Catherine Rampell: Donald Trump Is Falling Into the Same Trap That Ensnared Joe Biden

"THE PARTY IN POWER just lost an election because the party out of power hammered them hard for not cutting prices. If that sounds familiar, it’s because pretty much the same thing happened last year, except the antagonists have swapped places.

Turns out it’s easy to win while running as an outsider promising “affordability.” It’s much harder to actually do anything about it.

It’s doubly hard if you insist the problem doesn’t exist in the first place and suggest voters should just shut up about it. Triply hard if your economic policy agenda (cough-cough, tariffs) cuts in the opposite direction, making life more expensive.

In short, President Donald Trump and his fellow Republicans have learned nothing from how badly Joe Biden and the Democrats bungled inflation. Instead they’re repeating some of the same mistakes and adopting the same useless gimmicks. Only this time, they’re also pursuing policies that make the problem worse.

Affordability crisis? What crisis?

USUALLY TRUMP AND HIS ALLIES are great at creating their own alternative reality, and getting their voters to buy into it. Tax cuts pay for themselves? Sure. Horse dewormer cures your ills? Swell. Immigrants are eating your pets? You betcha.

This strategy is a bit more challenging when it comes to the cost of living, because voters presumably notice whether their grocery and electricity bills have gone up or down. Not that that has stopped the White House from trying.

In the past week, Trump has called complaints about affordability a “con job” orchestrated by the Democrats. Asked about voters’ anxiety on the economy—as documented in numerous polls—Trump told Fox News’s Laura Ingraham: “I think polls are fake. We have the greatest economy we’ve ever had.”

Not only that, he has stressed, but maybe prices are already falling!

As he explained to reporters last week, “The reason I don’t want to talk about affordability is because everybody knows that it’s far less expensive under Trump than it was under ‘Sleepy Joe Biden,’ and the prices are way down.” Republicans, he has said, can win on the issue if only they resolve to “talk about the fact that prices are down.” (To be clear, prices are not down. They’re still rising, up about 3 percent in September from a year earlier.)

In some ways this is a more strident version of what Biden and the Democrats did during the first year of his term.

For most of 2021—until, coincidentally, the weeks leading up to Thanksgiving—Democrats and allied commentators often downplayed or dismissed public concerns about inflation. The significance of rising inflation had been, well, inflated by media exaggeration, right-wing “propaganda,” and Republican lies, they stressed. Surrogates and pundits said stuff like this even as inflation seemed increasingly un-transitory, and continued shooting upward; in November 2021, the headline consumer price index was 6.9 percent higher than it was a year earlier...

Source:Catherine Rampell is an economic affairs columnist.

From The Bulwark

In Donald Trump's world (perhaps that's also called The Donald) it's not: 

censorship when he does it, 

not corruption when he does it

inflation doesn't exist on his watch

he's not a dictator, even though he believes that he he has the power to do whatever he wants to do, or whatever he doesn't want to

pardons don't count, if they come from a Democrat

and everything that is negative that's going on either about him, or his administration, the state of the economy, his personal fitness for the office... that's all fake news. 

The term "alternative universe" has been used a lot during the last 10 years. Why? Because we've had a professional reality TV star, whose only professional success in life, has been as a reality TV star... trying to either become President of the United States, or has been President the last 10 years. And remember: it's not real, it's just reality TV. 

So Mr. Trump has taken from what he's learned from reality TV 20-25 years ago and has applied that to his politics and style of governing. And most of his fans/followers must also be reality TV fans, because they believe everything that The Donald says and does. And that he's never wrong about anything: 

It's always someone else's fault 

that didn't happen 

it's all fake news. That's the fan base of Donald John Trump. 

And to respond to something that Catherine Rampell has said: the only thing that Donald Trump has learned from Joe Biden, is that's it': 

always someone else' fault 

or the situation is not as bad as the media is reporting it to be 

or the people are just overreacting to what they're seeing and feeling in their own personal lives 

or it's better now than it was before they came to office, etc. 

Not that difficult to see why Mr. Biden is no longer President. When you tell the voters that they should believe you, instead of what they're actually seeing and feeling in their own lives, that tends to backfire. American voters tend to not want to be told that they are stupid, or crazy, they are overreacting, etc. They want their politicians to first acknowledge that their problems are real, especially if they happened on the politician's watch. And then address those concerns and tell them what they're doing to try to fix those problems and help he people improve their own lives. 

But Donald Trump never became President to "make America great again". He became President because he wanted absolute power and probably nothing else.

You can follow me on Facebook, Threads, and Twitter.

You can also see this post on WordPress.

The Meaning of The Populist & Populism

"A "populist" is a political figure or movement that claims to represent the interests of the ordinary people against a corrupt or out-of-touch elite. Populist rhetoric often divides society into "the people" and "the elite," positions itself as a champion of the former, and can appear on both the left and right of the political spectrum. While it can rally disillusioned voters and be a democratic force, it is also frequently associated with anti-establishment sentiment and can be seen as a political insult. 

Key characteristics of populism

"The people" versus "the elite": At its core, populism posits a division between a virtuous, unified "people" and a corrupt, self-serving "elite".

Representation of "the people": Populist leaders claim to be the sole legitimate representatives of the will of the people, often in contrast to mainstream political parties and institutions.

Anti-establishment sentiment: Populism often reflects a deep distrust of the established political, media, and financial institutions.

Appeals to emotion and identity: It frequently relies on emotional appeals and can be nativist or xenophobic, especially on the right.

Political spectrum: Populism can exist on both the left and right of the political spectrum, with left-wing populists focusing on economic inequality and right-wing populists often emphasizing cultural or national identity" 

Source:PA Times We The People.

You can find all this on  Google

So over the last 6 weeks or so, especially during the government shutdown, I've had some time to think about this myself. If you are familiar with my blogging and The New Democrat in general, you certainly sense we are Democrats. But I seriously doubt that any mainstream Republican (like a Conservative, for example) would say that I or TND are overly partisan. 

We don't hate Republicans. We certainly dislike people who are registered Republicans, but who don't act or talk like Republicans. (Like MAGA, for example) We sure as hell don't hate, or even dislike Conservatives. We post a lot of their material on this blog. We had a post from Adam Kinzinger, just last week. And as hard as this might be to believe (sort of like seeing people flying around on flying rugs) Liberals and Conservatives actually have a lot in common. The difference is really about Conservatives believe in conserving and Liberals believe in moving forward. 

My point here is, I've been a registered Democrat since 1998, when I voted for the first time as a 22 year old. Like a lot of other Gen-Xers, I was a big fan of Bill Clinton and that's why I became a Democrat. And I've been blogging since 2009. But I lean more on the independent side when it comes to my own commentary and what I say on social media. I believe in what's best for the country, what's. best for people who are just trying to get ahead, who are perhaps struggling. Not what's best for the Democratic Party, or any other political party.

As I copy and pasted from Google: "Populism can appear on both the left and right of the political spectrum...

The point there is that populism in of itself, is not a political philosophy. Just like nationalism is not a political philosophy. This is not populism versus liberalism, or conservatism, libertarianism, or socialism, communism, etc. It's populism versus people who think that the powerful and the elite knows what's best for everyone else and therefor should be in charge of society, perhaps even the people themselves. How Populists vs the Oligarchs. (If you want a shorter and more simple comparison)

This is not about class warfare either. I believe in education, I love wealth. I think those things should be encouraged and supported and that more Americans should have the opportunities to be successful and be in complete control of their own personal destiny as well. This is more about the wealthy and highly educated, not being so powerful, that they get to make all the key decisions about the future of the country and the people. While ordinary Americans are not just left out even in the decision making and central planning, but left behind as well. 

When I think of populists, I don't think of people who rarely if ever had to even drive themselves around, let alone go to a grocery store to buy groceries. And then claim that they are a populist when they run for President of the United States. And we just don't have many politicians who fit at least my definition of a populist. Because American politics is so much about "what's in it for me and how do I advance my own political career", instead of what's in the best interest of the country... what would do the most good for the most people, regardless of which party or politician it might be good for or hurt. 

I have a lot of respect for the Kennedy Family and the Kennedy School at Harvard. But for someone to win a Profile in Courage award from them... a Democrat voting to reopen the government, or a Republican voting for the release of the Epstein files in Congress, might be all that it would take to win that award today. Which is sort of like winning a ballgame by forfeit. (There was simply no one else even available to give that award too) 

Not many Liz Cheney's left in American politics who are simply willing to give up their political careers, to stand up to a man, the leader of her own party... because she sees that man as wannabe dictator, strongman, who is bad for America. And she cares a lot more about her country, then any 1 political party. 

When I think of a populist, I think of someone who might not come from a deep poor, rural, or run down community in an inner city or someplace, where just getting enough food to eat when they were growing up and getting a decent education was a real struggle for them. But I do think of people who come from average means. Maybe the child of military personal, or a cop, factory workers... perhaps they were the first person in their family to get a college education and work a job, maybe 2 jobs, just to support themselves while they were in college. 

Someone who comes from average means, who has never forgotten their own upbringing, but who has made it by working really hard and being really good at what they do. Who has taken advantage of every opportunity that has come their way. Maybe someone, like a mentor, who saw a real talent in them and encouraged them to explore it and see what they can do with it. 

The populist is someone who fights for average people, because those are their people. Those are the communities that they come from. The old expression "they never forgot where they came from"... to me that's a real populist in America. Whether that person is a Liberal, (such as myself), or a Conservative, or a Socialist, Libertarian, etc. 

You can follow me on Facebook and Threads.

You can also see this post on WordPress.

CNN: Donald Trump Mentioned Multiple Times In Epstein Emails

"The White House said Wednesday that the release of Jeffrey Epstein emails that mentioned Donald Trump “prove absolutely nothing, other than the fact that President Trump did nothing wrong.” Asked whether Trump ever spent time at Epstein’s house with one of his victims — as one of the newly released emails suggests — White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt reiterated that Trump had kicked Epstein out of Mar-a-Lago for being a “creep” and also described the convicted sex offender as a “pedophile.”  

Source:CNN with a look at the MAGA Don and his chief propagandist.

From CNN

"Top Trump administration officials met with a key GOP lawmaker about an effort in the US House to force a vote on releasing Justice Department case files related to Jeffrey Epstein, according to multiple sources familiar with the meeting." 

Source:CNN with a look at White House chief propagandist Karoline Leavitt.

From CNN

I think former Donald Trump advisor and current CNN political analyst David Urban makes the case for why The White House should've already released the Epstein files:

“No, I mean, I don’t think, and at the end of the day, I don’t know if it’s gonna break apart MAGA. But the issue is bigger. Steve Bannon, I think, nails it here directly. It’s really not about Jeffrey Epstein, it’s about accountability. I think the base, you heard Trump talk about this for a long time, there’s a two-tier system of justice in America, and the elites get protected, and the FBI protects them, and the deep state protects them.”

From AOL

The New Democrat has been very clear on why we believe the Epstein files should've already been released: 

8/19/2025 

"The speculation (and I'm sure it's true) is that the reason why President Trump doesn't want his Attorney General Pam Bondi, to release the Epstein files, because he knows he's all over them and it would be very embarrassing for him. Even though there's probably nothing in them that could probably incriminate him of anything relating to Jeffrey Epstein. 

But my point is, for reasons that I've already laid out, is Donald Trump literally has nothing to lose here in releasing them. He's already the most unpopular 2nd term President, at least in the television and internet age. People who dislike and hate him now, won't dislike and hate him more after those files are released to the public...

From The New Democrat

9/02/2025 

"As far as the Epstein files, it's hard to imagine a sitting U.S. President being more unpopular than Donald John Trump. He's now in Joe Biden's range as far as political unpopularity, with his low 40s and upper 30s approval rating. Releasing the Epstein files even with him all over them, couldn't hurt himself anymore than what he's already done to his own political standing. If anything, it would probably just make him seem cooler with his reality TV base and perhaps even Independents who voted for him, because they think he's a "badass" or something: 

"Yeah!!! The Donald rolls with pimps and sex traffickers!!! He's even a bigger badass than we thought" 

Or phrase that last part anyway you want."

From The New Democrat

And from yesterday: 

"After tomorrow, there will be 214 House Democrats in the 119th Congress, after Adelita Grijalva is sworn in tomorrow. Now, I'm not going to say there will be 50-60 Republicans who will vote for Representative Massie's petition. I don't know where Representative Ro Khanna and others are getting that information. But I could see 15-20. And those members who will probably be the Republicans who will probably lose reelection next year, if they run for reelection. But voting for the Massie petition could help whatever reelection chances that they have in 26, at least in the general election."

From The New Democrat

I mentioned this back in August, but this is Watergate 52 years later. It's just a different White House that is trying to save the President's coverup. But at least during the Nixon Administration, the Department of Justice was not just cooperative with the Watergate investigation, but they were actually running it, for the most part. Congress finally gets involved in the investigation in the Senate with their Watergate committee in the summer of 1973. 

Nothing has changed for me since August. But President Trump is ever more unpopular now than he was 3 months ago. The White House gets to reopen the government, but only to deal with the Epstein files crisis. The President is now in the mid to upper 30s in approval, thanks to his bad economy, because of his tariffs. And this coverup is just making that problem worst. 

So if for some godforsaken reason I managed to find myself advising President Donald Trump about anything, (perhaps everybody else in Washington either moved out or abandoned him, or he locked everyone else up for being disloyal to him) this is what I would tell the President:

"The economy is a big enough problem for you. I realize you don't care about the Republican Party. But if they get hammered in Congress a year from now, your life will get a helluva lot worst. All the House and Senate investigations... you won't be a lame duck in the next Congress. You will be a dead duck with very little power and not much ability at all to effect the agenda of the country. 

But if you release the Epstein files, you can move on from here and spend the next year on the economy and make the political lives of Congressional Republicans a lot better. And give them a fighting chance to retain Congress. The American people won't dislike you any more than they already do, if the Epstein files come out. Some of your supporters will probably just see you as a bigger badass than they already thought and love you even more. 

But the longer your coverup of the Epstein files last, the worst off you will be. And your days as a dead duck President will come a lot sooner. And your last 2 years as President will be even worst than they are right now." 

You can follow me on Facebook and Threads. 

You can also see this post on WordPress.

Ben Meiselas: MAGA Mike CAVES As EPSTEIN FILES VOTE IS IMMINENT!!

"MeidasTouch host Ben Meiselas reports Republican Speaker MAGA Mike Johnson caving and swearing in Democratic Congresswoman-Elect Adelita Grijavala who will become the 218th signatures on the discharge petition to release the Epstein files." 

Source:Meidas Touch with a look at the MAGA Speaker and the MAGA Don. 

From the Meidas Touch

From POLITICO: 

"Speaker Mike Johnson has scheduled Rep.-elect Adelita Grijalva’s swearing-in for Wednesday around 4 p.m., right before the House votes on government funding, according to a notice from his office.

The Democrat was elected to her Arizona seat 49 days ago, but the speaker delayed her swearing-in as he kept the House out of session until after the Senate acted to end the government shutdown." 

From POLITICO

This is where The New Democrat has been on releasing the Epstein files.

8/19/2025 

"The speculation (and I'm sure it's true) is that the reason why President Trump doesn't want his Attorney General Pam Bondi, to release the Epstein files, because he knows he's all over them and it would be very embarrassing for him. Even though there's probably nothing in them that could probably incriminate him of anything relating to Jeffrey Epstein. 

But my point is, for reasons that I've already laid out, is Donald Trump literally has nothing to lose here in releasing them. He's already the most unpopular 2nd term President, at least in the television and internet age. People who dislike and hate him now, won't dislike and hate him more after those files are released to the public...

From The New Democrat

9/02/2025 

"As far as the Epstein files, it's hard to imagine a sitting U.S. President being more unpopular than Donald John Trump. He's now in Joe Biden's range as far as political unpopularity, with his low 40s and upper 30s approval rating. Releasing the Epstein files even with him all over them, couldn't hurt himself anymore than what he's already done to his own political standing. If anything, it would probably just make him seem cooler with his reality TV base and perhaps even Independents who voted for him, because they think he's a "badass" or something: 

"Yeah!!! The Donald rolls with pimps and sex traffickers!!! He's even a bigger badass than we thought" 

Or phrase that last part anyway you want."

From The New Democrat

Before someone accuses me of pretending to be a mindreader by saying that the only reason why U.S. Representative-Elect Adelita Grijalva hasn't been sworn in yet to the House, is because she's the 218th vote on Representative Tom Massie's discharge petition to get the Epstein files released... I'll go on the record right now... swear under oath, even that I'm not only not a mindreader, but I'm not pretending to be one. 

I'm not reading Speaker Mike Johnson's mind here. Also in the news: I'm not going to fly to Los Angeles from Washington, by wearing a cape and flapping my arms. But the circumstantial evidence is obvious here: 

You go to bed at night and it's completely dry and clear outside. And you wake up the next morning (unless you had a rough night) and there's snow on the ground. Now a mentally unhealthy person might say that an army of people came in and completely dumped white powder all over your yard and your neighborhood, while you were asleep. An intelligent person would say, it snowed last night. Even though they went to sleep before it started snowing. 

Speaker Mike Johnson (MAGA, Shreveport, Louisiana) has been 100% loyal to Donald Trump the whole year. Not just on policy grounds and delivering the votes to pass most of the President's agenda through the House. But also serving as the President's blocker (as they say in auto racing) by not doing any real Congressional oversight in the House and preventing embarrassing information for the President from coming out... like preventing votes on releasing the Epstein files. Which is really what I want to talk about and why that is the case. Not whether or not I'm a mindreader or not. 

What a difference just 1 election year can make. Republicans were on top of the world after the 2024 elections a year ago. They still looked like they were in good shape, even in February. But last week, Republicans (especially MAGA) got hammered everywhere in the country where there were competitive elections or referendums going on. 

After tomorrow, there will be 214 House Democrats in the 119th Congress, after Adelita Grijalva is sworn in tomorrow. Now, I'm not going to say there will be 50-60 Republicans who will vote for Representative Massie's petition. I don't know where Representative Ro Khanna and others are getting that information. But I could see 15-20. And those members who will probably be the Republicans who will probably lose reelection next year, if they run for reelection. But voting for the Massie petition could help whatever reelection chances that they have in 26, at least in the general election. 

You can follow me on Facebook, Threads, and Twitter.

You can also see this post on WordPress.

Katie Phang: Dem Senators STUN Party With SHOCKING SHUTDOWN Vote!?

"BREAKING: 8 Senate Democrats voted with Senate Republicans late last night on a handshake deal to break the government funding impasse. Katie Phang with the facts and details about this agreement, who was a part of the deal, and what is next for Americans." 

Source:Katie Phang & her favorite POTUS of 2025. That's a half-joke.

From Katie Phang

Just to see how many people I can put to asleep (especially insomniacs) I'm going to share with you where The New Democrat and its members have been the last 6 weeks or so on this government shutdown. Just to show that we've always been against the AOC/Schumer shutdown strategy and why. For the people who are able to stay wake after reading all this big government jargon. 

9/26/2205

"So, under The Anti-Deficiency Act, when the government shutdowns, the executive branch, under The White House and Office of Management Budget, gets to decide who is essential and who is nonessential, when it comes to the federal workforce. Meaning, who gets to show up to work, who has to stay home, who has to show up and work for free, during the shutdown. 

In case anyone who sees this, was born last night, (and if you are able to read before you even reach 1 day old, I'm fairly impressed) Donald John Trump is currently President of the United States and Russell Vought is currently the Director of the Office of Management and Budget. Do you really want these two "gentlemen" in charge of what stays open and is closed, who gets to go to work, who stays home, who has to work for free, during a government shutdown? 

Mr. Vought is 1 of the chief authors of Project 2025, which is a document that lays out how a President Trump could claim and use more executive authority, then the Constitution currently gives the President of the United States. And how they could essentially get away with that. Is this who you want in charge of the government shutdown in Washington? 

At least if Congress passed a government funding bill, (whatever you actually think of the actual bill) there are laws there that the courts can protect, requiring the executive branch to spend this amount of money, with this amount of workers in place enforcing those spending requirements. But put Trump and Vought in charge, thanks to your shutdown, there's no one left in place who could even try to hold the President and OMB accountable during a shutdown... 

From The New Democrat

10/02/2025

"Because Leader Schumer made the right decision not to shut down the government in March, the so-called Squad (which most of the time looks no more professional and experienced than the Columbia chapter of Students For a Democratic Society) threatens his job and tells him he has to step down, or face a primary challenge... probably from U.S. Representative Alexandria O. Cortez in 2028. She's probably not just the most popular and powerful Socialist, inside of Congress right now (sorry, Senators Sanders and Warren) but probably the most powerful and popular Socialist outside of Congress as well. 

So the reason why the government is shut down right now, even though it gives the power to the President to cut and layoff at will as many people as he wants, during the shutdown, because 75 year old Chuck Schumer (who has been in Congress since 1981, served 9 terms in the House, now in his 5th term in the Senate) is worried about losing his job 3 years from now. So this is just 1 reason why The New Democrat is calling this government shutdown, the Schumer shutdown. Because it's not based on what's good for the country, or even the Democratic Party next year, but what's good for Chuck Schumer's political future...

From The New Democrat

10/14/2025

"So look, the Kyle Kulinski's, the Ron Filipkowski's, MSNBC talk can argue all they want that "they were just going to do this anyway" when it comes to the mass Federal layoffs, firings, forcing people to work for free, etc. But what they don't understand, or won't admit, is because of Chuck Schumer's led government shutdown here, Congress has just given The White House permission and Congressional authority, to do what Kyle Kulinski says they would've done anyway. 

But if the government was fully funded right now, the The White House wouldn't legally be able to fire, layoff, and force work for no pay all these workers, people making maybe $50,000-100,000 a year, without Congressional authorization... 

From The New Democrat

I'll get into what I really want to say here. But I just have 1 short comment about what Katie Phang said here in her video. And then I'll move off of that faster a mouse walking on a hot stove. 

So this is from Katie Phang: 

"Hey friends, it''s November 10, 2025. Today I woke up feeling like I've been betrayed... stunned and had such a tangible, palpable sense, a change and a pit of energy, over what was a resounding trouncing of Republicans last Tuesday... a rebuke, a reputation of Trump and the Republicans last Tuesday. And yet I now sit here in front of you, spending this time with you, frustrated, overwhelmed... un and being betrayed...

So, look, Katie Phang could just being doing her own personal tryout for whatever is the next hit, left-wing, TV talk show, that might be on the horizon in the future. Or she's completely blowing this out of proportion. Because she sounds like 1 of those die hard sports fans, who are freaking out about their team just trading away their franchise player and getting nothing in return. (From the fan's perspective) 

I have news for Katie Phang. The U.S. Government is not a football game, or any other game. Sure, there are partisan political games that are played in Washington every day of the year. Actually, you might struggle to get though an hour without seeing some political game that is being played between Democrats and Republicans, just on Capitol Hill alone. But government is not a game. It's not supposed to be anyway. Everything that government does(for good and bad) can and generally does effect the lives of every American. 

It might sound cool to say: "Yeah man... we can shut down the government indefinitely, man. Until they give us what they want. And while we're waiting for Hell to freeze over in Alaska, in January... this is our stand against the man, man. Yeah, man... this would make us the biggest badasses and rockstars on campus, man". 

I know I'm politically and culturally stereotyping here. There might be 1 American leftist who is not a left-wing hippie. (Or if you prefer, hipster) And I apologize to that person, if that's the case. But it makes my point. Government shutdowns are really bad for any person who relies on government to support themselves. That includes everyone: 

who doesn't make enough money to support themselves 

or people who are unemployed 

government workers who are currently working for free, as well 

as well as government retirees

people who rely on the Postal Service to get their pension checks, or their lifesaving medicine. 

And the Left can argue that if we don't leave the government shutdown, people who rely on ObamaCare subsides, won't be able to afford their health insurance next year. And that's true. But what's to stop the President and the Republican Congress from saying no to that and leaving the government shut down, indefinitely? Or, just going nuclear on this very shutdown and just end it with 51 votes? 

The nuclear option in the Senate, was probably next, if those 8 Senate Democrats didn't agree to this deal to reopen the government. And then how would the Left respond to that? I guess they couldn't blame Democrats for that 1, had it happened. 

You can follow me on Facebook, Threads, and Twitter.

Josh Hammer: Sydney Sweeny VS. The Woke Mob

"Josh Hammer slams the woke mob after Sydney Sweeney refuses to bow to the backlash over her jeans ad and stands her ground in a new interview. He breaks down the political chaos in New York as the Mamdani administration approaches and exposes the deadly crisis facing Christians in Nigeria—and what the Trump administration is doing to fight back." 

Source:Newsweek with a look at actress Sydney Sweeney.

From Newsweek

As Ederik said about this back in August: 

"So my broader point here and Yaron Brook got into it as well... this is really just about race and color with the "WOKE-Left". If the model here was African, or Asian-American, even Spanish-Latino (that leftists don't consider to be white) and the model was saying that she has great jeans, (jeans with a J) no one is freaking out about this. That's the point that I would add to what Yaron said. But the woman with light hair, sort of light in complexion, light build, looks like she could be some preppy girl from the suburbs, someone the far-left would call "white privileged", they freak out over this commercial. 

And I guess my past point here is, as unpopular as Donald Trump and "MAGA" are today, the far-left seems to be addicted to reminding voters why the Democratic Party is unpopular as well. They seem to have this uncontrollable desire to remind voters: 

"Hey, you might hate the Republican Party right now, but before you go to the voting booth, don't forget to remember how much we suck as well and how crazy and out-of-touch we are with you. Do you really want a political party like us even in-charge of a local fruit stand, let lone running part of the Federal Government right now?"

But if that's not bad enough, when they take these crazy positions, they seem to feel the need to try to get their friendly voices in the media to stand behind them, whether it's on MSNBC, or CNN, or even freakin Stephen Colbert who lost his job on CBS, because he's seen as too friendly with "WOKE-Left" in America."

From The New Democrat

I guess I'm more with Ayn Rand and George Carlin on this, but I agree with Josh Hammer's broader point. Americans shouldn't give a damn about offending the far-left, which includes the woke-left. People who maybe represent 2-3-10 Americans, shouldn't get to decide what the rest of the country is allowed to watch on TV, what music they can listen to, what publications they should be allowed to read, what commentators they can listen to... what and how women should dress in public. 

If you believe in individualism and personal freedom, free speech... (just 3 of the American liberal values that make America the great country that it is) you are not worried about what some woke-leftist or MAGA fundamentalist thinks, about how you live your own life. Because unlike the cultural warriors, you have a life. Perhaps you drink something besides overly sweet and caffeinated coffee all day. And you have enough brain cells to be able to think for yourself. 

Free thinking and acting Americans are in the minority. But that's more about social and cultural, than it's political. Americans tend to want to be cool and popular and be seen that way. And you live under that mindset, you aren't go feel as free to make your own social and fashion choices, because you are worried about whoever the in-crowd (at the time) thinks about your own individual choices. 

But if you are familiar with my own blogging, you know that I'm a big fan of both George Carlin and Jim Morrison, a certain extent Bill Maher. Why? They didn't become popular and cultural icons, by doing what the rest of the so-called cool people were doing and how they were talking. They became icons by thinking and acting for themselves. And people saw what they were doing, what they were saying and thought those guys were cool and were interesting and became fans of them. 

And that's what American Eagle and Sydney Sweeney did here. They didn't poll MAGA or WOKE before they decided to go with that commercial. They found a good looking woman, an up-incoming actress and made a denim jeans commercial with her, in long, wide-leg, baggy denim pants (that some people call jeans) with the tag line: "Sydney Sweeney Has Great Jeans". With the far-left freaking out about that, simply because they chose a Caucasian woman, instead of a minority. And guess what? American Eagle has never backed down from that, because they believe in American freedom. And should be rewarded for that, not punished. 

You can follow me on Facebook, Threads, and Twitter.

You can also see this post on WordPress.

Adam Kinzinger: You Can’t Bulldoze The People

"Adam Kinzinger breaks down the stunning election results and what they mean for the Republican Party and Donald Trump’s political future. From California’s Prop 50 victory to Democratic blowouts in Virginia, New Jersey, and New York, Kinzinger shares his insider perspective on why the GOP is struggling, how authenticity is winning voters, and why “you can’t bulldoze the people.”

Source:Adam Kinzinger with a look at Election Night 2025.

From Adam Kinzinger

As my colleague Erik wrote yesterday: 

"And to talk about Chris Cillizza's broader point about who won and lost that night and what that means going forward, I have 2 points here: 

1. As the late, great former Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives (Thomas Tip O'Neill) so famously and accurately said: all politics is local. So what does that mean? Of course Republicans are going to try to tie the broader Democratic Party, including the real Liberals and Progressives, with the Socialists, now that NYC is going to have a Socialist Mayor and that 1 of their U.S. Reps. (Alexandria O. Cortez) is a strong, potential, contender for the Democratic nomination for President in 28. But they were going to do that anyway. And they have nothing else going for them right now, anyway. They're completely in charge in Washington and their leader has a 37-40% job approval, depending on what polls you look at. 

2. But as DNC Chairman Ken Martin told CNN last night, the Democratic Party is a big tent party. So that means Liberals (like The New Democrat) and most mainstream Democrats. But it also means a party that has Socialists, as we saw last night in New York. And since neither faction is big enough to govern this country by themselves, they need their center-right, their center-left, and their left-wing, working and getting elected together. Instead of 1 faction of the party trying to wipe out the other faction, before they try to defeat the Republicans."

From The New Democrat

I think Adam Kinzinger's key point is this: 

"1 of the things that Rahm Emanuel (Democratic House Campaign Committee Chairman - 2005-06) did very well in 06, is that he recruited Democratic candidates who looked like the district that they were running in.

You couldn't run a Zohran Mamdani or another Socialist, in a conservative district in Texas. Just like you couldn't run a "Conservative Democrat" in New York City. Maybe you could, but that Democrat wouldn't win the Democratic primary in New York." (Not Adam Kinzinger's worst closely, but very close) 

I know the far-left hates Rahm Emanuel for multiple reasons, but 1 in particular is ideology. And this is at his playbook from 05-06 and how Democrats won back the House in 2006 and I'm sure the Senate as well that year: 

Geographic Reach: As Chairman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) in the 2006 election cycle, Emanuel championed a strategy of recruiting candidates who could win in historically Republican-leaning "red" districts. This meant supporting candidates who were often more moderate on social issues or fiscally conservative.

Candidate Diversity: He supported a wide array of candidates, including those who held different views from the party consensus on issues like abortion (pro-life Democrats) or gun control, to ensure the party could compete in diverse districts and build a larger governing majority.

Focus on Common-Sense Issues: In recent comments, Emanuel has suggested Democrats should "stop talking about bathrooms and locker rooms and start talking about the classroom," advocating for a shift in focus to kitchen-table issues and concerns that resonate with a broader swath of the electorate.

Pragmatism over Ideology: His approach is often described as pragmatic and "cold" in its analysis, prioritizing electability and legislative majorities over ideological purity.

Winning First: The core of the strategy is that a party must win elections to govern and implement any part of its agenda. Expanding the tent is seen as a necessary step to achieve that goal. 

You can find this on Google

Look, I'm not a centrist/moderate. (Whatever the hell that's supposed to mean anymore) I'm a JFK Democrat, just like the rest of The New Democrat. We're all JFK Liberals. So this is not about arguing for a "centrist/moderate" Democratic Party, to try to take down Donald Trump and MAGA. But at the end of the day, political parties are only in the business to win. The more they win, the more they are able to govern, the more money they're able to raise, the more voters they bring in... assuming that they govern well. The latter is obviously always the hardest part

A big reason why Abigail Spanberger won in Virginia on Tuesday and Mikki Sherrill won in New Jersey on Tuesday, (along with who they ran against and President Trump) is because they're both center-right, fiscally responsible, national security hawks, who will protect the streets in their states. Who also connected very well with ordinary voters in their states and addressed the economic concerns of the voters in their states. But neither of them would've even won the Democratic primary in New York, or San Francisco... or any other big city in America with a large Socialist faction in it. 

The reason why New York City will have a Socialist Mayor next year and the next 4 years, is because the economy is bad up there, a lot of people are struggling and Zohran Mamdani spoke to the concerns of those voters and made his whole campaign about affordability. And the fact that NYC has a large Socialist bloc (at least compared with other big cities) didn't hurt the Mamdani campaign either. But Mamdani probably couldn't win statewide in New Jersey, definitely not in Virginia... perhaps not even in New York State. 

The Left is already talking about socialism is the way to go and that they've finally taken over the Democratic Party, or are about too. They're obviously entitled to believe that. The problem is most of the country still doesn't want a socialist government, they sure as hell don't want a socialist party. But for the Democratic Party to be successful next year and going forward, they are going need Socialists to run and win where they can. And for the real Liberals to run and win in the rest of the country, especially where Republicans currently hold those seats. 

You can follow me on Facebook, Threads, and Twitter. 

You can also see this post on WordPress.