Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Who are the angriest politicians on Twitter?

Ronna McDaniel

Republican National Committee Chairman is the angriest political figure on Twitter, according to one study.

Allen J. Schaben/Los Angeles Times via Getty Images

Are Republicans angrier than Democrats? Such a broad question cannot be answered at this time, but when it comes to Twitter the angriest Republicans are angrier than the angriest Democrats, according to a new study.

Preply, an online tool for learning languages, studied the Twitter accounts of the 85 political figures with the most followers to determine who is the angriest tweeter. And the “winner” is ... Republican National Committee Chairman Ronna McDaniel.


More than half (52.3 percent) of McDaniel’s September tweets were deemed to be angry by Preply’s machine learning model.

Of the 25 politicians who issue angriest tweets the most often, 19 are Republicans (including the top 15) and five are Democrats. The remaining person is former Rep. Tulsi Gabbard, who ran for the Democratic nomination for president in 2020 but recently became an independent. Rounding out the top five are four other Republican allies of former President Donald Trump: Rep. Louie Gohmert of Texas, Rep. Marjorie Taylor Green of Georgia, Rep. Matt Gaetz of Florida and Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas.

The highest ranked Democrat is Rep. Eric Swalwell of California, a vocal opponent of Trump. He placed 16th in September, with 44.3 percent of his tweets tagged as angry.

In addition to measuring who tweeted angry messages the most often, Preply also measured the intensity of that anger. The same five Republicans landed in the top five on that list as well. While McDaniel again had the highest score, the order of the five was shuffled.

All of this anger comes as the threat of violence against politicians is on the rise. Just days ago, Paul Pelosi, the husband of Speaker Nancy Pelosi, was attacked in their San Francisco home by a man searching for the speaker. That man, Paul DePape, has been linked to far-right conspiracy theories, including unfounded claims about the 2020 election.

The same day as that attack, federal security agencies issued a warning about potential threats against political candidates.

“Angry tweets only make the difficult work of engaging the real differences in our country more challenging. Neither side can wish the other away,” said Keith Allred, executive director of the National Institute for Civil Discourse. “The only option is to address our differences constructively and on the merits.”

The Preply study also examined the difference in tone between politicians' official Twitter accounts and their personal handles. Many were noticeably angrier in their personal accounts.

While Rep. Steve Scalise, the second-ranking Republican in the House of Representatives had the biggest difference between his official and personal “anger” scores, he was followed immediately by three of the most outspoken House Democrats: Rashida Tlaib, Ilhan Omar and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.

Read the full report.


Read More

The U.S. Pentagon.

Buried in the 2027 NDAA, Section 224 could fundamentally reshape U.S.-Israel defense ties. Is Congress creating an irreversible military partnership?

Getty Images, Westend61

America Should Stay Single

As we wait to see what comes of ceasefire negotiations between the United States and Iran, the House just released its 2027 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA). Buried within it lies Section 224, titled the “United States-Israel Defense Technology Cooperation Initiative,” a provision representing what would be a radical departure from how we work with even our strongest allies, turning America’s relationship with a close collaborator into a permanent military-industrial integration. The U.S. has worked with NATO partners on co-production and shared supply chains in the past, but never like this. Many are calling it a merger. We should all be calling it off.

Section 224 could inextricably link the fate of our country’s defense to another’s. The Secretary of Defense would be directed to designate an executive agent to fuse ventures with Israel so significantly that it would touch almost every area of defense tech: AI, autonomous systems, energy, cyber, biotech, and beyond. It also proposes “network” and “data fusion,” which means, as the director of the Democratizing Foreign Policy program at the Quincy Institute warned, “the U.S. military’s data could soon be the Israeli military’s data.America First may soon sound more like a sarcastic punchline than a platform.

Keep ReadingShow less
AI Could Save Thousands—So Why Is Healthcare Still Hitting the Brakes?

Discover how generative AI in healthcare could reduce misdiagnoses, improve chronic disease management, and save hundreds of thousands of lives—if policymakers accelerate adoption instead of waiting for risk-free perfection.

Getty Images / Pakorn Supajitsoontorn

AI Could Save Thousands—So Why Is Healthcare Still Hitting the Brakes?

Imagine that the only way Americans traveled was on foot or on horseback. And assume that 100,000 people died each year because they couldn’t reach a hospital in time or firefighters arrived too late.

Suddenly, they learned that thanks to a technological breakthrough, cars and trucks will become widely available within three years.

Keep ReadingShow less
This 3D rendered image shows a central AI processing chip sitting atop a glowing blue printed circuit board.

Can AI profit-sharing help workers? Examining public wealth funds, AI taxes, economic transition policies, and the future of work.

Jason marz / Getty Images

There’s No Easy Path Through the AI Transition

“Trending” policy ideas tend to garner attention for all the wrong reasons: they seem like silver bullet solutions that will save us from taking on much harder reforms. Proposals to share profits from leading AI companies with the public are the latest example. It’s the rare policy scheme that seems to have united President Donald Trump, Senator Bernie Sanders, and CEOs at the leading AI labs. While the proposals for AI profit sharing vary in their precise details, a quick review of their likely outcomes should quickly deflate the popular excitement that has formed in response to calls for new taxes, public wealth funds, and the like. It’s important to reveal such limitations so that the AI policy discourse can move on to mechanisms more likely to address the real concerns of the American people.

In our first hypothetical world, the two leading AI labs—Anthropic and OpenAI—give away 3% of their equity. That’s not nothing! Based on current figures, such a contribution could kickstart a public wealth fund of about $55 billion. Let’s then imagine that fund earns 10% a year (a big “if” but let’s run with it). Per The Economist, this AI would reach a staggering $140 billion within ten years. How much would that benefit Americans? If annual payouts were 4% — what the publication reports is a proper amount to keep the fund going and growing — Americans would have an extra $20 in their pocket.

Keep ReadingShow less
For Imre Huss, Fixing Democracy Starts With Talking to a Stranger
a couple of people sitting at a table with cups of coffee

For Imre Huss, Fixing Democracy Starts With Talking to a Stranger

The Democracy Architects Council, presented by The Bridge Alliance Education Fund and Civics Unplugged, offers a paid, one-year fellowship for eight fellows ages 18 to 28, each selected for their work across a distinct sector of democratic life.

The youngest member of the Democracy Architects Council is building AI-powered civic tech, but he says the real work of democracy still happens face to face.

Keep ReadingShow less