Compassion, kindness, and the ability to identify a triangle; these are some of the attributes AL.com readers say they’re looking for in their next governor.

Though there are no candidates officially running, speculation is running high that Sen. Tommy Tuberville and Lt. Gov. Will Ainsworth might face off for the 2026 GOP primary.

In a post to Facebook Friday, AL.com asked “What do you want to see from the next person in office?”

In 2026, Alabamians will elect a new governor. What do you want to see from the next person in office? Tell us the priorities, values, or changes that matter most to you. Posted by al.com on Friday, April 25, 2025

Nearly 1,000 people responded.

And while some have a particular candidate in mind like Doug Jones, who was mentioned the most, the majority of commentors focused on qualities they would like to see in state leadership.

“Compassion. Kindness. Dignity. Respect for all constituents. The willingness to move the state forward,” wrote Elaine Henry in a comment that received over 200 likes.

“In other words, anything but what we’ve had for the past 20+ years.”

“Somebody that the lobbyists can’t buy,” wrote Bedeah Waters.

“None of our representatives work for US. Bring that back.”

But the overwhelming majority of commentors were very vocal about what, or more accurately who, they didn’t want to represent them.

“I can tell you what I DON’T want to see, Tommy Tuberville,” wrote Angie Barned in the second most liked comment.

“ANYONE and I do mean ANYONE other than Tommy Tubberville (sic) …I’m afraid we are doomed,” wrote Sharon Chancellor.

Tuberville for months has been in conversations surrounding the 2026 race.

Yellowhammer News reported Tuberville “told a group of donors at a private event on Wednesday night that his mind is officially made up” and that he would run for governor rather than a second term in the U.S. Senate.

But Tuberville downplayed his interest on Thursday, and said he and his wife are still weighing their options.

“While I appreciate all the interest, Suzanne and I are still praying about how to best serve the people of Alabama. When I have an official announcement about my future, you’ll hear it directly from me,” he posted on social media.

Commentor Jay A Gee also took a dig at the senator, writing he preferred “someone who actually knows the 3 Branches of Government, oh and someone who actually lives in Alabama.”

The subject of Tuberville’s residency came up during the race for the Republican nomination for Senate in 2020, Tuberville’s first run for public office.

Former Sen. Jeff Sessions, who challenged Tuberville in the race, raised the issue of Tuberville’s residential property in the Florida panhandle.

AL.com reported at that time that Tuberville and his wife, Suzanne, were both registered voters in Alabama and owned a home here, according to the Alabama Secretary of State’s Office.

But by July 2023, the Tubervilles did not own a single square foot of property in Alabama after selling parcels in Macon and Tallapoosa counties for $1.4 million, according to a Washington Post report

And while a spokesman for Alabama’s senior senator maintained to the Post that Tuberville’s primary residence is an Auburn house owned by his wife and son, campaign finance documents and property records suggest Tuberville’s main home is in Santa Rosa Beach, Florida, the paper reported.

“There’s no problem with that. We looked at that six, seven years ago. It’s just people that are probably, maybe, wanting to run for governor. Hey, if you want to run, go run on your abilities. Don’t try to trick somebody else. There’s nothing to that,” Tuberville has said of residency questions.

Ainsworth, who is considering a run for governor next year, has said that Tuberville’s decision on whether to enter the race would not affect his plans.

“Sen. Tuberville, he’s done a good job,” Ainsworth has said. “But that doesn’t have any impact on my decision.”

Jessica Ramos State senator representing Queens Jessica Ramos / Michael M. Santiago/Getty Images Her ideological stance in brief: Pro-labor progressive who doesn’t like to fall in line. Major endorsements: United Auto Workers Region 9A (shared with Brad Lander and Zohran Mamdani), Teamsters Locals 804 and 808, Downtown Women for Change Fundraising: $232,292 raised so far, as of March 13. She has an estimated $1,039 in the bank. She has not qualified for matching funds. Where’s home? Jackson Heights, Queens What is she running on? She wants to improve child care access, bolster affordable housing supply and integrate mental health care citywide. What’s holding her back? Slow and messy fundraising, trouble distinguishing herself in a crowded field of progressives. What’s her deal: Ramos is a progressive state lawmaker who has represented East Elmhurst, Jackson Heights and Corona since she ousted a moderate Democrat incumbent in 2018 as an insurgent, Working Families Party-backed candidate. She has forged a reputation as a tough and effective lawmaker, notching a variety of high-profile legislative victories as chair of the powerful Labor Committee. She has cracked down on wage theft, passed paid sick leave for domestic workers, enacted new protections for workers on farms, at nail salons and in distribution warehouses, and secured unemployment for more nontraditional workers. Beyond Ramos’ legislative victories and her condemnation of Adams for his handling of the migrant crisis, she’s perhaps best known for her opposition to a proposed casino bid from Mets owner Steve Cohen. Ramos’ ties to the labor world run deep. She has a background working in communications for social service employees union SSEU Local 371 and building service workers union 32BJ SEIU. But while many see her as a champion for labor, she has so far been unable to unite any major labor support. 32BJ SEIU and the Hotel and Gaming Trades Council are backing Cuomo, while the public employees union DC 37 is backing Adrienne Adams. Ramos launched her campaign in mid-September, she so far hasn’t been able to fundraise enough to make her competitive. She’s one of two Latino candidates – the daughter of Colombian immigrants – and a mother to two boys. Further reading: Episode 1: An Interview with Jessica Ramos

Will Steve Cohen’s gambit to sidestep Jessica Ramos work?

Jessica Ramos, no-nonsense state senator from Queens, is running for NYC mayor

Jessica Ramos isn’t sugarcoating anything

Michael Blake Founder and CEO of Kairos Democracy Project, political consultant, associate pastor Michael Blake / Noam Galai/Getty Images His ideological stance in brief: Moderate Democrat in the style of Barack Obama. Major endorsements: None reported yet. Fundraising: $287,000 raised, as of March 13. He has an estimated $18,000 in the bank. He hasn’t qualified for public matching funds. Where’s home? Melrose, Bronx What is he running on? He wants universal child care and a tax break for middle-class homeowners. He also wants to speed up government payments to nonprofits. What’s holding him back? Blake has been out of office for a few years, and with a couple of unsuccessful campaigns, he’s in danger of becoming a perennial candidate. What’s his deal: Blake is a former state Assembly member from the Bronx who entered the mayoral race toward the end of November. Like many of the candidates, he’s emphasized that his campaign will center on making things more affordable for New Yorkers and on quality of life issues. An alum of the 2008 and 2012 Obama campaigns who also did a stint in the Obama White House, he’s a fairly moderate Democrat – certainly more than many of his opponents. He’s championed more progressive causes though, including the Raise the Age legislation to prevent 16- and 17-year-olds from being tried as adults. Name recognition and differentiating himself will be big hurdles in his campaign. He gave up his seat in the Assembly in 2020 to run for Congress. He came in second to Rep. Ritchie Torres in the Democratic primary. The year prior, he finished fourth of 17 candidates in a special election for New York City public advocate. Further listening: Episode 3: An Interview with Michael Blake

Whitney Tilson Investor and editor at Stansberry Research, an investment research firm. Whitney Tilson / Sam Latter/Stansberry Research His ideological stance in brief: Pro-charter school Wall Street moderate focused on public safety. Major endorsements: Bill Ackman – though Ackman recently donated $250,000 to the pro-Cuomo PAC. Fundraising: $730,000 in private donations and a $25,000 loan to himself, as of March 13. He has an estimated $85,000 in the bank. He hasn’t been awarded public matching funds yet. Where’s home? Upper East Side, Manhattan What is he running on? He wants to reduce violent crime, grow the city’s economy, and rein in excessive city government spending. What’s holding him back? He has no experience in politics, low name recognition and he’s a millionaire but not Bloomberg rich. What’s his deal: Tilson, a former hedge fund executive, announced he’d be running for mayor in late November. He fell short of his highly ambitious goal: Raising nearly $8 million including matching funds by Jan. 15, but he still put up some strong numbers. It’s Tilson’s first time running for a political office after years of donating to Democratic candidates – both local and national. He has a history of education philanthropy, particularly involving charter schools. He cofounded the PAC Democrats for Education Reform, which supports pro-charter candidates. The group successfully advocated to raise New York’s charter school cap. Tilson was also on the board of charter network KIPP NYC. And he helped found the service-year program Teach for America, which places recent college grads in struggling public schools. Some of his top priorities listed on his campaign website include growing the city’s economy by 50% over the next decade, cutting violent crime by 50% during his first term, addressing the “cost-of-living crisis,” curbing “out-of-control city government spending,” and to “prioritize” citizens and permanent legal residents when it comes to allocating city resources. Before announcing any aspirations to run for mayor, Tilson garnered national headlines when in July 2024 he urged President Joe Biden to drop out of the race. Further reading: With Adams ditching the primary and Cuomo absent, mayoral ire turns toward little-known Tilson

Episode 4: An Interview with Whitney Tilson

WASHINGTON — The massive domestic policy bill that House Republicans passed Thursday by one vote would reshape the federal budget to the tune of trillions of dollars, affecting millions of Americans.

The legislation for President Donald Trump’s agenda was backed by nearly every Republican in the House and unanimously opposed by Democrats, who were cut out of the negotiations. It now heads to the GOP-led Senate, where it is likely to change before it reaches Trump’s desk.

Here are the major provisions in the sprawling package.

Extending Trump’s tax cuts, with some tweaks

The centerpiece of the bill is an extension of the 2017 Trump tax cuts, which would otherwise expire at the end of this year. That means the current lower rates, expanded standard deduction, business tax breaks and various other provisions would continue. The move affects Americans in all income tax brackets, but the largest benefits are projected to go to the highest earners.

The legislation also makes an important change to the state and local tax deduction — known as SALT — by boosting the current $10,000 cap to $40,000. The deduction only applies to taxpayers earning less than $500,000 per year.

The bill preserves the carried interest tax loophole, despite the White House saying Trump wants to end it.

No tax on tips or overtime

The bill also seeks to fulfill two of Trump’s campaign promises: exempting tips and overtime pay from federal income taxes.

Ending taxes on earnings that workers make from tips would cost $40 billion. The policy applies to workers making cash tips in occupations that “traditionally and customarily received tips” as of the end of 2024, as certified by the administration. But experts have questioned the breadth of the impact, given that many tipped workers don’t earn enough to pay federal income taxes to begin with.

It also halts taxes on overtime pay at a cost of $124 billion, according to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office.

The package also includes a tax break for auto-loan interest payments. And it calls for temporarily increasing the child tax credit to $2,500 and boosting tax deductions for seniors.

All of these tax breaks would run through the end of 2028.

Medicaid cuts and new requirements

The legislation contains one of the largest Medicaid funding cuts in modern history, projected to be nearly $700 billion by the CBO.

That includes stricter work requirements for able-bodied adults under 65, which will begin on the last day of 2026, creating new rules and paperwork for those on Medicaid. It also adds more frequent eligibility checks, address verifications and provisions to verify legal status of beneficiaries.

The bill also cuts Medicaid funding to states if they allow people in the U.S. illegally to access Medicaid.

It increases funding to the 10 states — nearly all of them dominated by Republicans — that have declined to expand Medicaid under the Affordable Care Act, as an incentive for them to continue to decline the additional program.

Overall, the legislation is expected to rescind health coverage for 8.6 million people, according to CBO, although the number could change given that the revised bill triggers some changes earlier.

Cuts to SNAP

The package hits another federal safety-net program: food stamps. To achieve savings, the legislation cuts $290 billion from the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP, the food aid program for low-income Americans.

It includes stricter work requirements for SNAP participants. Currently, able-bodied adults under 55, without children, can get limited SNAP benefits unless they show they are complying with work requirements. But a provision in the bill expands those work requirements to able-bodied adults under age 65.

Rolling back clean energy funds and tax credits

The bill terminates several hundred billion dollars in clean cuts. It ends energy tax breaks for consumers, including on clean vehicles and energy-efficient items for homes. It ends or phases out production or investment tax credits for clean fuels, clean electricity and hydrogen production.

A cash infusion for immigration enforcement

The bill contains about $150 billion in new funds to beef up border security and carry out Trump’s mass deportation plans. That includes money to finish building the barrier system at the U.S.-Mexico border and a funding boost for U.S. Customs and Border Protection.

There are also new fees and higher costs for prospective immigrants to apply for legal status.

A huge boost in military spending

The legislation includes a one-time boost of $150 billion in new military spending on matters like shipbuilding, air and missile defense, nuclear forces and cybersecurity, among others.

‘Trump accounts’

The measure creates new tax-preferred savings accounts for children that the federal government seeds with a $1,000 deposit. Parents could then contribute an additional $5,000 annually until the child is 18. The money can be used for educational purposes, for a down payment for a home or to start a small business.

The original version of House Republicans’ legislation called them “MAGA” accounts, but after an eleventh-hour amendment, they were renamed ‘Trump” accounts.

A debt limit hike

The bill is projected by the CBO to add $2.3 trillion to the federal deficit over 10 years, with the tax breaks and new expenditures far outweighing the savings.

It also raises the debt ceiling by $4 trillion ahead of a summer deadline announced by the Treasury Department for Congress to act or risk a catastrophic default. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent has urged Congress to act by mid-July in order to prevent an economic meltdown if the U.S. government is unable to meet its obligations.

When Donald Trump launched a trade war on April 2, he produced enormous volatility in stock markets around the world, but since then upheaval in the bond market has forced him to row back on some of his tariffs.

Investors traditionally consider US Treasury bonds to be a safe asset with a guaranteed return and therefore preferable to stocks when the latter are falling in price. However, instead of buying these bonds investors have been selling them, and this produced a rapid fall in their price.

While stock prices have recovered somewhat in Europe and Asia they have continued to fall in the US. But what do US consumers make of all this? Has the shifting of the bond market and economic uncertainty affected voter confidence, and approval, in the US president?

A round up of recent polls suggest US voters expect to see higher prices for goods as a result of the tariffs, with 75% expecting short-term price hikes, and 48% long-term. While 51% like Trump’s trade goals, only 37% approve of his approach. Meanwhile, 91% of Republicans think the president has a clear plan for tariffs and trade, but only 16% of Democrats and 43% of independent voters do. Republican voters are also much more willing to take a longer time to make up their minds about Trump’s trade policy, with 49% saying they will assess it in a year’s time or longer, compared to 36% of independents and 21% of Democrats who are willing to wait that long.

The latest Morning Consult poll on April 14 gives Trump his lowest approval rating yet for his second term, at 45%. A few weeks ago it was clear from the polls that there were massive differences between Democrats and Republicans when it came to approval for Trump’s handling of his job. An Economist/YouGov poll completed on March 18 showed that 6% of Democrats, 90% of Republican and 37% of independents approved of his performance at that time.

A more recent Economist/YouGov poll, completed on April 8 after the trade war began, shows a significant change in the views of independent voters. The Democrat and Republican approval/disapproval ratings are about the same as in the earlier survey by the Economist, but approval among voters who class themselves as independents has fallen by 5% to 32%.

Put simply, the nonaligned voters in America have shifted against Trump over tariffs. This is significant because they are the largest political group in the US, at 37% of electors compared with 34% Democrats and 29% Republicans. Also significant is that, according to Morning Consult, the average voter is more likely to hold positive than negative views about Democrats in Congress, for the first time since the 2024 election, at 47% to 46%.

If this shift continues, and independent voters support Democrat candidates in the 2026 mid-term elections, it means that the Democrats are likely to take control of Congress. This will give them greater opportunity to block presidential initiatives to introduce new bills, which must be passed by both the House of Representatives and the Senate to became law

If, at some point, the Democratic party wanted to try and impeach Trump they would need far more Congressional votes than they currently have. The Republicans currently have majorities in both Houses. Impeachment requires a simple majority in the House of Representatives, but a two-thirds majority in the Senate, so it is not an easy thing to do.

That said, the point is often made that Trump is a transactional politician and as a result attracts little personal loyalty from many of the people around him, particularly in Congress. However, if his approval ratings started to rapidly deteriorate, and the midterm elections turn into a disaster for their party, some Republicans may be ready to turn on Trump.

Presidential approval and midterms

We can get an idea of the likelihood of a midterm swing by looking at the relationship between presidential approval and support for the president’s party in all 20 midterm elections since the second world war.

Presidential approval in October and changes in House seats in November midterm elections in the US (1946-2022)

The American Presidency Project , Author provided (no reuse)

The chart above compares presidential approval ratings in the month prior to elections with seat changes in the president’s party in the House of Representatives. There are 435 members of the House, and they are all up for re-election next year.

It is clear that there is a strong positive relationship between presidential approval and the success of his party in the mid-term elections (correlation = 0.57). In other words when the president is popular his party does well and when he is unpopular it does badly.

Donald Trump did rather badly in the midterm elections in 2018 during his first term of office. On that occasion the Republicans lost 40 House seats, a significantly greater number than the post-war average loss of 23 seats for Republican presidents. The last time the Republicans lost more seats than 2018 was in 1974 after Gerald Ford took over from Richard Nixon following the Watergate scandal.

Currently, the president’s current approval ratings might suggest that the loss of seats by Republicans is likely to be greater in next year’s midterm elections than it was in 2018. In October 2018 Trump’s approval rating was 41%, whereas it currently stands at 45% (with 52% disapproving) in the Economist/YouGov survey.

However, the current approval rating does not take into account the medium to longer term effects of the economic turmoil and market instability triggered by his policies. Tariffs, in particular, are very likely to increase inflation and slow economic growth both in the US and the rest of the world. This is likely to damage his approval ratings.

In the UK Conservative prime minister Liz Truss spooked the bond market in the autumn of 2022 by proposing large unfunded tax cuts. She was rapidly removed by her party from the job of leader and prime minister. This was followed by a crushing defeat for the party in the 2024 election. The same could happen to the Republicans, although the voters will have to wait until next year to make their presence felt.