You might think the state to produce the most cranberries is California because of how much produce it supplies the nation, but you’d be wrong.

Food Republic – Restaurants, Reviews, Recipes, Cooking Tips
You might think the state to produce the most cranberries is California because of how much produce it supplies the nation, but you’d be wrong.

Food Republic – Restaurants, Reviews, Recipes, Cooking Tips
President Donald Trump’s power as the GOP’s kingmaker faces a major test with this month’s primaries. So far, he’s on rocky footing.
His revenge tour kicks off Tuesday in Indiana, as he tries to oust eight Republican state legislators who blocked his redistricting effort there. Then it moves on to Louisiana and Kentucky, where he’s backing challengers to two longtime enemies, Sen. Bill Cassidy and Rep. Thomas Massie, who he’s been itching to unseat for years. Trump has also selected his favorite candidates in the crowded GOP primaries for Alabama Senate and Georgia governor.
But his picks have struggled to dominate their fields, with most holding only narrow leads in polling and some failing to pull far ahead in fundraising. In Indiana, even a few allies of the president are tempering expectations of a full eight-lawmaker sweep.
The results will reveal how effective the president’s political operation is at turning out Republicans when Trump is not on the ballot, and how motivated MAGA is to go along with his ongoing retribution campaign. It’s also a potent expression of his power ahead of the likely lame-duck phase of his presidency.
Some Republicans — even those involved in the races — say the shaky standing of Trump’s preferred candidates suggests that his ability to move his base en masse is beginning to slip. MAGA, they note, may be developing a mind of its own as the party begins to look beyond the Trump era.
“He’s hit his max power and now you’re seeing the backside of that power curve,” said former GOP Rep. Adam Kinzinger, a frequent target of Trump’s wrath who retired from Congress amid intense backlash for his 2021 vote to impeach the president and a new congressional map that would have left him in a member-on-member primary. “This will be his last competitive election cycle that will have any impact on him. And I think the base is starting to think into the future.”
Trump has a long history of unseating his congressional opponents, backing primary challengers to his critics and wielding his social media platform and his official bully pulpit to create such politically hostile conditions that many of his adversaries simply retire. Republican candidates have long jockeyed — and continue to trip over themselves — for his stamp of approval, hoping not to end up on the wrong side of his anger.
“The Trump endorsement is the most powerful and influential endorsement in the history of American politics,” said White House spokesperson Davis Ingle. “President Trump’s sterling record with his endorsements speaks for itself.”
Still, he’s produced a very mixed track record in contested races. Trump’s candidates have felled some of his biggest foes in GOP primaries, including former Rep. Liz Cheney (R-Wyo.) and other Republicans who voted to impeach the president in his first term. But he’s also suffered some high-profile losses; he failed to oust Georgia Gov. Brian Kemp and has watched several of his picks fall short in congressional races over the years, including Sen. Luther Strange in Alabama and scandal-plagued Rep. Madison Cawthorn in North Carolina.
Success will be even trickier this cycle: The May contests come as he continues an unpopular war in Iran that’s causing voters pain at the gas pump, as people sour on his economic and immigration agenda and as his approval ratings continue to sink.
“The [Trump] endorsement just isn’t moving voters. It just isn’t,” said a GOP operative working on the Alabama Senate race who was granted anonymity to speak candidly. “When you’ve endorsed more than 800 people in 10 years, the potency of an individual endorsement wanes.”
As the redistricting wars become a defining element of the midterms, Tuesday’s election will illuminate the president’s ability to maintain his grip on the Republican coalition.
While the White House and its allies have deployed the full force of its political operation against eight Indiana legislators — spending nearly $10 million across the races — they’re beginning to downplay the likelihood they will sweep all of them. Critics of the revenge effort say the strategy has been scattered and undisciplined.
How many incumbents survive will be an important piece of evidence predicting how the rest of May will go for the White House.
“We’ve tried to be helpful, as we always are, with our colleagues that are incumbents right now and will continue to be,” Rodric Bray, Indiana’s Senate President Pro Tempore who led the charge against Trump’s redistricting push, told POLITICO. “The challenge, of course, is that money matters in politics. When $9 million is spent, that has a huge impact, and we’ll see what the result is.”
Trump-backed Rep. Julia Letlow is struggling to dominate the polls in her primary challenge to unseat Cassidy, who earned MAGA’s ire for voting to convict Trump on impeachment charges in 2021. The latest Emerson College poll shows Letlow locked in a close three-way race, with her at 27 percent, State Treasurer John Fleming at 28 percent and Cassidy at 21 percent. Nearly 1 in 4 likely GOP primary voters are undecided.
Letlow entered the race at Trump’s urging. She boasts endorsements from Louisiana’s GOP Gov. Jeff Landry and national groups like the Make America Healthy Again PAC, which has promised $1 million in support like distributing mailers — a needed financial boost given her middling war chest compared with Cassidy’s.
But Trump has not sent the calvary for Letlow, withholding his own war chest and not making any trips to Louisiana on her behalf. The president recently doubled down on his campaign against Cassidy, telling GOP primary voters to kick the incumbent “OUT OF OFFICE” — but Trump notably did not name-drop Letlow or urge voters to back her.
Trump faces two very different tests of his influence in Kentucky, where he is simultaneously boosting Rep. Andy Barr as retiring Sen. Mitch McConnell’s successor and pushing to oust a longtime thorn in his side in Massie.
The president waded in late for Barr, endorsing the representative less than three weeks before the primary while also offering one of his two rivals, businessman Nate Morris, a job in his administration — a move that could help propel Barr past former Kentucky Attorney General Daniel Cameron.
But it is Massie’s 4th District race that may prove more troublesome for Trump. The president finally fronted a challenger to the renegade Republican after Massie voted against the party’s signature tax-and-spending package last year, and Trump’s allies have now poured over $10 million into sinking the incumbent.
So far, Massie has withstood the onslaught. He leads his rival, former Navy SEAL Ed Gallrein, in polling, fundraising and name ID. One recent survey showed half of likely voters in his deep-red district with a libertarian bent preferred an independent-minded lawmaker, compared to 37 percent who wanted a strong Trump supporter.
Massie, who threads that needle by saying he’s with Trump “91 percent of the time,” argues that supporting him and the president aren’t “mutually exclusive things.” And he thinks the Trump-directed flood of outside money against him has its limits.
“If outside billionaires spend millions of dollars, they can change somebody’s profile,” Massie said in a recent interview. “But I think what they’re going to find out is that my brand is established well enough … that [they] can persuade some of the people, but they’re not going to be able to persuade enough of them.”
The president isn’t being driven by revenge in Alabama. But even there, his chosen candidate is battling to break through a crowded GOP primary field for Senate: The Trump-backed Rep. Barry Moore has a slight lead in public polling, while Attorney General Steve Marshall, who has been in office for nearly a decade, is holding his own.
Meanwhile in Georgia, Trump’s backing of Lt. Gov. Burt Jones’ gubernatorial run is a rebuke of Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger, who rose to national prominence by defying the president’s efforts to overturn the 2020 election and is himself running for governor.
Still, Trump’s endorsement has its limits: Rick Jackson, a health care executive, has a slight lead over Jones in most polls for the GOP primary as he also makes a play for the MAGA base. He’s been pummelling the lieutenant governor with millions spent on attack ads.
“If any other candidate had received that amount of negative, they would be polling within the margin of error of zero,” said a Georgia-based Republican strategist who is unaffiliated with any candidate and was granted anonymity to speak openly. “When you’re looking at the reasons why [Jones] is now in a toss-up race, I would say the President’s endorsement is by far the top reason why.”
As both Jackson and Jones compete for the same slice of voters, some Republicans see Jones’ inability to dominate the race as evidence of Trump’s waning influence.
“It’s not just Donald Trump — Georgia candidates historically have not benefited very much from endorsements from out-of-state celebrities,” said Jason Shepherd, former Cobb County GOP Chair.
After Sen. John Cornyn finished ahead of Attorney General Ken Paxton in Texas’ March primary, Republicans in Washington were on standby for Trump’s expected endorsement. It never came.
Perhaps in the clearest example of MAGA beginning to make decisions without Trump’s explicit approval, Texas Republicans have rallied around the scandal-plagued Paxton. Polling now shows that a Trump endorsement for Cornyn, at this point, likely wouldn’t sway voters significantly — and Paxton would maintain his edge.
GOP Texas consultant Vinny Minchillo that if Trump does decide to weigh in, he “will have to sell this to the faithful and tell them exactly what to do. Especially if he endorses Cornyn.”
Trump’s endorsement still matters, he said, but “less so with each day that passes.”
Politics
State lawmakers raised concerns in a series of legislative hearings while they considered the confirmation of Gov. Mike Dunleavy’s attorney general designee Stephen Cox. At issue were controversial legal actions Cox took in his first eight months in office.

Cox is an attorney and has served in various roles in federal law enforcement, including as U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Texas and other roles in the U.S. Departments of Justice and Homeland Security, as well as in private industry in Texas and Alaska, according to his resume. Cox is a member of the Federalist Society, a national conservative and libertarian legal organization. Prior to being appointed, he worked as legal counsel for Bristol Bay Industrial, LLC, a holding company and investment subsidiary of the Bristol Bay Native Corporation, since 2021.
Dunleavy appointed Cox to the Attorney General’s office in August, after Treg Taylor resigned to run for governor. Cox appeared before lawmakers in Senate and House confirmation committees ahead of a joint session to vote on his appointment next week.
While in Alaska’s top legal post, Cox has taken several controversial actions lawmakers questioned. He defended handing over Alaska’s private voter information at the request of the U.S. Department of Justice, which has prompted a lawsuit by civil rights groups. Cox and the Alaska Department of Law also joined over 110 amicus briefs, or “friends of the court briefs” on a wide variety of federal and state cases, including U.S. Supreme Court cases.

Some lawmakers raised concerns that Cox has taken legal positions with amicus briefs that were highly politicized, aligned with the Trump administration and in some cases contrary to Alaska law and unrelated to Alaskans interests.
That included joining Alaska in cases opposing birthright citizenship, supporting a Christian baker declining to bake a cake for a same-sex wedding, and supporting the most recent case where the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that Louisiana’s congressional maps cannot be drawn based on race — a decision critics say effectively limits the Voting Rights Act.
Senate President Gary Stevens, R-Kodiak, asked why Cox had signed Alaska on to challenge birthright citizenship, which the U.S. Supreme Court is scheduled to decide in June. Stevens became emotional, saying it was a fundamental value to provide refuge to people fleeing war and poverty, or seeking better opportunities — like his own ancestors who escaped the Irish famine.
“It just baffles me. How can you or your department or anyone in the administration argue against birthright citizenship? It’s in our Constitution. It’s a moral issue,” Stevens said.

Cox said he believes that birthright citizenship should not be granted for children of those visiting or temporarily in the United States, but only for those who intend to stay.
“My view of the Constitution under the 14th Amendment is that it is not simply birth on the territory, that you also have to be not subject to the foreign jurisdiction, and that there has to be some kind of allegiance,” Cox replied.
“But I also recognize, like everything, I could be wrong,” he added. “But again, we will hear what the US Supreme Court decides on that issue.”
Lawmakers in the Senate Judiciary and State Affairs Committees pressed Cox on his reason for signing on to cases that they said would be contrary to Alaskan’s interests.
Sen. Matt Claman, D-Anchorage, asked if Cox would sign on to cases challenging abortion rights in another state, while Alaska’s Constitution protects the right to abortion within the right to privacy.
“What is your perspective with respect to filing amicus briefs and requests for amicus briefs regarding the right to abortion, that the courts have found is specifically protected in Alaska?” Claman asked.
After several minutes of back and forth, Cox finally said he would have to consider the specific case and consult with the governor.
“I would look hard at the law. I would consult the experts within the Department of Law. I would get their expertise. If I felt that the state of Alaska did not have an interest, I wouldn’t bring it,” he said. “If I thought that there was an interest in that the state of Alaska did have, notwithstanding what the Alaska Supreme Court has ruled in in its prior cases, I would have a conversation with the governor.”
Sen. Bill Wielechowski, D-Anchorage, questioned Cox on why he didn’t oppose a lawsuit before the U.S. Supreme Court that would require mail-in ballots to be received by Election Day, which would be a challenge for many rural Alaska precincts. Alaska law currently allows ballots to be received within 10 days, or 15 days if mailed overseas.

“Why didn’t you stand up for Alaska and say to the court: this is a bad law for Alaska. We want you to strike this down. We want you to say no to this,” Wielechowski said.
Cox defended the decision to submit an amicus brief declaring no support for either party as a “strategic choice.”
“I actually like briefs in support of neither party that are very fact-based. And I think, and again, I realize people might disagree, but I think sometimes they get noticed the most, but that was a strategic choice,” he said.
Lawmakers also questioned the time and resources expended by the Alaska Department of Law on amicus briefs, versus prosecutions and law enforcement in Alaska. “Why would we spend that money when we have this crisis on domestic violence and sexual assault, when that money is better spent on prosecution in state?” Claman asked.
Cox defended the initiative, and the creation of a new Alaska State Solicitor General role focused on multistate litigation in October. He said his goal in office is to pursue more amicus briefs.
“Going forward, I’d like Alaska to take more of a leadership role, offering more of our own briefs, and shaping the arguments directly, as opposed to just being a joiner,” he told lawmakers.
Several senators questioned Cox on his role in the Dunleavy’s administration’s decision to share confidential voter information at the request of the U.S. Department of Justice last year. Critics and plaintiffs in new lawsuit against the state say the sharing of voter information — including full name, birth dates and partial social security numbers — was a violation of voters’ privacy. The state also signed an agreement to remove voters the DOJ flags as ineligible.

Cox said he believed the request was lawful, and noted the federal government had threatened to sue.
“One, was there a statute that authorized disclosure of confidential information? There was, for lawful government purposes,” Cox said. “And two, we took the posture of cooperation. Alaska has a long standing history of cooperating with the U.S. Department (of Justice) Civil Rights Division.”
“And I will be candid with you,” he added. “I have a disposition of cooperating with law enforcement.”
Sen. Scott Kawasaki, D-Fairbanks, pressed Cox on the decision to share the voter information, which he and other lawmakers stressed is protected by Alaska’s Constitution.

“The state also has a constitutional right of privacy. It’s one of the, I think, bedrocks and one of the most important things I think some people recognize in the state constitution,” Kawasaki said. “Why was that not your first thought, is that Alaska has got a constitutional right to privacy. Let’s take a pause before we do anything more that the Department of Justice has requested?”
Cox defended the decision as lawful: “I will concede I am learning about the right to privacy. And the Legislature has far better expertise on the right to privacy,” Cox said. “And the law department’s position is that that statute is a valid statute and that it is not unconstitutional.”
Sen. Jesse Bjorkman, R-Kenai, also questioned the purpose of sharing Alaska’s voter information, which Cox defended as under “lawful government purpose” in the agreement. But Bjorkman raised doubts that the reasons the federal government may deem voters to be ineligible is clear.
“If we are releasing the data for a lawful purpose, but we can’t positively identify what the purpose is, and then judge that according to whether or not it is indeed lawful,” Bjorkman said. “I have a concern about that.”
Cox told lawmakers that while in the Attorney General’s office his priorities include a new “quality of life” initiative working with the municipality of Anchorage to prosecute retail theft and public disorder infractions.
“We’ve cross-designated prosecutors so that state and municipal attorneys can use each other’s authorities. We’re looking at civil tools like abatement actions to go after drug houses or even using data from retailers to identify patterns and repeat offenders,” he said.
Cox said prosecuting violent crime like domestic violence and sexual assault is always the No. 1 priority of the office, and added he’s focused on resource development and consumer protection as well.
“Alaska has some of the strongest consumer protection laws in the country, and I think we can be enforcing them more aggressively,” he said.
“At bottom, this job is about the rule of law, what the law requires, how it is applied and how we exercise the state’s power within those limits. I’ve spent much of my career in law enforcement settings where the stakes are real. Decisions affect liberty, public safety and public trust. That experience shapes how I approach this office,” he said.
Cox is scheduled to appear before the House Judiciary Committee on Monday. A joint session on state appointments was scheduled for May 7 but was postponed and likely will be set for early next week.
The post Alaska lawmakers raise concerns with Dunleavy’s attorney general pick ahead of confirmation vote appeared first on Chilkat Valley News.
Juneau’s Goldbelt Tram is scheduled to remain closed until May 24 following an accident last Thursday when one of the two passenger cars docked at the base station at an accelerated rate of speed, injuring employees in the car, Goldbelt Inc. announced Monday.
The closure is to “investigate the issue and take any necessary corrective measures to ensure the safety of our guests and employees,” the Juneau-based Alaska Native corporation stated in a post on its Facebook page.
“The Tram is in the process of refunding all pre-paid tickets for visits scheduled during the closure period that were purchased through our website. If you purchased tickets through a third party, such as a cruise line, please contact that vendor directly for refund assistance.”

The accident occurred at about 9 p.m. last Thursday when five employees were taking one of the cars down from the mountain. Two were taken to Bartlett Regional Hospital after the impact at the base, where they were treated and released.
Damage occurred at both the top and bottom stations, due to both cars operating in tandem when the incident occurred.
Goldbelt has not specified the reason for the accident.
This story was originally published by the Juneau Independent.
The post Goldbelt Tram to remain closed at least until May 24 after accident last week that injured employees appeared first on Chilkat Valley News.
The wrestling icon’s final documentary revisits key moments from his life — and some of them carry a very different weight now. Continue reading…The Boot – Country Music News, Music Videos and Songs
Madonna is striking a pose at the 2026 Met Gala.
Indeed, the “Vogue” hitmaker dressed to impress at the annual fundraising event at the Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York City May 4.
Staying…
E! Online (US) – Top Stories
Hold on tight—because Suki Waterhouse is rocking the Met Gala 2026.
The Daisy Jones & the Six actress enjoyed a stylish outing at New York City’s Metropolitan Museum of Art May 4, stepping out on…
E! Online (US) – Top Stories
“Water” may have changed Tyla’s life, but diamonds were her best friend at the 2026 Met Gala.
The South African singer wore a custom Valentino dress with a top consisting of diamond chains,…
E! Online (US) – Top Stories
By: James Brooks, Alaska Beacon

After two southeast Alaska Republicans reversed themselves, the Alaska Legislature on Monday failed to override Gov. Mike Dunleavy’s veto of an elections bill intended to take effect this year.
Forty votes were needed to override the veto. Monday’s vote was 38-22, with Rep. Jeremy Bynum, R-Ketchikan, and Sen. Bert Stedman, R-Sitka, providing the critical votes to sustain the veto. Both previously voted to pass Senate Bill 64 and send it to the governor.
Each said after Monday’s vote that they did not believe state officials would be able to implement the bill in time for this year’s elections.
As written, SB 64 contained a swath of changes to state law that were intended to make it easier for Alaskans to vote and to improve the security of state elections.
Among the proposed modifications: Free postage for absentee ballots, a new system for absentee voters to track their ballots through the counting process, a 10-day period for absentee voters to fix problems that disqualified their ballots, updated procedures for auditing the state’s voter list to remove ineligible people, a requirement that the financial backers of ballot measures disclose their identities and a special liaison intended to fix widespread voting problems in rural Alaska.
Dunleavy vetoed the bill on Thursday. In his veto message to the Legislature, he wrote, “the Division of Elections warns such changes would be extremely difficult if not impossible, to implement securely and reliably in advance of the 2026 elections.”
Sen. Bill Wielechowski, D-Anchorage, supported the bill and the override. Speaking ahead of the vote, he said that in 2022, during a special election held after the death of Rep. Don Young, R-Alaska, the state was able to implement a ballot-tracking system within six weeks.
“I’m not prepared to tell Alaskans, ‘Sorry, it’ll have to wait another year. It’s just too hard,’” Wielechowski said.

But Bynum said afterward that he was swayed by statements from the Division of Elections, which said it was uncertain about its ability to implement the system so quickly this year.
“I can’t speak to what they may or may not have done in 2022. I can only speak to what the Division of Elections is telling me today. And what they told me is that this timeline is too aggressive for them to effectively put this in the law,” he said.
Bynum said another factor in his vote was the use of tribal IDs by voters at the polls. SB 64 would have mandated the state to accept their use as voter ID. Bynum said that until the past week, he was unaware that tribal IDs could already be used as a matter of policy.
Bynum said the vote was a difficult one for him and that if the bill had taken effect Jan. 1, he would have voted for it.
Stedman was one of the last legislators to vote, and his opposition was significantly less important because Bynum’s decision had already sustained the veto.
“I think they need more time to implement it. That was it, pretty much. I think there’s a lot of good work in this bill and a lot of positive things, but it just needs a little more time,” he said while walking away from Monday’s joint session.

In March, the House voted 23-16 on March 23 to pass the bill. Rep. Ashley Carrick, D-Fairbanks, was excused absent from that vote but later expressed her support. Two days later, the Senate voted 16-4 to approve the House’s changes and send the bill to Dunleavy.
The veto of SB 64 was Dunleavy’s 10th in the two-year 34th Alaska State Legislature. While prior governors have vetoed more bills during a single Legislature, this Legislature has passed relatively few bills, and Dunleavy has vetoed bills at a higher rate than any previous governor.
Legislators overrode two of Dunleavy’s 10 vetoes. Two others, in addition to SB 64, saw override votes fail. The remaining five were never brought up for an override vote despite opportunities to do so.
The veto means a sixth consecutive year will pass without a significant update to the state’s election system. Bipartisan bills failed in 2022, 2024 and now 2026.
This year’s bill appeared to have the most likelihood of success — it was endorsed by Reps. Sarah Vance, R-Homer, and Kevin McCabe, R-Big Lake, two of the most politically conservative members of the state House, and it had support from House and Senate progressives.
The Alaska Federation of Natives issued a statement urging legislators to support an override, as did other groups.
But many Republicans opposed the changes because they wanted a more rigorous cull of the state’s voter list and oppose easier access to absentee voting.
Ahead of the final vote, Republican writer Suzanne Downing lambasted the bill, as did other socially conservative commentators.
Vance, speaking Monday to the Legislature, said she received “threats” and “bullying” because of her support of the bill and an override.
After the vote, she said “there has been slander and an all-out assault to discredit and, frankly, lie to the people about what this bill does.”
Asked whether she was referring to Downing and her website, which has published a series of articles against the bill, she said, “Very clearly — intentionally misleading the people about what’s actually in the bill, what it does, and claiming that I’m no longer a conservative.”
One of the articles was from Rep. Rebecca Schwanke, R-Glennallen, who urged Dunleavy to veto the bill and on Monday asked legislators to sustain the governor’s decision.
Speaking on the floor, she said rural voters in her district need more than 10 days to fix problems that might have disqualified their absentee ballot.
Sen. Mike Cronk, R-Tok, represents Schwanke’s district and another Fairbanks-area House district. He was in favor of the override.
“If I lose an election because a little old lady in Arctic Village had to cure her ballot and have that one ballot cost me my election, so be it,” he said. “Aren’t we here to make sure every vote counts?”
All is fair in love and war, but Simone Ashley is the victor of the 2026 Met Gala red carpet.
Celebrating the “Costume Art” exhibit’s focus on the dressed body, the Bridgerton star ascended the…
E! Online (US) – Top Stories