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

Who’s Responsible When AI Causes Harm?: Unpacking the Federal AI Liability Framework Debate
the letters are made up of different colors

Who’s Responsible When AI Causes Harm?: Unpacking the Federal AI Liability Framework Debate

This nonpartisan policy brief, written by an ACE fellow, is republished by The Fulcrum as part of our partnership with the Alliance for Civic Engagement and our NextGen initiative — elevating student voices, strengthening civic education, and helping readers better understand democracy and public policy.

Key takeaways

  • The U.S. has no national AI liability law. Instead, a patchwork of state laws has emerged which has resulted in legal protections being dependent on where an individual resides.
  • It’s often unclear who is legally responsible when AI causes harm. This gap leaves many people with no clear path to seek help.
  • In March 2026, the White House and Congress introduced major proposals to establish a federal standard, but there is significant disagreement about whether that standard should prioritize protecting innovation or protecting people harmed by AI systems.

Background: A Patchwork of State Laws

Without a national AI law, states have been filling in the gaps on their own. The result is an uneven landscape where a person’s legal protections depend entirely on which state they live in.

Keep ReadingShow less
Teenager admiring electronic hobby robot.

Explore how China is overtaking the U.S. in the global innovation race, from electric vehicles to advanced research, and why America’s fragmented science policy, talent loss, and weak industrial strategy threaten its technological leadership.

Getty Images, Willie B. Thomas

America’s Greatest Geopolitical Blind Spot

The global hierarchy of innovation is undergoing a structural shift that Washington is dangerously slow to acknowledge. For decades, the prevailing narrative in the United States was that China was merely the "world’s factory"—a nation capable of mass-producing Western designs but inherently lacking the creative spark to invent its own. This assumption has been shattered. Today, Beijing is no longer playing catch-up; in sectors ranging from electric vehicles and next-generation nuclear power to hypersonic missiles, China is setting the pace.

The central challenge is that China has mastered the entire innovation ecosystem, while the United States has allowed its own to fracture. Innovation is not just about a "eureka" moment in a laboratory; it is a relay race that begins with basic scientific research, moves through the training of specialized talent, and ends with the large-scale commercialization of "hard tech." China is currently winning every leg of that race.

Keep ReadingShow less
An illustration of a person standing alone on a platform and looking at speech bubbles.

A bold critique of modern democracy and rising authoritarian ideas, exploring how AI-powered swarm digital democracy could redefine participation and governance.

Getty Images, Andriy Onufriyenko

The Only Radical Move Forward: Swarm Digital Democracy

We are increasingly told that democracy has failed and that its time has passed. The evidence proffered is everywhere, we are told: Gridlock, captured institutions, performative elections, a public that senses, correctly, that its voice rarely translates into real power. Into this vacuum step dystopic movements like the Dark Enlightenment and harder strains of Right-wing populism, offering a stark diagnosis and an even starker cure: Abandon the illusion of popular rule and return to forms of authority that are decisive, hierarchical, and unapologetically exclusionary. They present themselves as bold, clear-eyed, rambunctious, alive, and willing to act where others hesitate. And all to save the world from itself.

But this framing depends on a sleight of hand: It assumes that what we have been living under is, in fact, democracy, and that its failures are the failures of democracy itself. That is the first mistake.

Keep ReadingShow less
Judge's Gavel Hammer as a Symbol of Law and Order with Processor CPU AI Chip.

Elon Musk’s xAI company is challenging AI regulations in Colorado after losing in California, arguing that limits on artificial intelligence violate free speech. As Connecticut enforces its own AI law, this case could shape the future of AI regulation, corporate accountability, and constitutional rights in the United States.

Getty Images, Alexander Sikov

xAI Pushes Free Speech Theory Into New AI Lawsuits

Elon Musk's AI company, xAI, is on a legal road trip. After losing in California, it filed suit in Colorado asking a court to declare the state's artificial intelligence regulations unconstitutional. The argument is essentially the same one that already failed. Meet the new boss. Same as the old boss.

For Connecticut residents, this is not just the next state in the alphabet that has passed AI legislation. Connecticut was one of the first states in the nation to adopt an AI law, requiring companies to disclose when AI is being used in critical decisions like employment, housing, credit, or healthcare. That law is already drawing scrutiny from the technology industry. What xAI tried to do in California and now in Colorado is a preview of what we may face in Connecticut.

Keep ReadingShow less