6.3% of 3,657 statements contain a personal attack (230 statements); the average for Senate Republicans is 2.1%. Ranks 3rd of 52, where 1st is the highest rate.
An AI model reads each of Blackburn’s Congressional Record speeches, posts on X, press releases and newsletters and marks whether it attacks a person’s character, integrity or loyalty. The rate is the share of statements marked; it is compared with the average among Senate Republicans and ranked against the same group.
0
At a glance
6 measures against Senate Republicans. 9.1% of Blackburn’s statements use an extreme label, 3.2 times the Senate Republican average of 2.9%. Blackburn missed 5.8% of 915 roll calls, attendance in the bottom tenth of Senate Republicans (average 97.1%).
The measures on which Blackburn sits furthest from the middle of Senate Republicans, each against the same group, with the CSIP score when there is one. Every number is explained in its own section below.
Personal attacks
6.3%
Senate Republicans average 2.1% · ranks 3rd of 52
Extreme labels
9.1%
Senate Republicans average 2.9% · ranks 3rd of 52
Party unity
100%
Senate Republicans average 98.4% · ranks 4th of 53 · 5 votes against the majority of Senate Republicans
Attendance
94.2%
Senate Republicans average 97.1% · ranks 49th of 53 · 915 roll calls
Policy criticism
18%
Senate Republicans average 17% · ranks 18th of 52
CSIP ideology
+0.95
Right of 0, the centre of the scale · ± 0.03
Peer group: Senate Republicans. Rank 1 is the highest value in the group; the thick bar is Blackburn, the thin grey bar the peer average. The headline is the measure on which Blackburn is most unusual among peers (Methods, §08).
Blackburn attacks opponents personally more than 94% of Senate Republicans. Personal attacks in 6.3% of 3,657 statements, against 2.1% for the average Senate Republican; 3rd of 52.
An AI model reads each of Blackburn’s 3,657 statements in the 119th Congress (3,016 posts on X, 394 press releases, 166 Congressional Record speeches, 81 newsletters) and marks the kinds of statement it contains: a personal attack, criticism of a policy, discussion of policy, bipartisanship, credit claiming, and extreme labels. A statement can carry several. Every rate is compared with the average for Senate Republicans and ranked among them.
Kinds of statement
Share of statements carrying each label, the 119th Congress
Blackburn
Senate Republicans, average of 52
0%20%40%60%80%
Blackburn
Peers
Rank
Policy discussion2,597 statements
71%
70%
27th of 52
Credit claiming1,440 statements
39%
36%
21st of 52
Policy criticism676 statements
18%
17%
18th of 52
Bipartisanship324 statements
9%
13%
33rd of 52
Personal attacks230 statements
6%
2%
3rd of 52
+ Show the data
Blackburn's share of statements in each category against the Senate Republicans average.
Row
Blackburn
Peers
Policy discussion
71%
70%
Credit claiming
39%
36%
Policy criticism
18%
17%
Bipartisanship
9%
13%
Personal attacks
6%
2%
3,657
statements classified
3,016 posts on X, 394 press releases, 166 Congressional Record speeches, 81 newsletters.
posts on X
press releases
Congressional Record speeches
newsletters
+ Show the data
Blackburn's statements by source
Part
Value
posts on X
3,016
press releases
394
Congressional Record speeches
166
newsletters
81
+ − How to read the bars
The thick bar is Blackburn; the thin grey bar is the average Senate Republicans. A longer thick bar means Blackburn does this more than peers. Rank 1 is the highest rate in the group.
Extreme labels
Blackburn used extreme labels in 9.1% of statements, 3.2 times the peer average. 332 statements, most often aimed at Democrats; peers 2.9%.
“radical”121
“far left”57
“woke”34
“communist”29
“extreme”8
Who gets the labels
Targets named alongside an extreme label, by number of statements
Democrats58
radical left25
left18
gender ideology15
Biden administration6
+ − What an extreme label is
Calls a politician, a party or a policy “far left”, “far right”, “MAGA”, “extreme”, “radical”, “woke”, “fascist” or “communist”. The target is who or what the label was aimed at. The lists show the five most used labels and targets; the toggle shows the rest.
Month by month
Share of statements per month, the 119th Congress
+ Show the data
Monthly rates for Blackburn, each row shaded against its own peak, with statement volume. Months with fewer than 10 statements are left blank.
Column
Statements
Personal attacks
Policy criticism
Policy discussion
Bipartisanship
Credit claiming
Extreme labels
Jan ’25
244
7.4%
19.3%
61.9%
9.0%
37.7%
10.7%
Feb ’25
177
3.4%
26.6%
72.9%
9.0%
40.7%
7.9%
Mar ’25
190
3.7%
15.8%
63.2%
7.4%
36.3%
12.1%
Apr ’25
188
4.8%
12.2%
65.4%
10.1%
35.1%
6.4%
May ’25
219
5.0%
13.2%
67.1%
10.5%
39.3%
3.6%
Jun ’25
253
9.5%
14.2%
61.3%
5.9%
27.7%
9.1%
Jul ’25
211
10.9%
19.0%
69.2%
6.2%
43.1%
12.3%
Aug ’25
173
2.9%
23.1%
68.2%
8.7%
44.5%
6.9%
Sep ’25
186
2.7%
23.1%
66.1%
10.8%
41.4%
11.8%
Oct ’25
239
5.9%
28.9%
68.2%
10.0%
33.9%
17.6%
Nov ’25
165
6.1%
24.2%
63.6%
5.5%
38.8%
13.9%
Dec ’25
162
7.4%
16.1%
86.4%
8.0%
54.9%
4.9%
Jan ’26
188
5.9%
6.9%
91.0%
5.9%
53.2%
2.1%
Feb ’26
155
12.3%
22.6%
66.5%
7.7%
36.1%
6.5%
Mar ’26
183
5.5%
32.2%
72.7%
12.0%
33.3%
13.1%
Apr ’26
138
7.2%
16.7%
83.3%
12.3%
46.4%
8.7%
May ’26
111
1.8%
19.8%
73.9%
17.1%
40.5%
9.0%
Jun ’26
121
5.0%
23.1%
73.6%
10.7%
36.4%
9.1%
Jul ’26
138
13.8%
10.1%
76.8%
5.1%
34.8%
6.5%
Aug ’26
84
4.8%
5.9%
81.0%
5.9%
33.3%
8.3%
Sep ’26
83
3.6%
7.2%
81.9%
13.3%
48.2%
4.8%
Oct ’26
49
4.1%
2.0%
85.7%
8.2%
40.8%
4.1%
+ − How to read the strips
Each row is one kind of statement; each cell is a month, shaded against that row’s own peak (darker = closer to the peak), with the peak and the latest value written at the right. The top row counts statements. The strip covers every month of the 119th Congress, the same span as the rates above, including months with no statements. A month with fewer than 10 statements is hatched, not shaded: one or two posts would swing its rate to 0% or 100%.
In Blackburn’s words
Real statements from the classifier’s example set, with the labels it assigned
Bipartisanship
Blackburn, Colleagues Introduce Bipartisan, Bicameral Legislation to Protect U.S. Internet Users From Foreign Online Piracy
NASHVILLE, Tenn. – U.S. Senators Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.), Chris Coons (D-Del.), Thom Tillis (R-N.C.), and Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) introduced the Deterring Extraterritorial Fo…
Oct 21, 2026 · Press releases · policy discussion; bipartisanship; credit claiming; Commerce; Crime and Law Enforcement; Civil Rights and Liberties, Minority Issues; Law; Science, Technology, Communications · Source
Personal attacks
The text of this post is on X; follow the source link to read it.
Oct 15, 2026 · Posts on X · personal attacks; policy discussion; Government Operations and Politics; Civil Rights and Liberties, Minority Issues; target: Jack Smith · Source
Extreme label
The text of this post is on X; follow the source link to read it.
Oct 21, 2026 · Posts on X · policy discussion; Civil Rights and Liberties, Minority Issues; extreme label “radical” aimed at gender ideology · Source
Examples by category
Up to five recent statements in each category
Overtly questions a named person’s character, integrity or loyalty, or calls them names. Criticising a record or a policy does not count.
·Posts on X
The text of this post is on X; follow the source link to read it.
personal attacks · policy discussion · Government Operations and Politics · Civil Rights and Liberties, Minority Issues · target: Jack SmithSource ↗
·Posts on X
The text of this post is on X; follow the source link to read it.
personal attacks · policy discussion · Immigration · Armed Forces and National Security · target: BidenSource ↗
·Posts on X
The text of this post is on X; follow the source link to read it.
personal attacks · policy discussion · Crime and Law Enforcement · Government Operations and Politics · target: Jack SmithSource ↗
·Posts on X
The text of this post is on X; follow the source link to read it.
personal attacks · policy discussion · Immigration · Crime and Law EnforcementSource ↗
·Posts on X
The text of this post is on X; follow the source link to read it.
personal attacks · policy discussion · Civil Rights and Liberties, Minority Issues · target: federal judgeSource ↗
All 3,657 statements
Newest first, the 119th Congress
+ − The full feed
Five statements at a time, newest first; filters apply to the statements loaded so far. Export saves the statements that match. Sources: 3,016 posts on X, 394 press releases, 166 Congressional Record speeches, 81 newsletters.
Crime and Law Enforcement is what Blackburn talks about most: 30% of policy statements, 2.7 times the peer share. Talk and legislation agree at 0.67 on a 0–1 scale (Senate Republicans average 0.64; 18th of 52).
Each policy statement is tagged by the AI model with one or more of 25 policy areas from the Congressional Research Service list, so the shares say what Blackburn talks about. The bills Blackburn sponsors and cosponsors carry the same areas, so the two can be compared.
What Blackburn talks about
Share of policy statements by area, the 119th Congress
Blackburn
Senate Republicans average
0%9%18%26%35%
Blackburn
Peers
Crime and Law Enforcement788 statements
30%
11%
Immigration686 statements
26%
10%
Government Operations and Politics464 statements
18%
19%
Armed Forces and National Security380 statements
15%
25%
Economics and Public Finance357 statements
14%
17%
+ Show the data
Policy areas Blackburn talks about, as a share of policy statements, against the Senate Republicans average.
Row
Blackburn
Peers
Crime and Law Enforcement
30%
11%
Immigration
26%
10%
Government Operations and Politics
18%
19%
Armed Forces and National Security
15%
25%
Economics and Public Finance
14%
17%
+ − How to read the bars
The thick bar is the share of Blackburn’s policy statements in an area; the thin grey bar is the average share for Senate Republicans. A statement counts once in each of its areas, so shares can add to more than 100%. The five largest areas are shown; the toggle shows the rest.
Talks about · legislates on
Left: share of statements by policy area. Right: share of bills. Areas in order of their share of statements; both sides run from 0 to 35%. Grey ticks are the Senate Republicans averages.
Statements
Bills
Senate Republicans
+ Show the data
Blackburn's share of statements against share of bills in each policy area.
Area
Talks about
Senate Republicans, talks about
Legislates on
Senate Republicans, legislates on
Crime and Law Enforcement
30%
11%
14%
8%
Immigration
26%
10%
6%
4%
Government Operations and Politics
18%
19%
10%
11%
Armed Forces and National Security
15%
25%
11%
8%
Economics and Public Finance
14%
17%
1%
1%
0.67
talk-to-bills agreement, 0 to 1
Senate Republicans average 0.64. Ranks 18th of 52.
+ − What agreement means, and what it doesn’t
Agreement is 1 minus the distance between the two distributions (Jensen–Shannon): 1 means Blackburn legislates on exactly the areas Blackburn talks about, in the same proportions; 0 means no overlap. It does not say whether the bills match the positions in the statements, only the subjects. Bills Blackburn sponsored count fully, cosponsored bills a quarter. Shown with at least 20 policy statements and 5 bills.
Blackburn sits at +0.95 on the CSIP scale, right of 0, more liberal than 52% of Senate Republicans. Approximate range +0.92 to +0.97, which understates the uncertainty; from 917 donors and 3,467 roll calls.
CSIP, the lab’s Common-Space Ideal Point, places every official, federal and state, on one left–right scale, estimated from roll-call votes, who gives money to whom, and the text of statements. Negative is left of 0, positive right of it; 0 is the centre of the scale, not a definition of “moderate”.
+0.95
CSIP ideal point
Approximate range +0.92 to +0.97. From 917 donors and 3,467 roll calls. Run 2026-10-25T215945. Blue is left of 0, red right of 0.
The outlined dot is Blackburn, coloured by its side of 0 (blue left, red right, deeper further out); the bar through it is the approximate range (±1.96 standard errors), which understates the uncertainty; the grey ticks below are the medians of Blackburn’s groups. 0 is the centre of the scale, not “moderate” by definition.
+ − What this means, and what it doesn’t
The score summarises how an official votes, who funds them and how they talk, relative to everyone else. It does not grade positions as good or bad, and two officials with the same score can differ on any single issue. The ± range is 1.96 standard errors, which understates the uncertainty: scores whose ranges overlap may not differ at all, and even scores whose ranges do not overlap may not differ.
Where Blackburn sits
Every official in each group, on the CSIP scale
Senate Republicans51 · median +1.0
All Senate98 · median +0.4
+ Show the data
Blackburn's CSIP score of +0.95 placed against Senate Republicans, All Senate.
Group
Officials
Median
Share left of Blackburn
Senate Republicans
51
+1.0
47%
All Senate
98
+0.4
72%
+ − How to read the strips
Every small dot is one official on the same scale, coloured by its own score (blue left of 0, red right of 0, grey at 0, deeper further out) and spread up and down only to keep dots apart; where a group is crowded the dots overlap, and darker patches mean more officials. The large outlined dot is Blackburn in every row; the rule is each group’s median. The table under the figure gives the share of each group to the left of Blackburn.
Blackburn raised $3.2M in the 2026 cycle, close to the Senate Republicans’ median of $3.2M. 25% of individual money came in gifts of $200 or less. 20% of itemized individual money came from Tennessee.
Campaign money from Federal Election Commission filings, as aggregates only; the lab never shows an individual donor. Campaigns must report by name every person who gives them more than $200 in a cycle (“itemized”); smaller gifts are reported only as one total (“unitemized”), so donor counts, donor states, employers and occupations describe itemized donors only.
$3.2M
raised in the 2026 cycle
From 925 itemized donors. Senate Republicans’ median $3.2M.
Where the money came from
Each square is one percent of 2026-cycle receipts, from FEC summary totals.
Itemized individual (over $200)6 squares$189.9K
Unitemized individual (gifts of $200 or less)2 squares$64.8K
PACs and other committees4 squares$132.5K
Remainder not broken out in the FEC summary (transfers, loans, refunds)88 squares$2.8M
+ Show the data
Sources of Blackburn's money, 2026 cycle, one square per percent
Source
Amount
Share
Itemized individual (over $200)
$189.9K
5.9%
Unitemized individual (gifts of $200 or less)
$64.8K
2.0%
PACs and other committees
$132.5K
4.1%
Remainder not broken out in the FEC summary (transfers, loans, refunds)
$2.8M
88.0%
+ − What this means, and what it doesn’t
Totals say how much a campaign took in, not how it was spent, and they rise sharply when a seat is up for election; compare cycles with that in mind. The small-donor share understates small giving when a campaign itemizes gifts made through ActBlue or WinRed.
Receipts by cycle
Total receipts, 2020 to 2026. The grey line is the Senate Republicans’ median for 2026.
+ Show the data
Blackburn's receipts by cycle against the 2026 Senate Republicans median.
Item
Value
2020 cycle
$2.0M
2022 cycle
$3.2M
2024 cycle
$13.6M
2026 cycle
$3.2M
Top donor states, 2026
Itemized contributions by donor state. 20% came from Tennessee.
Tennessee$50.4K
New York$46.1K
New Jersey$25.9K
Florida$17.9K
Texas$17.5K
Small donations
Gifts of $200 or less as a share of individual money, by cycle. The thin grey bar is the 2026 Senate Republicans’ median.
Blackburn
Median
0%20%40%60%
Blackburn
Median
2026
25%
17%
2024
15%
17%
2022
16%
17%
2020
25%
17%
+ Show the data
Small-donor share by cycle against the Senate Republicans median
Row
Blackburn
Median
2026 cycle
25%
17%
2024 cycle
15%
17%
2022 cycle
16%
17%
2020 cycle
25%
17%
Where itemized donors live
Individuals who gave more than $200, by donor state
Itemized dollars$14$50.4Kno data
+ Show the data
Blackburn's itemized individual contributions by donor state, 2026 cycle
State
Value
Tennessee
$50.4K
New York
$46.1K
New Jersey
$25.9K
Florida
$17.9K
Texas
$17.5K
California
$12.1K
Delaware
$10.1K
Colorado
$9,147
Virginia
$8,673
New Mexico
$8,348
Minnesota
$4,066
District of Columbia
$4,047
Alabama
$2,906
Ohio
$2,745
Missouri
$2,303
Hawaii
$1,910
Louisiana
$1,909
Georgia
$1,753
Utah
$1,656
Illinois
$1,553
Arizona
$1,370
Maryland
$1,303
Wisconsin
$1,156
Connecticut
$1,099
Massachusetts
$982
Arkansas
$968
Indiana
$947
Kansas
$932
Nevada
$897
Mississippi
$861
North Carolina
$790
Pennsylvania
$693
Michigan
$650
Washington
$636
South Carolina
$589
South Dakota
$513
Oklahoma
$474
Montana
$449
Oregon
$409
Idaho
$284
Maine
$273
West Virginia
$249
Kentucky
$146
Nebraska
$144
Iowa
$69
Rhode Island
$43
New Hampshire
$30
Alaska
$25
North Dakota
$14
Vermont
No data
Wyoming
No data
925
itemized donors
People who gave more than $200
20%
from Tennessee
Of itemized individual dollars
+ − How to read the map
Every state the same size. Darker states gave more itemized money; hatched states had no itemized donors; the outlined state is Tennessee. Gifts of $200 or less carry no address and are left out.
Donors’ ideology
Distribution of itemized donors’ own CSIP scores
+ Show the data
Ideology of Blackburn's itemized donors in 2026, from −0.50 to +1.75: 15% between +0.25 and +0.50, 28% between +0.75 and +1.00, 36% between +1.00 and +1.25, 9.2% between +1.25 and +1.50.
Item
Value
CSIP −0.50 to −0.25
2.1%
CSIP −0.25 to 0.00
4.0%
CSIP 0.00 to +0.25
1.8%
CSIP +0.25 to +0.50
15%
CSIP +0.50 to +0.75
3.9%
CSIP +0.75 to +1.00
28%
CSIP +1.00 to +1.25
36%
CSIP +1.25 to +1.50
9.2%
CSIP +1.50 to +1.75
0.3%
+ − How to read the columns
Donors who give to many candidates get their own CSIP score. Each column is the share of Blackburn’s itemized money from donors in that part of the scale, blue left of 0 and red right of 0, deeper further out; Blackburn’s own score is +0.95.
Top donor occupations
Itemized, 2026 cycle.
RETIRED$86.0K 784 donors
CONSULTANT$18.1K 8 donors
CEO$8,927 7 donors
PHYSICIAN$8,142 5 donors
ATTORNEY$4,352 5 donors
Top committees
PAC and committee contributions, 2026 cycle.
OSHKOSH CORPORATION EMPLOYEES PAC (OCEPAC)$10.0K
1-800 CONTACTS, INC. PAC$5,000
A NEW NATION PAC$5,000
AMERICAN COLLEGE OF RADIOLOGY ASSOCIATION PAC$5,000
AMERICAN SOCIETY OF ANESTHESIOLOGISTS POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE (ASA PAC)$5,000
Top employers
Itemized, 2026 cycle.
No employers reported.
Aggregates only. Individual donors are never named.
Blackburn voted with the majority of Senate Republicans on 100% of party-line votes and missed 5.8% of 915 roll calls. Senate Republicans on average: 98.4% party unity, 97.1% attendance. Across all roll calls, Blackburn voted against the majority of Senate Republicans 5 times.
915 roll calls Blackburn could vote on in the 119th Congress, compared with Senate Republicans. Attendance is the share with a vote recorded. Party unity counts only party-line roll calls, where most Democrats and most Republicans voted on opposite sides, and is the share of those where Blackburn voted with the majority of Senate Republicans. The count of votes against that majority covers every roll call where the majority took a side.
5
votes against the majority of Senate Republicans
Party unity 100%, Senate Republicans average 98.4%, ranks 4th of 53. 915 roll calls in the 119th Congress.
Attendance and party unity
The thick bar is Blackburn, the thin grey bar the Senate Republicans average. The scale runs from 80% to 100% to show the gap.
Blackburn
Senate Republicans, average of 53
80%90%100%
Blackburn
Peers
Rank
Attendance
94.2%
97.1%
49th of 53
Party unity
100%
98.4%
4th of 53
+ Show the data
Blackburn's attendance and party unity against Senate Republicans.
Row
Blackburn
Peers
Attendance
94.2%
97.1%
Party unity
100%
98.4%
+ − What this means, and what it doesn’t
A missed roll call has many causes, from illness to campaigning, so attendance says how often, not why. A vote against the majority can be on procedure as well as substance, and many fall on roll calls where both parties split; the key votes below show the ones that decided something.
Key votes
25 roll calls the lab flagged as key in the 119th Congress
A bill to protect the name, image, and likeness rights of, and provide protections for, student athletes and to promote fair competition among intercollegiate athletics, and for other purposes.
On Passage of the Bill
Yea
With majority
Bill Passed
D 26–19 · R 50–2 · I 1–1Democrats 26 yea, 19 nay; Republicans 50 yea, 2 nay; Independents 1 yea, 1 nay
A concurrent resolution directing the President, pursuant to section 5(c) of the War Powers Resolution, to remove United States Armed Forces from hostilities with Iran.
On the Concurrent Resolution
Nay
With majority
Concurrent Resolution Rejected
D 43–1 · R 4–49 · I 2–0Democrats 43 yea, 1 nay; Republicans 4 yea, 49 nay; Independents 2 yea, 0 nay
An act to impose sanctions and other measures with respect to the Russian Federation, as championed by the late Senator Lindsey O. Graham, and for other purposes.
On Passage of the Bill
Did not vote
—
Bill Passed
D 36–9 · R 49–1 · I 1–1Democrats 36 yea, 9 nay; Republicans 49 yea, 1 nay; Independents 1 yea, 1 nay
An executive resolution authorizing the en bloc consideration in Executive Session of certain nominations on the Executive Calendar.
On the Resolution
Did not vote
—
Resolution Agreed to
D 0–45 · R 50–0 · I 0–2Democrats 0 yea, 45 nay; Republicans 50 yea, 0 nay; Independents 0 yea, 2 nay
close vote
+ − How key votes are chosen
Automatically: a final-passage or override vote where the measure became law, the margin was under 10%, at least 10% of either party voted against its majority, or the bill was among the 25 most mentioned in officials’ own statements. Up to 25 per window, most recent first; five are shown. Bars show yea on the left, nay on the right, per party.
Votes most often with
The colleagues who voted the same way as Blackburn most often
The share of roll calls both members voted on where they voted the same way, among colleagues sharing at least 50 such votes. High agreement with members of the other party is common on routine votes.
Blackburn sponsored 145 bills in the 119th Congress; 2 became law. Cosponsored 502 others. 14% of sponsored bills got out of committee (Senate Republicans average 22%; 35th of 51).
The bills Blackburn sponsored and cosponsored in the 119th Congress, from the official bill records, and how far each got: introduced, referred to or acted on in committee, passed one chamber, passed both, became law. A bill counts at every stage it has reached, so the blocks only shrink to the right.
Bills by stage
Counts for the 119th Congress
Sponsored
Cosponsored
+ Show the data
Bills Blackburn sponsored and cosponsored, by furthest stage reached
Role
Introduced
In committee
Passed one chamber
Passed both chambers
Became law
Sponsored
145
145
13
2
2
Cosponsored
502
493
88
7
7
+ − How to read the blocks
Ink blocks are bills Blackburn sponsored, ochre blocks bills Blackburn cosponsored; the figure above each block is the count. Most bills in any legislature never leave committee, so a short staircase is the norm.
14%
of sponsored bills got out of committee
Senate Republicans average 22%. Ranks 35th of 51.
Cosponsorship partners
Colleagues who most often cosponsor with Blackburn, by number of shared bills in the 119th Congress; the square shows their party.
Republican
Ted Budd123
Rick Scott120
James Lankford98
Ted Cruz95
Thom Tillis93
+ − What this means, and what it doesn’t
The score is the share of sponsored bills that a committee reported out or a chamber passed, with at least 5 sponsored bills, ranked within the peer group. Members of the majority party and committee chairs move more bills, so the rank reflects position in the chamber as well as effort. Cosponsorship partners are the five colleagues who share the most of Blackburn’s bills; the toggle shows more.
Bill list
Sponsored and cosponsored, with status and policy area; five are shown, the toggle shows the rest
A resolution designating September 30, 2026, as "National Veterans Suicide Prevention Day".
Cosponsor
Sep 30, 2026
Passed one chamber
Armed Forces and National Security
Submitted in the Senate, considered, and agreed to without amendment and with a preamble by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S5299; text: CR S5272-5273) Sep 30, 2026
A site that changed 35 times in 90 days. Blackburn’s official site had 25 pages when last crawled on Oct 18, 2026. The lab last catalogued the images Blackburn posted on Oct 17, 2026.
The lab crawls Blackburn’s official and campaign websites (weekly for Congress, monthly for the states) and keeps every page’s text, so changes can be read later; it also records social accounts and describes the images Blackburn posts with a vision model.
“Pages crawled” is the size of the site at the last crawl; “changes in 90 days” counts pages whose text differed from the previous crawl. Sites change for many routine reasons, such as new press releases, so a high count is not by itself notable.
A group of officials sit around long tables in a vehicle hangar for a meeting or briefing. Large American flag hangs behind them, with emergency and sheriff vehicles parked in the background. There is text on the vehicles and nameplates.View post ↗
02
A man and a woman sit in armchairs on a stage and talk beneath a large screen displaying their portraits and names. Stage lights and audio equipment are visible; the image contains text.View post ↗
03
A smiling woman and man pose together in an industrial indoor space. A forklift is parked beside them, and there is text on the machinery.View post ↗
04
A smiling woman and man pose together in an indoor hallway in front of wooden double doors. A letter sign is visible on one of the doors.View post ↗
05
A screenshot of a social media post with a news article preview. The preview shows a blonde woman in a video still with a news banner. Text appears throughout the post and article card.View post ↗
+ − About the descriptions
Written by a vision model and may be wrong. Open the post to see the original. Five are shown; the toggle shows the rest.
How this page was made. Profile built Oct 28, 2026; site last built Oct 28, 2026. Every number on the page is computed from the sources listed here, by the same rules for every official; nothing is written by hand.
The headline
The headline is the measure on which Blackburn is most unusual among Senate Republicans, chosen by one rule for every official of every party. The candidates are the rate of each kind of statement and of extreme labels, party unity, attendance, the small-donor share, the in-state share and total receipts of the latest cycle, the share of sponsored bills that got out of committee, talk-to-bills agreement, and the CSIP score’s place within the party group.
The builder ranks every measure within the same peer group the page compares it with, and writes each official’s percentile: the share of the group below the value, ties counting half, so 0.5 is the median and a value shared by many never ranks first. A measure’s score is how far that percentile sits from the median (0 in the middle, 0.5 at either end), and the highest score leads if it is above 0.25, outside the middle half of the group. Scores within 0.03 of each other are a tie, broken in this order: votes against the party majority, kinds of statement, ideology, roll calls missed, small donations, in-state money, legislation, agreement, extreme labels, receipts.
A measure counts only with at least 200 statements, 100 roll calls or 5 sponsored bills behind it and a peer group of at least 10. Two things never lead: high party unity or attendance, where most members sit, and a high rate of a kind of statement backed by fewer than 10 statements. When nothing qualifies, the headline is a neutral fact instead: statements classified, or years in office. The wording always names the direction (“in the bottom 5% of …”, “votes against the majority of …”).
What politicians sayOct 27, 20261 days agoMembers of Congress: tweets since 2017; press releases, newsletters and floor speeches since 2022. State legislators: tweets since May 2024. Governors: tweets since January 2025. Labels from an LLM classifier.
Roll calls (Congress)Sep 30, 202628 days agoVoteview roll calls, 113th Congress (2013) on.
Campaign money (FEC)Oct 22, 20266 days agoFEC committee financial summaries (totals, small donations) and itemized contributions (donor counts, states, employers), cycles 2020-2026; aggregates only.
Ideology (CSIP)Oct 25, 20263 days agoCommon-Space Ideal Points (CSIP), current validated run.
WebsitesOct 25, 20263 days agoWeekly crawls of federal sites since April 2026; monthly state crawls since June 2026.
ImagesOct 27, 20261 days agoImages in members' tweets with vision-model descriptions.
How the measures work
What politicians say
Every post, press release, newsletter and congressional floor speech is read by a language model and marked for personal attacks, policy criticism, policy discussion, bipartisanship and credit claiming. A statement can be in several. Rates are shares of statements in the window. The methods paper.
Extreme labels
A statement has an extreme label when it calls a politician, party or policy “far left”, “far right”, “MAGA”, “extreme”, “radical”, “woke”, “fascist” or “communist”. The target is who the label is aimed at.
Policy areas and agreement
Statements and bills share 25 Congressional Research Service policy areas (state bills are assigned by a language model). Agreement is 1 − Jensen–Shannon distance between the two distributions, shown with at least 20 policy statements and 5 bills.
Ideology (CSIP)
Common-Space Ideal Points place federal and state officials on one left–right scale, estimated jointly from roll calls, campaign contributions and the text of statements, with standard errors. Only a validated run is shown. The methods paper.
Campaign money
Campaigns report by name only donors who give more than $200 in a cycle; smaller gifts are reported as one total. Federal totals and the small-donor share come from the FEC’s financial summaries of each campaign committee. Donor counts, donor states, employers and occupations cover itemized donors only. State filings report no small-gift totals, so state figures are itemized only. The lab never publishes donor names.
Votes and key votes
Attendance, party unity and the count of votes against the majority of an official’s own party come from roll calls (Voteview for Congress, chamber records for the states). Key votes are final-passage or override votes that became law, were decided by under 10%, saw at least 10% of a party vote against its majority, or concerned one of the 25 bills most mentioned in officials’ statements.
Peers and ranks
Comparisons are with the same party, chamber and level (for example House Democrats); state legislators are compared within their state and chamber for votes. Every comparison names its group. Rank 1 is the highest value in the group; tied values share the average of their ranks, and the percentile is the share of the group below the value, ties counting half.
America’s Political Pulse · Polarization Research Lab
