Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Presidential field spends more on Facebook attacking dark money than on any other topic

Presidential field spends more on Facebook attacking dark money than on any other topic

Sen. Amy Klobuchar has spent more than $432,000 on Facebook ads emphasizing her promise to "get dark money out of politics."

Justin Sullivan/Getty Images

In speeches and the first debates, the Democratic presidential candidates haven't put much emphasis on their plans for making democracy work better. On Facebook, it's a slightly different story: Collectively, they've been spending more to attack dark money than to promote any other policy position.

In the 14 weeks ending July 6, the aspirants spent a combined $879,000 on ads across the social media platform promising to change campaign finance rules so that nonprofit groups engaged in political advocacy are required to disclose the identities of the donors. That easily eclipsed the second biggest chunk of online issue spending: $721,000 on their economic policy platforms.

To be sure, spending to lambaste dark money was No. 1 because of just one candidate's investment: Sen. Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota spent more than $432,000 — almost more than all the others, combined — emphasizing her stump speech line promising to "get dark money out of politics" by pushing a constitutional amendment to overturn the Supreme Court's Citizens Unitedruling, which declared that minimally regulated spending by corporations, nonprofits and unions is within their free speech rights.


The only Democratic candidate to allocate more on a single issue was Gov. Jay Inslee of Washington, who spent $472,200 to talk about his aggressive plans to tackle climate change — the issue on which he's banked his longshot candidacy.

Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter

Bully Pulpit Interactive, a communications firm, pulled together the data from the Facebook Ad Library Report, which the tech giant introduced to create more transparency around advertisements related to social issues, elections and politics.

As the top Democrat on the Rules and Administration Committee, Klobuchar has also been the party's prime sponsor of the bill, dubbed the Honest Ads Act, that would mandate disclosure of those paying for online political ads.

She also accounted for more than half of the $16,000 spent by the candidates on voting rights — with most of her ads posted about the same time she helped introduce the Senate companion bill to the House-passed political process overhaul HR 1.

Read More

Trump to the Nation: "We're Just Getting Started"

U.S. President Donald Trump speaks to a joint session of Congress at the U.S. Capitol on March 04, 2025 in Washington, DC. President Trump is speaking about the early achievements of his presidency and his upcoming legislative agenda.

(Photo by Mandel Ngan-Pool/Getty Images)

Trump to the Nation: "We're Just Getting Started"

On Tuesday, President Donald Trump addressed a joint session of Congress, emphasizing that his administration is “just getting started” in the wake of a contentious beginning to his second term. Significant themes, including substantial cuts to the federal workforce, shifts in traditional American alliances, and the impact of an escalating trade war on markets, characterized his address.

In his speech, Trump highlighted his actions over the past six weeks, claiming to have signed nearly 100 executive orders and taken over 400 executive actions to restore “common sense, safety, optimism, and wealth” across the country. He articulated that the electorate entrusted him with the leadership role and stressed that he was fulfilling that mandate.

Keep ReadingShow less
Trump’s Tariffs: a burden on workers, a boon for the wealthy

An illustration of a deconstructed dollar bill.

Getty Images, rob dobi

Trump’s Tariffs: a burden on workers, a boon for the wealthy

Earlier this year, President Trump imposed tariffs on Canada, Mexico, and China, claiming they would fix trade imbalances and protect jobs. However, instead of helping American workers, these tariffs act as hidden taxes; they drive up costs and feed inflation. While average Americans bear the brunt of higher prices and lost jobs, the wealthy are insulated from the worst effects.

Many economists assert that tariffs are stealth taxes, that is, the burden is not distributed equally—while corporations may adjust by diversifying suppliers or passing costs along, working households cannot escape higher prices on essential goods like groceries and electronics. Analysts estimate these tariffs could add $1,250 to the annual cost of living for the average American household—a substantial burden for families already struggling with inflation. Additionally, according to the well-regarded Tax Foundation, the tariffs are projected to reduce GDP by 0.5% and result in the loss of approximately 292,000 jobs.

Keep ReadingShow less
Veterans diagnosed with asbestos-related diseases should apply for compensation

An individual applying for a program online.

Getty Images, Inti St Clair

Veterans diagnosed with asbestos-related diseases should apply for compensation

In 1922, the U.S. Navy identified asbestos as the most efficient material for shipbuilding insulation and equipment production due to its heat resistance and durability. The naturally occurring asbestos mineral was also the most abundant and cost-effective material on the market. During the difficult WWII years, asbestos became critical to the U.S. Military, especially for the U.S. Navy and the U.S. Air Force: shipping and shipbuilding were essential, and parts of the military aircraft and incendiary bombs also contained asbestos.

Even as demand exceeded supply, in 1942, a presidential order banned the use of asbestos for non-military purposes until 1945. The application of asbestos-based material by the Military continued to increase until the 1970s when its carcinogenic nature came to light, and the use of asbestos started to be regulated but not banned.

Keep ReadingShow less
S.E. Cupp: Where is the Democratic Party’s Ronald Reagan?

President Joe Biden and President-elect Donald Trump arrive for the inauguration ceremony in the U.S. Capitol rotunda in Washington, D.C., on Jan. 20, 2025.

Getty Images/TCA, Melina Mara/POOL/AFP

S.E. Cupp: Where is the Democratic Party’s Ronald Reagan?

With all the attention deservedly on President Trump and what he intends to do with his defiant return to the White House, there’s a more than good chance we’ll spend the next four years consumed once again by all things Trump.

There’s already been a dizzying amount: a giant raft of executive orders; attacks on a constitutional amendment; his threats to invade sovereign nations; a seeming Nazi salute from one of his biggest surrogates; his sweeping Jan. 6 pardons; his beef with a bishop; his TikTok flip-flop; his billion-dollar meme coin controversy; scathing new allegations against one of his Cabinet picks; unilaterally renaming a body of water; a federal crackdown on DEI; promises of immigration raids across major cities. All this in just the first three days of Trump’s second term.

Keep ReadingShow less