Personal attacks
The text of this post is on X; follow the source link to read it.
Oct 23, 2026 · Posts on X · personal attacks; policy discussion; Government Operations and Politics; target: Donald Trump · Source
0.46
agreement between talk and bills (0 to 1), in the bottom 5% of House Democrats
Agreement 0.46 on a 0–1 scale; the average for House Democrats is 0.67. Ranks 215th of 216, where 1st is the closest match.
How closely the mix of policy areas in Blair’s statements matches the mix in the bills Blair sponsors and cosponsors: 1 means the same areas in the same proportions, 0 means no overlap. Ranked among House Democrats.
At a glance
3 measures against House Democrats. Blair sits at −0.67 on the CSIP scale, more conservative than 85% of House Democrats. 0% of the 5 bills Blair sponsored got out of committee, in the bottom quarter of House Democrats.
The measures on which Blair sits furthest from the middle of House Democrats, each against the same group, with the CSIP score when there is one. Every number is explained in its own section below.
Talk-to-bills agreement
0.46
House Democrats average 0.67 · ranks 215th of 216
CSIP ideology
−0.67
More conservative than 85% of House Democrats · ± 0.17
Out of committee
0%
House Democrats average 4.9% · ranks 171st of 207
Statements
42
41 posts on X, 1 Congressional Record speeches
Roll calls
29
Compared with House Democrats
Bills sponsored
5
and 36 cosponsored
Peer group: House Democrats. Rank 1 is the highest value in the group; the thick bar is Blair, the thin grey bar the peer average. The headline is the measure on which Blair is most unusual among peers (Methods, §08).
What Blair says
Blair stresses bipartisanship less than any other House Democrat. Bipartisanship in 0% of 42 statements, against 9.8% for the average House Democrat; 216th of 216.
An AI model reads each of Blair’s 42 statements in the 119th Congress (41 posts on X, 1 Congressional Record speeches) 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 House Democrats and ranked among them.
Kinds of statement
Share of statements carrying each label, the 119th Congress
0%80%
Blair
Peers
Rank
Policy discussion31 statements
74%
73%
111th of 216
Credit claiming5 statements
12%
23%
202nd of 216
Personal attacks4 statements
10%
7%
52nd of 216
Policy criticism4 statements
10%
28%
211th of 216
Bipartisanship0 statements
0%
10%
216th of 216
Show the data
| Row | Blair | Peers |
|---|---|---|
| Policy discussion | 74% | 73% |
| Credit claiming | 12% | 23% |
| Personal attacks | 10% | 7% |
| Policy criticism | 10% | 28% |
| Bipartisanship | 0% | 10% |
42
statements classified
41 posts on X, 1 Congressional Record speeches.
Show the data
| Part | Value |
|---|---|
| posts on X | 41 |
| Congressional Record speeches | 1 |
How to read the bars
The thick bar is Blair; the thin grey bar is the average House Democrats. A longer thick bar means Blair does this more than peers. Rank 1 is the highest rate in the group.
Extreme labels
Blair used no extreme labels in 42 statements. The peer average is 1.9%.
No extreme labels in this window.
Who gets the labels
Targets named alongside an extreme label, by number of statements
No targets recorded.
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
| Column | Statements | Personal attacks | Policy criticism | Policy discussion | Bipartisanship | Credit claiming | Extreme labels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sep ’26 | 24 | 12.5% | 8.3% | 79.2% | 0.0% | 4.2% | 0.0% |
| Oct ’26 | 18 | 5.6% | 11.1% | 66.7% | 0.0% | 22.2% | 0.0% |
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 Blair’s words
Real statements from the classifier’s example set, with the labels it assigned
Credit claiming
The text of this post is on X; follow the source link to read it.
Oct 13, 2026 · Posts on X · policy discussion; credit claiming; Energy; Science, Technology, Communications; Transportation and Public Works · Source
Policy criticism
The text of this post is on X; follow the source link to read it.
Oct 17, 2026 · Posts on X · policy criticism; policy discussion; Housing and Community Development; Economics and Public Finance · 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 · target: Donald TrumpSource
Posts on X
The text of this post is on X; follow the source link to read it.
personal attacks · policy discussion · Armed Forces and National Security · Taxation · Government Operations and Politics · target: TrumpSource
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 · target: TrumpSource
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 · Crime and Law Enforcement · Science, Technology, Communications · target: Mike JohnsonSource
All 42 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: 41 posts on X, 1 Congressional Record speeches.
Policy
Government Operations and Politics is what Blair talks about most: 29% of policy statements, above the peer share. Talk and legislation agree at 0.46 on a 0–1 scale (House Democrats average 0.67; 215th of 216).
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 Blair talks about. The bills Blair sponsors and cosponsors carry the same areas, so the two can be compared.
What Blair talks about
Share of policy statements by area, the 119th Congress
0%35%
Blair
Peers
Government Operations and Politics9 statements
29%
20%
Immigration7 statements
23%
11%
Civil Rights and Liberties, Minority Issues6 statements
19%
13%
Crime and Law Enforcement5 statements
16%
9%
Armed Forces and National Security4 statements
13%
16%
Show the data
| Row | Blair | Peers |
|---|---|---|
| Government Operations and Politics | 29% | 20% |
| Immigration | 23% | 11% |
| Civil Rights and Liberties, Minority Issues | 19% | 13% |
| Crime and Law Enforcement | 16% | 9% |
| Armed Forces and National Security | 13% | 16% |
How to read the bars
The thick bar is the share of Blair’s policy statements in an area; the thin grey bar is the average share for House Democrats. 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 House Democrats averages.
Show the data
| Area | Talks about | House Democrats, talks about | Legislates on | House Democrats, legislates on |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Government Operations and Politics | 29% | 20% | 12% | 11% |
| Immigration | 23% | 11% | 2% | 4% |
| Civil Rights and Liberties, Minority Issues | 19% | 13% | 4% | 5% |
| Crime and Law Enforcement | 16% | 9% | 2% | 7% |
| Armed Forces and National Security | 13% | 16% | 2% | 7% |
0.46
talk-to-bills agreement, 0 to 1
House Democrats average 0.67. Ranks 215th of 216.
What agreement means, and what it doesn’t
Agreement is 1 minus the distance between the two distributions (Jensen–Shannon): 1 means Blair legislates on exactly the areas Blair 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 Blair sponsored count fully, cosponsored bills a quarter. Shown with at least 20 policy statements and 5 bills.
Ideology
Blair sits at −0.67 on the CSIP scale, left of 0, more conservative than 85% of House Democrats. Approximate range −0.84 to −0.50, which understates the uncertainty; from 0 donors and 29 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”.
−0.67
CSIP ideal point
Approximate range −0.84 to −0.50. From 0 donors and 29 roll calls. Run 2026-10-25T215945. Blue is left of 0, red right of 0.
The outlined dot is Blair, 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 Blair’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 Blair sits
Every official in each group, on the CSIP scale
House Democrats217 · median −1.0
All House439 · median +0.3
Show the data
| Group | Officials | Median | Share left of Blair |
|---|---|---|---|
| House Democrats | 217 | −1.0 | 85% |
| All House | 439 | +0.3 | 42% |
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 Blair 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 Blair.
Money
No campaign-finance data.No campaign-finance records are matched to this official.
Votes
Blair voted with the majority of House Democrats on 100% of party-line votes and missed none of 29 roll calls. House Democrats on average: 96.4% party unity, 96.9% attendance. Across all roll calls, Blair voted against the majority of House Democrats 1 time.
29 roll calls Blair could vote on in the 119th Congress, compared with House Democrats. 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 Blair voted with the majority of House Democrats. The count of votes against that majority covers every roll call where the majority took a side.
1
votes against the majority of House Democrats
Party unity 100%, House Democrats average 96.4%, ranks 10th of 217. 29 roll calls in the 119th Congress.
Attendance and party unity
The thick bar is Blair, the thin grey bar the House Democrats average. The scale runs from 80% to 100% to show the gap.
80%100%
Blair
Peers
Rank
Attendance
100%
96.9%
10th of 217
Party unity
100%
96.4%
10th of 217
Show the data
| Row | Blair | Peers |
|---|---|---|
| Attendance | 100% | 96.9% |
| Party unity | 100% | 96.4% |
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
13 roll calls the lab flagged as key in the 119th Congress
| Party split (yea–nay) | Why it’s key | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 16, 2026 | Yea | With majority | Passed | D 209–0 · R 191–14 · I 1–0Democrats 209 yea, 0 nay; Republicans 191 yea, 14 nay; Independents 1 yea, 0 nay | became law | |
| Sep 16, 2026 | H.J.Res. 213 Providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, United States Code, of the rule issued by the Environmental Protection Agency relating to the “California State Nonroad Engine Pollution Control Standards; Commercial Harbor Craft Regulations; Notice of Decision” On Passage | Nay | With majority | Passed | D 3–207 · R 210–1 · I 1–0Democrats 3 yea, 207 nay; Republicans 210 yea, 1 nay; Independents 1 yea, 0 nay | close vote |
| Sep 16, 2026 | Nay | With majority | Passed | D 6–206 · R 210–1 · I 1–0Democrats 6 yea, 206 nay; Republicans 210 yea, 1 nay; Independents 1 yea, 0 nay | close vote | |
| Sep 16, 2026 | Nay | Against majority | Passed | D 139–72 · R 212–0 · I 1–0Democrats 139 yea, 72 nay; Republicans 212 yea, 0 nay; Independents 1 yea, 0 nay | party crossover | |
| Sep 16, 2026 | H.R. 5334 An Act to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to allow early childhood educators to take the educator expense deduction, and for other purposes On Motion to Concur in the Senate Amendments | Nay | With majority | Passed | D 58–152 · R 203–7 · I 1–0Democrats 58 yea, 152 nay; Republicans 203 yea, 7 nay; Independents 1 yea, 0 nay | became law · party crossover |
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 Blair most often
Not enough shared votes.
Votes least often with
The colleagues who voted the same way as Blair least often
Not enough shared votes.
How to read the agreement lists
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.
Full voting record
119th Congress (2025–27), loads in batches
Legislation
Blair sponsored 5 bills in the 119th Congress; none became law. Cosponsored 36 others. 0% of sponsored bills got out of committee (House Democrats average 4.9%; 171st of 207).
The bills Blair 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
Show the data
| Role | Introduced | In committee | Passed one chamber | Passed both chambers | Became law |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sponsored | 5 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Cosponsored | 36 | 36 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
How to read the blocks
Ink blocks are bills Blair sponsored, ochre blocks bills Blair cosponsored; the figure above each block is the count. Most bills in any legislature never leave committee, so a short staircase is the norm.
0%
of sponsored bills got out of committee
House Democrats average 4.9%. Ranks 171st of 207.
Cosponsorship partners
Colleagues who most often cosponsor with Blair, by number of shared bills in the 119th Congress; the square shows their party.
- Yvette Clarke2
- Donald Davis2
- Jim McGovern2
- Maxine Waters2
- Eleanor Norton2
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 Blair’s bills; the toggle shows more.
Bill list
Sponsored and cosponsored, with status and policy area; five are shown, the toggle shows the rest
| H.R. 10875 | To amend titles II and XVIII of the Social Security Act to lower the Medicare eligibility age to 50, and for other purposes. | Cosponsor | Oct 22, 2026 | In committee | Unassigned | Referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committee on Ways and Means, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned. Oct 22, 2026 |
| H.R. 10907 | To prohibit interference in elections for Federal office, and for other purposes. | Cosponsor | Oct 22, 2026 | In committee | Unassigned | Referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committee on House Administration, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned. Oct 22, 2026 |
| H.Res. 1636 | Constituent Casework Continuity Resolution | Sponsor | Oct 22, 2026 | In committee | Government Operations and Politics | Referred to the House Committee on House Administration. Oct 22, 2026 |
| H.R. 10811 | PARTNER Act | Sponsor | Oct 15, 2026 | In committee | Transportation and Public Works | Referred to the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure. Oct 15, 2026 |
| H.R. 10769 | SUN Act | Sponsor | Oct 9, 2026 | In committee | Transportation and Public Works | Referred to the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure. Oct 9, 2026 |
Online
A site that changed 50 times in 90 days. Blair’s official site had 23 pages when last crawled on Oct 25, 2026. The lab last catalogued the images Blair posted on Oct 17, 2026.
The lab crawls Blair’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 Blair posts with a vision model.
Websites
- 23
pages crawled
50changes in 90 days
- 7
pages crawled
16changes in 90 days
How to read the counts
“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.
Social accounts
Images Blair posted
The latest 22, with model-written descriptions
A political campaign infographic on a white background, with a candidate logo at the top, a quote about housing, and three bullet points describing proposed housing and homelessness legislation. Orange and navy-blue text and a two-color stripe appear near the bottom.View post 
A white political press-release graphic with a campaign logo at the top, a large headline, date, and several paragraphs about housing costs and housing policy. A colored stripe runs along the bottom.View post 
A political promotional graphic featuring a row of modern suburban houses, a circular portrait of a smiling man in a suit against an American flag, a campaign logo, a large headline, and a right-pointing arrow.View post 
A congressional office informational flyer on a white background, with a campaign-style logo at the top, paragraphs about housing assistance and congressional legislation, two bulleted resource sections, and colored stripes along the bottom. The image contains text.View post 
A formal press release on a white background, with a campaign-style logo at the top, a large headline, a date, and several paragraphs about proposed legislation. A narrow orange and navy band runs along the bottom. Text fills most of the image.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.
Methods and sources
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 Blair is most unusual among House Democrats, 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 …”).
Identifiers
- Profile id
- B001328
- Bioguide
- B001328
- FEC candidate ids
- H6GA13062
Bulk files with the same data for every official:
Freshness of this profile’s data
- 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.
- Bills (Congress)Oct 22, 20266 days agoGovInfo BILLSTATUS: sponsors, cosponsors, actions, CRS policy area.
- 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 28, 2026todayImages 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