yazzy

I’m Isaac Saul, and this is Tangle: an independent, nonpartisan, subscriber-supported politics newsletter that summarizes the best arguments from across the political spectrum on the news of the day — then “my take.”

Are you new here? Get free emails to your inbox daily. Would you rather listen? You can find our podcast here.

Today's read: 13 minutes.

This Friday.

Over the last few weeks, the deportation actions by the Trump administration have sparked a debate about due process — what it means, who gets it, and when it should be applied. This Friday, Executive Editor Isaac Saul is publishing a personal opinion piece about that debate, making the case for how we should approach due process.

Quick hits.

1. The Department of Health and Human Services began the process of laying off roughly 10,000 employees following Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.'s announcement of an agency-wide reorganization last week. (The layoffs) Separately, attorneys general and governors from 23 states and the District of Columbia sued the Trump administration over its cancellation of $11 billion in health program grants allocated during the Covid-19 pandemic. (The lawsuit)
2. Immigration officials said they had mistakenly deported a man to a prison in El Salvador due to an administrative error but were unable to bring him back to the United States. An immigration judge ruled in 2019 that the man, a Salvadoran national, could not be deported to El Salvador because of a credible fear he would be killed or tortured if he returned to his home country. (The filing)
3. The U.S. Army Europe and Africa Command said that it had recovered the body of the final missing U.S. soldier whose armored vehicle sank in a swamp in Lithuania last week. Three other soldiers from the crew were declared dead on Monday. (The recovery)
4. Attorney General Pam Bondi directed federal prosecutors to seek the death penalty for Luigi Mangione, the man charged with murdering UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson in December. (The directive)
5. Sen. Cory Booker (D-NJ) broke the record for the longest speech delivered in the Senate after speaking for 25 hours and four minutes. Booker said the speech was intended to disrupt Senate business in protest of the actions of the Trump administration. (The speech)

Today's topic.

The elections in Florida and Wisconsin. On Tuesday, voters in Florida elected two new U.S. representatives, while Wisconsin voters selected a new state Supreme Court justice. The races were the first general elections since President Donald Trump took office in January. In Florida, Republican candidates Jimmy Patronis and Randy Fine defeated their Democratic opponents, preserving House Republicans’ narrow majority. In Wisconsin, the Democrat-backed Susan Crawford defeated the Republican-backed Brad Schimel, maintaining the court’s 4-3 liberal majority.

Florida’s elections filled the seats of former Reps. Matt Gaetz (R) and Michael Waltz (R). Gaetz resigned his seat in the state’s 1st Congressional District in November 2024 after then-President-elect Trump nominated him for attorney general; Gaetz later withdrew his nomination amid sexual misconduct allegations. Waltz resigned his seat in the 6th District in January to join President Trump’s Cabinet as national security adviser. Both districts are solidly Republican, with Gaetz winning reelection by 32 points and Waltz winning by 33 points in 2024.

In FL-1, Jimmy Patronis (R), the state’s chief financial officer, defeated Gay Valimont (D), a gun-control activist, by roughly 15 points. In FL-6, state Senator Randy Fine (R) defeated Josh Weil (D), a teacher. Although polling in the final week showed Weil within four points of Fine, Fine won by 14 points.The victories in Florida give Republicans a House majority of 220-213.

Separately, Wisconsin held its state Supreme Court election to replace a retiring justice on the seven-seat court. The state holds its judicial elections in April, and judges are elected to 10-year terms. Election analysts called the race for Crawford on Tuesday night, and she led Schimel 55%–45% with over 95% of the vote counted as of Wednesday morning. Additionally, Wisconsin voters approved a constitutional amendment enshrining the state’s voter ID requirement in its constitution.

The race drew national attention in part because the court will rule on high-profile issues like abortion access and union rights in the coming months, and a victory for Schimel would have shifted the court’s balance toward conservative-leaning justices. Additionally, the court will deliberate on voting rights and election rules in the battleground state ahead of the 2026 midterms and the 2028 presidential race.

While judicial elections are technically nonpartisan, national Republicans and Democrats invested heavily in Wisconsin’s election. The race was the most expensive judicial contest in U.S. history, with the candidates, state parties and outside groups spending over $98 million, according to the Brennan Center. White House adviser Elon Musk was an active force in the race down the home stretch, holding a rally in Green Bay to support Schimel on Sunday and giving away two $1 million checks to attendees.

Today, we’ll share perspectives on the race results from the right and left, followed by my take.

What the right is saying.

• The right welcomes Republicans’ victories in Florida, but many express concern about the margins in each race.
• Some say the Wisconsin judicial election will have far-reaching implications.
• Others say Republicans did well overall but suggest Musk’s involvement may have hurt them in Wisconsin.

The Wall Street Journal editorial board wrote “the MAGA backlash arrives.”

“Democrats solidified their 4-3 progressive majority on the Wisconsin Supreme Court on Tuesday, and the ramifications are nationwide. The comfortable win by Democratic Judge Susan Crawford is the second sign in two weeks of a political backlash against the Trump Presidency,” the board said. “That’s a warning to the GOP that the Trump-Musk governing style is stirring a backlash that could cost them control of Congress next year. All the more so given the results in two special House races in Florida Tuesday to replace a pair of Republicans.

“These are safe seats, and Republicans won the western Panhandle district held by Matt Gaetz with some room to spare. But Jimmy Patronis’s 57% was about nine points less than the 66% that Mr. Gaetz won in 2024. It was a similar story in the Palm Coast seat of former Rep. Mike Waltz,” the board wrote. “Republicans can console themselves that they held the Florida seats and thus their narrow House majority. And we hope the results don’t scare House Republicans into backing away from their tax and regulatory reform agenda. That’s what Democrats would love, so next year they’d get the benefit both ways—motivated Democrats and sullen Republicans after a GOP governing failure.”

Before the election, William A. Jacobson and Kemberlee Kaye wrote in The New York Post about “why George Soros and Democrats have gone all-in on this week’s Wisconsin court race.”

“If liberals retain control, it is likely that the court will unwind the public sector union reforms enacted when Scott Walker was governor, something high on labor unions’ wish list for the past decade. Issues such as abortion are also on the agenda,” Jacobson and Kaye said. “Voters gave Republicans an 18-15 majority in the Wisconsin Senate and a 54-45 majority in the Wisconsin Assembly. Yet a liberal Supreme Court bench would spell disaster for any Republican initiatives. But there’s a lot more at stake than Wisconsin politics.

“Early big money backers of Crawford, like George Soros and Reid Hoffman, recognized the potential of using the court to regain control of the US House and stop President Trump’s legislative agenda in its tracks. That’s because the Wisconsin Supreme Court will be ruling on challenges to congressional districts, where Republicans hold six of the eight seats,” Jacobson and Kaye wrote. “Redistricting could net Democrats two extra seats, and control of Congress. Crawford supporters even put out a campaign email touting the election as a ‘chance to put two more House seats in play for 2026.’ Democrats know what is at stake.”

In National Review, Jim Geraghty said “Tuesday could have been much worse for Republicans.”

“The good news for Republicans is that House Speaker Mike Johnson wakes up to an imminent, er, gargantuan GOP majority of 220 to 213. After a lot of nervousness and runaway Democratic fundraising leads, both GOP House candidates — Jimmy Patronis in the first district, Randy Fine in the sixth district — won with almost 57 percent of the vote,” Geraghty wrote. “Yes, these margins are down significantly from a normal GOP House wins in these places, but if Democrats couldn’t win in either of these districts in a lower-turnout (less than 200,000 votes in either!) special election, with huge fundraising numbers, they’re probably not winning in these districts for a long, long time.”

“The bad news for Republicans is that the Wisconsin Supreme Court race turned out to be a thumping — a 55 percent to 45 percent win for Judge Susan Crawford… The progressive-minded majority will keep their four to three advantage on the state supreme court… But what really has Democrats ecstatic was that they wanted to turn the state supreme-court race into a referendum on Musk,” Geraghty wrote. “It’s a reminder to Republicans that while Americans may like the concept of the Department of Government Efficiency in theory, they’re not particularly enamored with Musk himself.”

What the left is saying.

• The left is heartened by Crawford’s victory in Wisconsin and the margins of the elections in Florida, framing the results as a repudiation of Trump and Musk.
• Some say the results reveal vulnerabilities for Republicans nationwide.
• Others criticize Musk for his involvement in the Wisconsin race.

In New York Magazine, Ed Kilgore wrote “Elon Musk goes bust.”

“Musk not only personalized the Wisconsin race: he also boosted the stakes, saying at one point that ‘the entire destiny of humanity’ rested on winning there. Without much question, his involvement helped energize Democrats, who saw a rare opportunity to take the arrogant tech bro down a notch or two,” Kilgore said. “The results could help produce progressive rulings in a variety of Wisconsin cases and perhaps even lead to a re-redistricting of congressional districts benefiting Democrats.”

“Republicans fared better in Florida where they held two vacant House seats as expected, winning both by 14 points. The margins were reduced from recent elections in part thanks to the same sort of Democratic grassroots energy that powered Crawford’s victory and filled the coffers of candidates in the Sunshine State,” Kilgore wrote. “We’ll have to see if Musk’s face-plant in Wisconsin affects his standing in Washington. Trump doesn’t like losers and does enjoy shifting blame for adverse political trends. The liberal win could sharpen knives in Republican and White House circles already concerned about Musk’s sagging approval ratings and regularly outrageous utterances.”

In CNN, Eric Bradner, Fredreka Schouten, Steve Contorno, and Arit John shared their key takeaways from the races.

“The outcome [in Wisconsin] is certain to bolster the spirits of Democrats who are out of power and ideologically splintered after November’s losses. It’s also an ominous sign for Republicans who are entering a midterm election cycle without Trump on the ballot, and one that comes before the effects of Trump’s management of the economy — including tariffs — are fully felt,” the authors said. “Musk’s high-profile gamble – and loss – in Wisconsin raises questions about the effectiveness of his money and brand moving forward as he works to help Republicans next year attempt to buck the trend of the president’s party losing ground in the midterms.”

“Although Republicans won both special elections in Florida and shored up their party’s narrow majority in the House, the races grew more competitive than expected in the stretch to election day with the Democrats raising significant sums,” the authors wrote. “For GOP incumbents in battleground seats seeking reelection next year, the narrow margins in these deep-red Florida districts could serve as a potential warning sign of a tough midterm environment if Democrats are able to sustain their enthusiasm in opposition to Trump, Musk and the Republican agenda.”

In The Nation, John Nichols criticized Musk for “spending tens of millions of dollars to block free and fair elections in the battleground state.”

“Even the most fervent Wisconsin boosters might be skeptical that this election could influence the fate of the species so dramatically. But Musk argues that if progressives maintain a 4–3 majority on Wisconsin’s high court, they might address the radical gerrymandering of the state’s congressional district maps, which currently advantages Republicans. If they make the system fairer, another Democrat, perhaps two, could get elected,” Nichols said. “A lawsuit challenging the state’s current congressional maps could reach Wisconsin’s high court. But, despite what Musk claims, the Wisconsinites who would be the plaintiffs on such a suit wouldn’t be asking the court to create gerrymandered maps. They would be asking the court to help them get rid of gerrymandered maps.”

“Why wouldn’t Wisconsinites want to eliminate the bias and draw fair maps that would allow Republicans and Democrats to compete based on the quality of their candidates and their ideas—as opposed to built-in geographic advantages? Musk doesn’t see it that way. He wants to keep the competition rigged,” Nichols wrote. “In order to get his way, Musk is not just trying to buy an election. He’s effectively telling Wisconsinites that they should opt for a gerrymandered future rather than representative democracy.”

My take.

Reminder: "My take" is a section where I give myself space to share my own personal opinion. If you have feedback, criticism or compliments, don't unsubscribe. Write in by replying to this email, or leave a comment.

There’s a lot of meat on the bone from last night’s results, so I’ll share 12 thoughts about what we can learn from these races:

1. I’m one of an increasingly small number of political commentators consistently saying that Trump 2.0 will resemble Trump 1.0 more than a lot of people believe: His actions are going to create major backlash — he’s leaning heavily on stretching his executive authority, and most of what he’s done so far carries the risk of being fleeting. One outcome that would bolster this theory would be Republicans taking major losses in the 2026 midterm elections just as they did in 2018. I think these three elections are the first indication of what’s coming.
2. Democrats dominated a race in Wisconsin where Elon Musk and his PAC spent $25 million, and where he warned that the entire “destiny of humanity” and the “fate of America” was on the line. It was also a race many expected to be competitive. In both Florida elections, Republicans won but saw Trump’s margins gobbled up — it was 22 points closer than Trump’s 2024 margin in FL-1 and 16 points closer in FL-6. If you are wondering why Trump pulled Elise Stefanik from the U.N. ambassador position, you might consider that she won her seat in New York by 20 points. If these kinds of shifts take place in 2026, we’re almost certainly going to see a Democratic House majority.
3. Money can’t buy elections. Republicans outspent Democrats in Wisconsin and lost. Democrats outraised Republicans 10-1 in Florida’s Sixth District and 3-1 in Florida’s Third District. They lost both.
4. All of this is happening right now, two months into the Trump administration, before we’ve even hit the “bumpy” times Trump keeps warning voters about. Remember: Today is “liberation day” (aka tariff day). Trump’s treasury secretary is warning of an economic “detox” period. The probability of a recession is going up. The markets continue to slide. Fox News hosts are telling people to think about losses in their 401ks as supporting a war effort. I think we are headed for a serious economic disruption, and I do not think Trump’s or the Republicans’ popularity is going to improve before 2026.
5. Republicans should breathe a sigh of relief in Florida. There is no good way to spin the major swing in their margins, but there was a brief moment last week where Democrats really started to believe they could pull off a shocker in the Fine-Weil race. Trump actually held a tele-rally to get Fine over the finish line. In the end, neither race was all that close, and the GOP’s House majority got a tiny bit comfier.
6. Even though they may not be celebrating the margin of victory in Florida, House Republicans now have some genuine breathing room. The difference between a 220-212 majority and 218-213 majority is significant, especially with the House Freedom Caucus members who are going to want major spending cuts in the forthcoming omnibus bill. The overall trend may not be a good sign for Republicans in 2026, but keeping control of these seats creates a bigger opening for Trump to pass most of his agenda in the next year.
7. Democrats have a genuine opening with Musk front and center. He has completely thrust himself into the political world — now spending his time (and millions) in Wisconsin for a state Supreme Court race. The writer Zaid Jilani made a strong point that “Democrats’ problem with dealing with Trump is that the man is charismatic and funny and denouncing him often makes you look like you're humorless. Elon doesn't have this problem. He has zero social skills whatsoever and often just looks like a jerk. He's a great target.” I think this is 100% correct. Musk’s favorability ratings are dismal, and the more he puts himself in the spotlight, spends money, treats the left like it is evil incarnate, and becomes the face of government cuts and Republicanism, the better it is for Democrats. Case in point: Crawford even won in Brown County, where Musk held his rally this week and where Trump won by eight points just a few months ago. If Musk were quietly pouring resources into these races, it’d be one thing, but he’s going above and beyond to antagonize the left, and I don’t think it’s a winning formula.
8. Charlie Kirk correctly made the point that Republicans are the low propensity party now — that is, the party of voters who do not follow politics closely. If turnout was higher in 2024, election data suggests Kamala Harris would have been trounced worse than she was. Low-turnout elections are going to be an issue for Republicans going forward, and that includes 2026. Their off-cycle strategies in Florida and Wisconsin didn’t work, and that’s an obstacle they are going to have to figure out how to clear absent Trump in a presidential race.
9. I still really hate the fact that some states elect their supreme court judges. Watching millions of dollars and national political influencers pour into Wisconsin in order to swing a state court majority makes me deeply uncomfortable. Politicians and representatives should be elected. Judges, in my opinion, should be appointed.
10. Despite Democrats' convincing victory in the Supreme Court race, Republicans got a huge win when Wisconsin voters enshrined voter ID into the state constitution. There are a few takeaways here: First, the same electorate that propelled a Democrat-backed candidate to a 10-point win also supports voter ID laws. Second, Republicans have a winning issue here in a swing state — even in an off-cycle election. Third, Democrats should really consider changing their position here. As I’ve written, I support voter ID laws (so long as there is a provision to provide IDs to people who can’t afford them). It’s a simple, common-sense regulation that is ubiquitous across the Western world and it could also tamp down the growing skepticism about election results in the U.S. It’s worth noting Wisconsin has had voter ID requirements in state law since 2011 and… it doesn’t appear to be hurting either party right now.
11. Remember Matt Gaetz? It’s pretty remarkable that he is no longer a member of Congress or serving in the Trump administration. Patronis, who is set to take his seat, appears to be a much less controversial politician. He’s had a little bit of an anti-establishment streak and once suggested Florida taxpayers foot the bill for Trump’s legal fees, but he brings a good deal of legitimate experience to the position. It’s a much different story from Gaetz, who came into Congress as a prominent rabble rouser and did a lot more tweeting than legislating during his time in office.
12. Not that we needed any more confirmation, but — yes — we are still a thermostatic electorate — where the middle constantly desires change and the minority party regularly turns out in off-cycle elections. I have no idea how or when this trend in American politics will end. The middle moves against whoever is in office, the party in power struggles to turn out voters for special elections or midterms, and voters regularly act as a check on whichever political power is perceived to be in charge.

Take the survey: What do you think of Tuesday’s results? Let us know here.

Disagree? That's okay. My opinion is just one of many. Write in and let us know why, and we'll consider publishing your feedback.

Help share Tangle.

I'm a firm believer that our politics would be a little bit better if everyone were reading balanced news that allows room for debate, disagreement, and multiple perspectives. If you can take 15 seconds to share Tangle with a few friends I'd really appreciate it — just click the button below and pick some people to email it to!

• Email Tangle to a friend .
• Share Tangle on X/Twitter .
• Share Tangle on Facebook by clicking here.

Your questions, answered.

Q: What is really happening to Social Security? Should we be concerned about our monthly payments?

— Dee from Utah

Tangle: For the time being, I don’t think you need to be worried about your monthly payments. I may eat my words in the next few weeks, but right now, Social Security payments in April are scheduled to go out as usual — and I don’t see any credible reporting that there will be issues with those payments.

That said, there are a few things to be concerned about. One is major staff cuts, which a lot of experts (and Social Security employees) are warning will impact customer service and increase wait times to resolve issues with your payments. With field offices closing and phone services being degraded, technical issues or problems with your payments could become a major, lasting issue.

The planned migration of the entire Social Security system from an old computer programming language to a new one could also be disruptive. This is an incredibly complex program impacting roughly 1 in 5 Americans, and I’m not an expert on it. But I can tell you from doing much simpler things — like migrating my mailing list for Tangle from one platform to another — that problems always arise. A major change like this, combined with staffing shortages, seems to be ripe for dysfunction.

And, of course, it should be said that some of this is already happening. The Washington Post published an extensive report about the Social Security Administration website crashing four times in 10 days in March, thanks to servers being overloaded. All while field offices and systems to monitor customer experience are being overwhelmed or shut down.

Naturally, we still have nothing in the way of reforms to actually improve the financial viability of the program — reforms we desperately need. So, to your question, who qualifies for benefits and who receives them is unlikely to change in the near future. Still, the program itself does appear to be under serious strain.

Want to have a question answered in the newsletter? You can reply to this email (it goes straight to our inbox) or fill out this form.

Under the radar.

On Wednesday, President Trump will be briefed on the framework of a plan to keep the social media app TikTok operational in the United States ahead of an April 5 deadline for the app’s owner, ByteDance, to either sell or shut down its U.S. business. Under the proposal, cloud computing company Oracle would join a group of U.S. investors to submit a bid to ByteDance to acquire its U.S. operations. The Chinese government has signaled that it would be open to approving such a deal, but likely only as part of broader negotiations on separate issues, including tariffs. The Wall Street Journal has the story.

Numbers.

• $70 million. The approximate amount spent on TV ads in the Wisconsin state Supreme Court race, according to AdImpact.
• $12.2 million. The approximate amount spent by Elon Musk’s super PAC — America PAC — in support of Brad Schimel in the Wisconsin race, according to NBC News.
• $8.4 million. The approximate amount spent by A Better Wisconsin Together PAC in support of Susan Crawford in the race.
• $3.4 million. The approximate amount spent on TV ads in the special election in Florida’s 1st District.
• $6.2 million. The approximate amount spent on TV ads in the special election in Florida’s 6th District.
• 73. The number of posts or reposts on X from Elon Musk about the Wisconsin state Supreme Court race in 2025, as of Monday.
• 32% and 33%. Former Reps. Matt Gaetz’s (R) and Michael Waltz’s (R) margins of victory in FL-1 and FL-6, respectively, in the 2024 election.
• 15% and 14%. Jimmy Patronis’s (R) and Randy Fine’s (R) margins of victory in FL-1 and FL-6, respectively, in Tuesday’s special election.

The extras.

• One year ago today we wrote about the Baltimore bridge collapse.
• The most clicked link in yesterday’s newsletter was for our sponsor in the free edition for the free business newsletter The Daily Upside.
• Nothing to do with politics: A mail carrier was chased out of a Massachusetts neighborhood by a gang of wild turkeys.
• Yesterday’s survey: 3,443 readers responded to our survey on President Trump’s executive orders targeting law firms, with 89% disagreeing with the orders and the justification. “It is clearly only for his revenge tour,” one respondent said.

Have a nice day.

Connor Stephanoff, a 20-year-old pizza delivery driver using his grandmother’s car, was tipped $2 after driving through a blizzard to a customer’s home. Lieutenant Richard Craig spotted Stephanoff trekking through the snow without proper gear and stopped to praise his work ethic. After discovering how much he had been tipped, Craig gave Stephanoff the $15 he had in his wallet and started a GoFundMe, hoping to raise $500 as a “tip” for Stephanoff. Three weeks and 2,000 donations later, the drive has raised over $41,000. Stephanoff plans to use the donations to buy his own car. Today has the story.

Don't forget...

📣 Share Tangle on Twitter here, Facebook here, or LinkedIn here.

🎧 We have a podcast you can listen to here.

🎥 Follow us on Instagram here or subscribe to our YouTube channel here

💵 If you like our newsletter, drop some love in our tip jar.

🎉 Want to reach 370,000+ people? Fill out this form to advertise with us.

📫 Forward this to a friend and tell them to subscribe (hint: it's here).

🛍 Love clothes, stickers and mugs? Go to our merch store!