differences between the two bills ​before any measure could become law.

National Transportation Safety Board ​Chair Jennifer Homendy said the ALERT bill addresses its 50 recommendations proposed after the 2025 mid-air collision and said any final legislation must also do so. “Anything less than that would be counter to aviation safety and dishonor the lives of 67 people who died on January 29, 2025, and their families who have fought tirelessly for safety change,” Homendy told Reuters.

(Reporting by David Shepardson; Editing by Chris Reese, Rod Nickel)

source

WASHINGTON, April 9 (Reuters) – The U.S. Senate Banking Committee is no longer planning to hold a confirmation hearing for Kevin Warsh, U.S. President Donald Trump’s pick to run the Federal Reserve, next week, Punchbowl News reported on Thursday, citing two sources familiar with planning.

As of late Thursday, the panel had not yet set or announced a hearing date, which under its rules requires a five-day advance notice. 

Hearings are almost exclusively held Tuesdays through Thursdays, making April 21 likely the earliest potential date for a Warsh nomination hearing.

The delay narrows the window for full Senate confirmation before current Fed Chair Jerome Powell’s leadership term ends on May 15. 

Powell has said that should Warsh not yet be confirmed by then he would continue to serve as chair “pro tem.” 

The committee did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Punchbowl reported on March 29 that the hearing would be next week.

(Reporting by Jasper Ward in Washington; Editing by Daphne Psaledakis and Cynthia Osterman)

source

PHOENIX (AP) — Renewable energy advocates in Arizona made gains against a business-backed slate in a fight over how the nation’s largest public power utility will meet fast-rising electricity demand in a data center hot spot.

However, election results released by the Phoenix-area Salt River Project mean that the rival slates will be forced into compromises over potential questions of whether to increase rates and whether to favor natural gas or renewable energy technologies to meet power demand.

The election, which wrapped up Tuesday, saw a surge of interest from voters amid rising household electricity prices and pushback against massive data centers in the battleground state and elsewhere, as national politics gives a jolt to once-low-profile elections for control over utilities.

It also drew the attention of Turning Point Action — better known for its role mobilizing young conservatives behind President Donald Trump — which attacked the renewable energy advocates as “radical environmentalists.”

The slate of clean energy advocates picked up two seats on the 14-member utility board, giving them an 8-to-6 majority in votes that come before the board. However, incumbents backed by construction firms and data center developers held on to the offices of president and vice president, keeping their agenda-setting power over what votes are presented to the board.

“We’re a little disappointed by not winning president and vice president, but now we have a majority, so we’re going to have to do a little negotiating,” said Randy Miller, a renewable energy advocate on the board.

The utility projects that it needs to double its power capacity within a decade and has been under pressure to reduce its reliance on fossil fuels like coal and natural gas that emit planet-warming greenhouse gases.

Backers of the incumbents for president and vice president warn of a risk of tight energy supplies and blackouts without relying, at least in part, on natural gas-fueled power plants.

The slate running as the “clean energy” team said the current majority is too eager to hook up to natural gas, raise rates and embrace data centers. Members of the slate have voted in the past against major natural gas projects being undertaken by the Salt River Project, as well as a rate increase last year.

source

WASHINGTON, April 9 (Reuters) – First lady Melania Trump, in a rare White House address to the nation on Thursday, denied any relation to the late convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, the subject of long-running conspiracy theories that have become a persistent political problem for President Donald Trump.

What follows is the full text of her remarks:

Good afternoon. 

The lies linking me with the disgraceful Jeffrey Epstein need to end today.

The individuals lying about me are devoid of ethical standards, humility and respect.

I do not object to their ignorance, but rather, I reject their mean-spirited attempts to defame my reputation.

I never been friends with Epstein.

Donald and I were invited to the same parties as Epstein from time to time, since overlapping in social circles is common in New York City and Palm Beach.

To be clear, I never had a relationship with Epstein or his accomplice Maxwell.

My email reply to Maxwell cannot be categorized as anything more than casual correspondence.

My polite reply to her email doesn’t amount to anything more than a trivial note.

I am not Epstein’s victim.

Epstein did not introduce me to Donald Trump.

I met my husband by chance at a New York City party in 1998. This initial encounter with my husband is documented in a detail in my book Melania.

The first time I crossed paths with Epstein was in the year 2000 at an event Donald and I attended together.

At the time, I had never met Epstein and had no knowledge of his criminal undertakings.

Numerous fake images and statements about Epstein and me have been circulating on social media for years now.

Be cautious about what you believe.

These images and stories are completely false.

I’m not a witness or a named witness in connection with any of Epstein’s crimes. My name has never appeared in court documents, the depositions, victim statements or FBI in interviews surrounding the Epstein matter.

I have never had any knowledge of Epstein’s abuse of his victims.

I was never involved in any capacity. I was not a participant, was never on Epstein’s plane and never visited his private island.

I have never been legally accused or convicted of a crime in connection with Epstein, sex trafficking, abuse of minors and other repulsive behavior.

The false sneers about me from mean spirited and politically motivated individuals and entities looking to cause damage to my good name to gain financially and climb politically, must stop. 

My attorneys and I have fought these unfound and baseless lies with success, and will continue to maintain my sound reputation without hesitation.

To date, several individuals and companies have been legally obligated to publicly apologize and retract their lies about me, such as Daily Beast, James Carville and HarperCollins UK.

Now is the time for Congress to act.

Epstein was not alone.

Several prominent male executives resigned from their powerful positions after this matter became widely politicized. Of course, this doesn’t amount to guilt, but we still must work openly and transparently to uncover the truth.

I call on Congress to provide the women who have been victimized by Epstein with a public hearing specifically centered around the survivors.

Give these victims their opportunity to testify under oath in front of Congress with the power of sworn testimony.

Each and every woman should have her day to tell her story in public, if she wishes, and then her testimony should be permanently entered into the Congressional Record.

Then, and only then, we will have the truth. Thank you. 

(Reporting by Jasper Ward in Washington; editing by Scott Malone and Alistair Bell)

source

ANN ARBOR, Mich. (AP) — As students banged on desks and stomped their feet inside a packed lecture hall at the University of Michigan, someone decades older stood in the back, quietly taking in the scene.

Debbie Dingell, a longtime Democratic congresswoman, was there to watch progressive U.S. Senate candidate Abdul El-Sayed campaign with Hasan Piker, a popular yet controversial online streamer.

Dingell has often served as an early warning system for her party, cautioning that Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump was on track to win Michigan in 2016 and 2024. Now she was once again scoping out the shifting political landscape, and something caught her eye.

“Quite frankly, I haven’t seen that many people outside an event yet this year,” said Dingell, whose district includes Ann Arbor and who said her attendance wasn’t an endorsement.

A line of mostly young people stretched out the door and down the street, hundreds waiting in the cold evening air on Tuesday. Some had backpacks slung over their shoulders after coming from class, while others had traveled from afar.

Although they were there to see a progressive candidate, attendees didn’t fit neatly into any ideological box. Instead, they shared a common dissatisfaction with both major political parties. Their frustration was a reminder of the anger that has coursed through modern American politics and now appears to be simmering within a new generation ahead of the midterm elections that will determine control of Congress.

Liam Koenig was in third grade when Trump was first elected president — a moment that has shaped his generation’s understanding of politics.

“It’s just become increasingly more inflammatory,” he said.

Now a high school senior in Oakland County, a longtime political bellwether in Michigan, Koenig described an era of constant conflict and anxiety. The mood among his peers, he said, is often somber and frustrated.

“I think a lot of us have lost hope in, like, tangible change,” he said.

Younger adults are more likely than older Americans to have an unfavorable view of both the Republican and Democratic parties, according to AP-NORC polling from February.

Still, that frustration hasn’t led to disengagement for Koenig. He waited for hours to see El-Sayed. He described the campaign as different from what he’s used to seeing, something more like Zohran Mamdani’s successful run for mayor in New York City. He wanted that kind of energy in Michigan.

“You’re not going to get people out with business as usual,” Koenig said.

Karol Molina, an artist who recently moved from New York City, said she had been hunting for a candidate in Mamdani’s mold when she arrived in Michigan. She settled on El-Sayed, who is facing U.S. Rep. Haley Stevens and state Sen. Mallory McMorrow in the state’s primary.

“We want to be able to live and, like, afford life without constantly scraping by,” she said.

Molina was looking for a clean break with the past.

“I think the Democratic Party is losing because they’re not really listening to what the people really want,” she said. “They’re trying to keep a party that existed before Donald Trump. And that party doesn’t exist anymore.”

Ethan Schneider, a third-year student at the University of Michigan, described today’s politics as “a little unserious.”

“It’s difficult to remain positive or not be jaded at a young age,” said Schneider.

Schneider said he voted for Democrat Kamala Harris two years ago but, like many in line to see Piker and El-Sayed, was critical of her and her party.

“Hate them,” he said of Democrats. “They feel very complicit, in terms of all the issues going on now. If not complicit, they’re just doing nothing,”

Younger people are rejecting both parties at much higher rates than older generations, according to recent Gallup polling. More than half of Generation Z and Millennials identify as political independents, while a majority of older generations side with a party.

The Gallup polling found that this growing group of independents tends to be motivated by unhappiness with the party in power — a dynamic that could benefit Democrats this year but doesn’t promise lasting loyalty.

Jacob Abbott, an undergraduate student at the University of Michigan, said he feels that the Democratic Party has strayed toward “corporate interest politics.”

He dismissed concerns about El-Sayed’s decision to campaign with Piker. The 34-year-old streamer has 3.1 million followers on Twitch and 1.8 million on YouTube, and he’s said “Hamas is a thousand times better” than Israel, described some Orthodox Jews as “inbred” and claimed that “America deserved 9/11.”

For Abbott, the controversy underscores a broader vacuum in American politics — a lack of people who can command attention and speak to their frustrations, even if they’re flawed.

“So is Hasan perfect? Probably not,” Abbott said. “But he’s much better than the alternative the Democratic Party has had.”

Over decades in politics, Dingell has seen long lines and packed rooms before. She was trying to gauge whether there’s something more durable at the event with El-Sayed and Piker.

After all, progressive candidates have long generated excitement without winning electoral victories. El-Sayed himself finished a distant second in Michigan’s Democratic primary for governor in 2018. In addition, independent Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont, a leading face of the progressive movement, fell short in two Democratic presidential campaigns.

But some Democrats argue this moment may be different, pointing to recent victories by Mamdani in New York and Analilia Mejia, who won a crowded Democratic primary in a special U.S. House election in New Jersey.

“There should be a progressive running everywhere that one exists,” said Pennsylvania Rep. Summer Lee, who also appeared with El-Sayed.

“Every year, every race,” she added. “We might not be victorious, but every single time we have to call the question.”

Dingell said she’ll be looking to see what happens next.

“Is it something for the kids to do, or is it going to connect?” she said.

___

Associated Press writer Linley Sanders contributed to this report.

source