President Donald Trump compared Democrats to Japanese kamikaze pilots who conducted suicide missions during World War II, amid the ongoing government shutdown.

Trump’s remarks come on the heels of his Asia trip, where he visited Japan, as the government shutdown has lasted for 36 days – marking the longest one in U.S. history.

‘I think they’re kamikaze pilots,’ Trump told Republican senators at a breakfast at the White House on Wednesday. ‘I just got back from Japan and talked about the kamikaze pilots. I think these guys are kamikaze. They’ll take down the country if they have to.’

Additionally, Trump said he didn’t think Democrats were taking enough of the blame for their role in the shutdown.

‘It is Democrat-created, but I don’t think they’re getting really the blame that they should,’ Trump said, adding that the government must open soon.

The government ran out of funding that prompted the partial shutdown on Oct. 1, due to gridlock between Senate Republicans and Democrats over a short-term funding bill to fund the government through Nov. 21.

The stalemate between Republicans and Democrats stems from healthcare provisions in a potential funding measure. Trump and Republicans claim Democrats want to provide illegal immigrants healthcare, and have cited a provision that would repeal part of Trump’s tax and domestic policy bill known as the ‘big, beautiful bill’ that reduced Medicaid eligibility for non-U.S. citizens.

But Democrats say this isn’t the case and have said they want to permanently extend certain Affordable Care Act subsidies that are set to expire at the end of 2025.

Trump also stated that the shutdown was the reason that Republicans lost several key races – including the Virginia and New Jersey gubernatorial elections – on Tuesday.

‘Exactly one year ago, we had that big, beautiful victory,’ Trump said. ‘But I thought we’d have a discussion after the press leaves about what last night represented and what we should do about it. And also about the shutdown and how that relates to last night.’

‘I think if you read the pollsters, the shutdown was a big factor. Negative for the Republicans, and that was a big factor,’ Trump said.

Meanwhile, Senate Democrats refused to back Republican’s stopgap funding bill on Tuesday to reopen the government. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., said that his party remains firm that it will not support a measure that doesn’t include extensions for the Affordable Care Act subsidies.

‘The only plan Republicans have for healthcare seems to be to eliminate it, and then to tell working people to go figure it out on their own,’ Schumer said Tuesday. ‘That’s not a healthcare plan. That’s cruel.’

President Donald Trump said on Wednesday morning that the ongoing government shutdown was partly to blame for Republican losses on Election Day.

Trump told reporters during a breakfast with GOP lawmakers at the White House that election night on Tuesday ‘was not expected to be a victory,’ saying the 36-day government shutdown was one of two possible reasons.

‘I think, if you read the pollsters, the shutdown was a big factor,’ Trump said. ‘Negative for the Republicans, and that was a big factor.’

Trump added: ‘And they say that I wasn’t on the ballot and was the biggest factor. But I don’t know about that. But I was honored that they said that.’

His remarks come after Democrats won resoundingly in multiple states on Tuesday, with exit polls showing economic worries were very much on the minds of voters.

‘I don’t think it was good for Republicans,’ Trump said of the election results. ‘I don’t think it’s good. I’m not sure it was good for anybody.’

Some major losses for Republicans included the New York City mayoral race, and contests for governor in New Jersey and Virginia. Democrats also secured another expected win in California, where voters approved a new congressional map that is designed to help their party win five more U.S. House seats in next year’s midterm elections.

On the morning following the defeats, Trump called on lawmakers to bring the 36-day government shutdown, now the longest on record, to an end. 

‘We must get the government open,’ Trump said, going on to push Republican senators to end the filibuster.

‘It’s time for Republicans to do what they have to do,’ he said. ‘Terminate the filibuster.’

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

House GOP leaders’ daily government shutdown press conference briefly descended into chaos on Wednesday when a Democratic lawmaker interrupted the event.

Rep. Chrissy Houlahan, D-Pa., a moderate Democrat, shared a heated exchange with Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., after crashing his remarks outside the U.S. Capitol while demanding he meet with her caucus to end the shutdown.

Johnson told her, ‘You should respect free speech,’ to which Houlahan responded, ‘You should respect free speech.’

‘I’m asking a question if you’re ready to have a conversation with the other side,’ Houlahan shouted from where reporters were gathered at the press conference. ‘You represent all of us. You are the speaker for all of us, sir.’

Johnson attempted to take a question from a reporter but told them, ‘I can’t hear you because we have someone who doesn’t respect the rights of their colleagues.’

Meanwhile, Houlahan kept shouting over the speaker even as he tried to call order.

‘You have an obligation not just to speak lies to the American people, you have an obligation to call the leadership of both parties and bring us together, and solve this problem together,’ she yelled.

House GOP Conference Chair Lisa McClain, R-Mich., erupted back, ‘You have an obligation!’

‘We did that before the shutdown began. I went to the White House. We went and sat in front of the Resolute Desk. We brought [House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y.] in and we had a discussion,’ Johnson responded. 

‘The president said, ‘Please don’t shut the government down, it would all this pain to the American people.’ This has never happened before. It is a clean, non-partisan CR that every Democrat, including you, voted no on,’ he said.

Houlahan shot back, ‘You are absolutely misrepresenting history, sir, and you know that you are, and you’re dividing the American people unnecessarily.’

The two continued to speak over each other, with Johnson accusing Houlahan of having ‘regret’ for her vote.

‘No, sir, I do not regret anything. It’s important that we work together and that we unify,’ she responded.

Johnson said, ‘I appreciate your input. Now somebody give me a question that’s real.’

‘I appreciate you too,’ she finished.

Tensions are running high on Day 36 of the government shutdown, now the longest such standoff in U.S. history.

It was Johnson’s first shutdown press conference after Tuesday night’s sweeping victories for Democrats during elections in Virginia, New Jersey and New York City.

Republicans had anticipated Democrats’ resolve was weakening amid a lack of funding for food aid programs and paychecks for air traffic controllers, but Tuesday night’s wins appear to have emboldened some on the left as well.

The House passed a short-term federal funding bill on Sept. 19 aimed at giving lawmakers until Nov. 21 to strike a deal on fiscal year (FY) 2026 spending levels.

But at least some Democrats are needed to advance the legislation in the Senate, where it’s failed 14 times over the left’s demand that any funding deal be paired with an extension of COVID-19 pandemic-era Obamacare subsidies that are set to expire at the end of this year.

Republicans have contended that federal funding and healthcare are issues that must be considered separately.

A new bipartisan bill introduced by Sens. Josh Hawley, R-Mo., and Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., would bar minors (under 18) from interacting with certain AI chatbots. It taps into growing alarm about children using ‘AI companions’ and the risks these systems may pose.

Get my best tech tips, urgent security alerts and exclusive deals delivered straight to your inbox. Plus, you’ll get instant access to my Ultimate Scam Survival Guide — free when you join my CYBERGUY.COM newsletter. 

What’s the deal with the proposed GUARD Act?

Here are some of the key features of the proposed Guard Act:

• AI companies would be required to verify user age with ‘reasonable age-verification measures’ (for example, a government ID) rather than simply asking for a birthdate.
• If a user is found to be under 18, a company must prohibit them from accessing an ‘AI companion.’
• The bill also mandates that chatbots clearly disclose they are not human and do not hold professional credentials (therapy, medical, legal) in every conversation.
• It creates new criminal and civil penalties for companies that knowingly provide chatbots to minors that solicit or facilitate sexual content, self-harm or violence.

The motivation: lawmakers cite testimony of parents, child welfare experts and growing lawsuits alleging that some chatbots manipulated minors, encouraged self-harm or worse. The basic framework of the GUARD Act is clear, but the details reveal how extensive its reach could be for tech companies and families alike.

Why is this such a big deal?

This bill is more than another piece of tech regulation. It sits at the center of a growing debate over how far artificial intelligence should reach into children’s lives.

Rapid AI growth + child safety concerns

AI chatbots are no longer toys. Many kids are using them. Hawley cited more than 70 percent of American children engaging with these products. These chatbots can provide human-like responses, emotional mimicry and sometimes invite ongoing conversations. For minors, these interactions can blur boundaries between machine and human, and they may seek guidance or emotional connection from an algorithm rather than a real person.

Legal, ethical and technological stakes

If this bill passes, it could reshape how the AI industry manages minors, age verification, disclosures and liability. It shows that Congress is ready to move away from voluntary self-regulation and toward firm guardrails when children are involved. The proposal may also open the door for similar laws in other high-risk areas, such as mental health bots and educational assistants. Overall, it marks a shift from waiting to see how AI develops to acting now to protect young users.

Industry pushback and innovation concerns

Some tech companies argue that such regulation could stifle innovation, limit beneficial uses of conversational AI (education, mental-health support for older teens) or impose heavy compliance burdens. This tension between safety and innovation is at the heart of the debate.

What the GUARD Act requires from AI companies

If passed, the GUARD Act would impose strict federal standards on how AI companies design, verify and manage their chatbots, especially when minors are involved. The bill outlines several key obligations aimed at protecting children and holding companies accountable for harmful interactions.

• The first major requirement centers on age verification. Companies must use reliable methods such as government-issued identification or other proven tools to confirm that a user is at least 18 years old. Simply asking for a birthdate is no longer enough.
• The second rule involves clear disclosures. Every chatbot must tell users at the start of each conversation, and at regular intervals, that it is an artificial intelligence system, not a human being. The chatbot must also clarify that it does not hold professional credentials such as medical, legal or therapeutic licenses.
• Another provision establishes an access ban for minors. If a user is verified as under 18, the company must block access to any ‘AI companion’ feature that simulates friendship, therapy or emotional communication.
• The bill also introduces civil and criminal penalties for companies that violate these rules. Any chatbot that encourages or engages in sexually explicit conversations with minors, promotes self-harm or incites violence could trigger significant fines or legal consequences.
• Finally, the GUARD Act defines an AI companion as a system designed to foster interpersonal or emotional interaction with users, such as friendship or therapeutic dialogue. This definition makes it clear that the law targets chatbots capable of forming human-like connections, not limited-purpose assistants.

How to stay safe in the meantime

Technology often moves faster than laws, which means families, schools and caregivers must take the lead in protecting young users right now. These steps can help create safer online habits while lawmakers debate how to regulate AI chatbots.

1) Know which bots your kids use

Start by finding out which chatbots your kids talk to and what those bots are designed for. Some are made for entertainment or education, while others focus on emotional support or companionship. Understanding each bot’s purpose helps you spot when a tool crosses from harmless fun into something more personal or manipulative.

2) Set clear rules about interaction

Even if a chatbot is labeled safe, decide together when and how it can be used. Encourage open communication by asking your child to show you their chats and explain what they like about them. Framing this as curiosity, not control, builds trust and keeps the conversation ongoing.

3) Use parental controls and age filters

Take advantage of built-in safety features whenever possible. Turn on parental controls, activate kid-friendly modes and block apps that allow private or unmonitored chats. Small settings changes can make a big difference in reducing exposure to harmful or suggestive content.

4) Teach children that bots are not humans

Remind kids that even the most advanced chatbot is still software. It can mimic empathy, but does not understand or care in a human sense. Help them recognize that advice about mental health, relationships or safety should always come from trusted adults, not from an algorithm.

5) Watch for warning signs

Stay alert for changes in behavior that could signal a problem. If a child becomes withdrawn, spends long hours chatting privately with a bot or repeats harmful ideas, step in early. Talk openly about what is happening, and if necessary, seek professional help.

6) Stay informed as the laws evolve

Regulations such as the GUARD Act and new state measures, including California’s SB 243, are still taking shape. Keep up with updates so you know what protections exist and which questions to ask app developers or schools. Awareness is the first line of defense in a fast-moving digital world.

Take my quiz: How safe is your online security?

Think your devices and data are truly protected? Take this quick quiz to see where your digital habits stand. From passwords to Wi-Fi settings, you’ll get a personalized breakdown of what you’re doing right and what needs improvement. Take my Quiz here: Cyberguy.com.

Kurt’s key takeaways

The GUARD Act represents a bold step toward regulating the intersection of minors and AI chatbots. It reflects growing concern that unmoderated AI companionship might harm vulnerable users, especially children. Of course, regulation alone won’t solve all problems, industry practices, platform design, parental involvement and education all matter. But this bill signals that the era of ‘build it and see what happens’ for conversational AI may be ending when children are involved. As technology continues to evolve, our laws and our personal practices must evolve too. For now, staying informed, setting boundaries and treating chatbot interactions with the same scrutiny we treat human ones can make a real difference.

If a law like the GUARD Act becomes reality, should we expect similar regulation for all emotional AI tools aimed at kids (tutors, virtual friends, games) or are chatbots fundamentally different? Let us know by writing to us at Cyberguy.com.

Get my best tech tips, urgent security alerts and exclusive deals delivered straight to your inbox. Plus, you’ll get instant access to my Ultimate Scam Survival Guide — free when you join my CYBERGUY.COM newsletter. 

Copyright 2025 CyberGuy.com.  All rights reserved. 

Democrat Abigail Spanberger defeated Republican Winsome Earle-Sears to win the Virginia governor’s race, tallying significant leads among reliable Democratic groups while capitalizing on economic worries and the deep unpopularity of President Donald Trump in the state.

Spanberger will be the first woman to hold the office in the Old Dominion State.

The former Virginia congresswoman replaces term-limited Republican Governor Glenn Youngkin, who was the first Republican to win a statewide election in Virginia in 12 years when he was elected in 2021. That race surprised many in that it was much closer than the 2020 presidential race the year before, when Joe Biden defeated Trump by 10 points. This year it was the other way around, with Spanberger well exceeding the 2024 presidential margin that saw Harris over Trump by only six points.

Trump was undoubtedly a factor in the race, even though he wasn’t on the ballot. Close to six in 10 Virginia voters disapproved of the job he is doing, while more than half said they strongly disapprove. The vast majority of these voters backed Spanberger.

Two-thirds of Spanberger supporters said their vote was expressly to show opposition to the president. That compares to about one-third of those backing current Lt. Governor Earle-Sears who said theirs was to show support.

Aside from those sending a signal of opposition to Trump, Spanberger’s strong appeal to Black voters, college graduates and the young was more than enough to offset Earle-Sears’ strength among White men, White evangelicals and those with no college degree, according to near-final data from the Fox News Voter Poll, a survey of more than 4,000 Virginia voters.

Not even the prospect of voting for the first Black woman governor of any state seemed to move Black voters, who backed Spanberger by about a nine to one margin.

Spanberger also benefited from a significant gender gap. Indeed, 65% of women backed her compared to 35% for Earle-Sears, a 30-point advantage; and men supported Earle-Sears by 4 points (48% for Spanberger, 52% Earle-Sears) – leaving a gender gap of 34 points, one of the largest in recent memory.

Neither party is very popular in the state, half of voters said they have an unfavorable opinion of Democrats, and more than half felt that way about Republicans.

Between the two candidates, however, Spanberger garnered a net-positive rating – more than half had a favorable opinion of her – compared to Sears, and more than half viewed her unfavorably.

Voters continue to be happy with Youngkin. More than half approved of the job he is doing as governor.

The top characteristic Virginia voters wanted in a candidate was someone who shares their values, followed by someone who is honest and trustworthy.

Values voters broke for Earle-Sears while Spanberger carried those looking for honesty.

Spanberger focused heavily on the economy during the campaign, specifically banging home the deleterious effects that Trump administration efforts to upend government in D.C. are having on Virginia, home to a large number of federal workers.

More than six in 10 of those federal employees backed Spanberger.

The economy was by far the top issue for Virginia voters – with close to half ranking it as the most important. Those voters broke significantly for Spanberger.

Healthcare was the second most important concern – another issue Spanberger hit hard in the wake of the federal government shutdown and people facing the possible loss of health benefits.

Those voters who said healthcare was their number one issue went overwhelmingly for Spanberger – by about four to one.

Overall, Virginia voters – about six in 10 – think the economy is doing pretty well. Those voters backed Earle-Sears.

But when it comes to their own family’s finances, most said they were either holding steady or falling behind. Both of those groups went for Spanberger.

And of the six in 10 voters who said the federal budget cuts had affected their family finances, they backed Spanberger as well.

Two issues that got significant attention from Earle-Sears in the campaign were controversies about trans rights, and the disclosure of violent texts from the Democratic candidate for attorney general.

Fewer than half of voters found the texts sent by Democrat Jay Jones, threatening a fellow lawmaker, disqualifying from the job of attorney general. Those who did broke strongly for Earle-Sears.

The rest, though – who said the texts were concerning but not disqualifying, were not a concern, or who simply didn’t know enough – went strongly for Spanberger.

It was suspected that some voters might split their votes, backing Spanberger for governor but Republican Jason Miyares for attorney general. That did not happen. Those Democrats defecting to Miyares remained in the single digits, and Jones was declared the winner.

On transgender rights, voters have mixed views. Half said support has gone too far – the position Earle-Sears took, with special emphasis on its effect on schools and girls’ sports. The other half, however, said support has not gone far enough, or it’s been about right.

Those who said it’d gone too far backed Earle-Sears by almost four to one, while those who disagreed went hard for Spanberger.

In the end, the headwinds of Trump’s unpopularity and the ire of the vast number of federal workers in the state was too much for Earle-Sears to overcome.

Only about a third of Virginia voters are happy with the direction the country is going, and while these voters overwhelmingly backed Earle-Sears, the other two-thirds went big for Spanberger. Of the four in 10 who are actually angry about how things are going, almost all of them – more than nine in 10 – backed Spanberger.

Asked about Trump’s immigration enforcement efforts, more than half say it has gone too far, and, perhaps not surprisingly, most of these voters backed Spanberger.

Almost all Democrats voted for Spanberger, as did a few Republicans. Earle-Sears was unable to generate any sort of crossover appeal, while winning most Republicans. The small group of independents favored Spanberger.

The Fox News Voter Poll is based on a survey conducted by SSRS with Virginia registered voters. This survey was conducted October 22 to November 4, 2025, concluding at the end of voting on Election Day. The poll combines data collected from registered voters online and by telephone with data collected in-person from Election Day voters at 30 precincts per state/city. In the final step, all the pre-election survey respondents and Election Day exit poll respondents are combined by adjusting the share of voting mode (absentee, early-in-person, and Election Day) based on the estimated composition of the state/city’s final electorate. Once votes are counted, the survey results are also weighted to match the overall results in each state. Results among more than 4,500 Virginia voters interviewed have an estimated margin of sampling error of plus or minus 2.1 percentage points, including the design effects. The error margin is larger among subgroups.