President Volodmyr Zelenskyy: The Trump Peace Plan

"President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said Friday that Ukraine has to confront the possibility of losing its dignity or risking the loss of a key partner as it figures out how to respond to a U.S. peace proposal to end Russia-Ukraine conflict. (Produced by Elaine Carroll)." 

Source:Associated Press with a look at President Volodmyr Zelenskyy of Ukraine.

From the Associated Press

From the Center on American Progress: 

"The Trump administration’s 28-point plan for peace in Ukraine that leaked this week does not create a path out of the war; it merely repackages the Kremlin’s long-standing demands and presents them as diplomatic breakthrough. The Russian proposal speaks for itself: It demands that Ukraine surrender territory, accept limits on its armed forces, and curb Western military assistance. It punishes the victim and shields the aggressor from any cost—a dynamic that leads to more instability, not peace.

European officials understood the danger immediately. Finnish Foreign Minister Elina Valtonen captured the central flaw when she warned that the plan “completely ignores the principles of the UN charter.” Her point reflects an underlying truth: Peace at any cost is no peace at all; it formalizes the outcome that Russian President Vladimir Putin spent years trying to impose on Ukraine by force, signaling that borders can be changed at will and that diplomatic settlements will invariably reward territorial seizure when the victim lacks the capacity to resist.

The proposal also removes Ukraine’s ability to deter a future invasion. A diminished Ukrainian military cannot defend the country, and restrictions on Western weapons give Russia the time and space to rebuild its forces. Former Ukrainian Prime Minister Arseniy Yatsenyuk called the plan a “creeping capitulation” because it locks in Russia’s territorial gains, cedes additional unoccupied territory in the Donbas, prohibits NATO membership by legal statute, and strips Ukraine of the long-range strike capabilities it needs to blunt another offensive. Such a deal guarantees only one outcome: a future attack by Moscow where it can truly finish the job.

Such a deal guarantees only one outcome: a future attack by Moscow where it can truly finish the job... 

From the Center On American Progress

I'm going to tell you the 3 key elements of the "Trump peace plan" and explain why this is completely unacceptable not just for Ukraine, but Europe as well and then I'll do a little speculating about why President Trump is proposing this. A little spoiler alert about the latter: it's not what you might think it is. This is not about Donald Trump doing Vladimir Putin's dirty work, or taking his side. It's something else. 

So under this "peace plan": 

Ukraine has to give up the Ukrainian provinces of Donetsk and Luhansk, which make up the region of Donbas. 

They will also have to reduce the size of their current military, which along with western aide are the only things that are keeping Ukraine from becoming part of Russia right now, along with their President, Volodmyr Zelenskyy. And they will also get less military aide from America in the future. 

And Ukraine still would not be allowed to join the North Atlantic Treaty Organization. (That some people know as NATO) 

So why do I call this the so-called Trump peace plan and put "Trump peace plan" in quotes? 

So imagine someone kidnapping your child or your spouse and the kidnappers tell you that if you give them a million dollars, for each, you can have both your wife and child back. And the cops and FBI tell you that you only way you are going to get your wife and child back, is if you pay off the kidnappers and they don't arrest them and just let them go. If you were to take that deal, you are just inviting future kidnappings against your family, because the future kidnappers will think they can just kidnap this man's wife and kid, they'll get paid off for that, and be able to walk away for free. 

What Vladimir Putin's Russia did to Ukraine back in 2022, was essentially a foreign kidnapping, as much as it was an illegal invasion. But they didn't kidnap just 1 man's wife and kid. They kidnapped thousands, if not 10s of thousands, maybe hundreds of thousands (maybe more than that) of Ukrainians and took them to Russia to be kept as their prisoners. Along with all the Ukrainian territory that they stole. 

So for Ukraine to just give up Donbas and reduce its military, and get less foreign aide in the future, to not be able to join NATO... sure, Russia will temporarily pull out of Ukraine, except for Donbas. But now they've just been rewarded (by the United States, of all country's) for their illegal invasion and kidnappings. And now they'll be able to do this again to Ukraine in the future and perhaps other vulnerable Slavic countries in the future. 

So why is Donald Trump doing this? 

Do I think Donald Trump likes Vladimir Putin? Perhaps. But I think its President Putin's power and be able to control an entire country, especially a country as large as Russia, that is what President Trump respects the most about Putin and is probably jealous of that. And along with the past and I'm sure the current business and financial interest that The Donald has in the Russian Federation, that makes it harder for him to take a strong stance against the Putin government. Because it's not America that The Donald cares about, but it's The Donald. 

But I think what's really going on here, is Putin is making Trump look really bad and really weak. Mr. Trump when he was running for President in 24, promised that he would end the War in Ukraine on day 1 of becoming President. He's now been President for about 10 months. And guess what? Ukraine is still fighting to keep Russia from completely taking over its country. 

And along with the President' weak political situation at home, the struggling economy, low 40s approval rating, the Republican Party in position to get politically wiped out next year... the President sees this as an opportunity to look like he's trying to make peace and be a peacekeeper and long like a great man. 

Blog alert: The New Democrat is off next week for Thanksgiving. But TND will be back the following Monday after Thanksgiving. And I'll be back in about 3 weeks.

You can follow me on Facebook and Threads. 

You can also see this post on WordPress.

President George W. Bush: Remembering His Vice President Dick Cheney

"Former President George W. Bush eulogized former Vice President Dick Cheney and opened up about the process that led him to pick Cheney to be his running mate." 

Source:CNN with a look at President George W. Bush (Republican, Texas) delivering his tribute to his Vice President, Richard Cheney.

From CNN   

President Bush's statement on the passing of his Vice President Dick Cheney: 

"The death of Richard B. Cheney is a loss to the nation and a sorrow to his friends. Laura and I will remember Dick Cheney for the decent, honorable man that he was. History will remember him as among the finest public servants of his generation – a patriot who brought integrity, high intelligence, and seriousness of purpose to every position he held... 

From the Bush Center

And here is part of President Bush's speech today: 

“Dick was a calm and steady presence in the White House amid great national challenges. I counted on him for his honest, forthright counsel, and he never failed to give his best,” Bush said in a statement. “He held to his convictions and prioritized the freedom and security of the American people.”

Cheney died Monday night due to complications of pneumonia and cardiac and vascular diseases, according to a statement from his family. He was 84.

In our long discussions about the qualities a vice president should have – deep experience, mature judgment, character, loyalty – I realized that Dick Cheney was the one I needed,” Bush said. “I’m still grateful that he was at my side for the eight years that followed...

From Texas Tribune

To start off on more of a negative point first and then I'll get into what I really want to say here:

The 2 worst president's in my lifetime, (I'm in my late 40s) are current President and George W. Bush. Even though I would pick President Bush 100% of the time over President Trump... if for no other reasons George Bush is an American patriot and a very good and honest man. 

As far as President Bush's speech today... not that difficult to see why he was elected President of the United States, twice. Of course he is 25-26 years older today than he was when he ran for President the first time back in 1999-2000 and he's now 79 years old. So he's obviously aged a lot since 2009 when he left The White House. 

But the G.W. Bush that you saw today give that speech, is the same man who was elected President of the United States in 2000. He's always been a very calm, folksy, humorous man, who is also a great storyteller. The old political phrase and test: 

"Is the candidate someone you want to have a beer with?" 

That could've been written for G.W. Bush. And the answer of course would've always been yes. He would be someone you would want to go to ballgames with, and drink a whole keg of beer with. (Especially during George's drinking days. Ha. ha) Because he's such a friendly and funny guy and someone you would want to get to know and be social with. Unlike a lot of other American politicians, even from his generation, where hanging out with that person, might be as exciting as being stuck in Washington traffic, driving a big wheel. 

The whole story about how Mr. Bush went about choosing his Vice President in the spring and summer of 2000 and he consulted his father George H.W. Bush about that and H.W. suggested that his son choose Dick Cheney to manage that process for him. And after a few weeks or months of this, G.W. tells Dick Cheney: 

"After all of this and the process, the best man for me to choose for Vice President, is you". (Close paraphrase) 

Dick Cheney's public service career goes back to the late 1960s, when Richard Nixon was President and Mr. Cheney got a job in the Nixon White House and worked his way up to becoming President Gerald Ford's Chief of Staff in 1974. So he comes from the Ronald Reagan/Tip O'Neal era when even partisans knew that the people from the other party, weren't bad people, or Un-American. They were just different politically, ideologically, perhaps even culturally as far as where they were from, how they grew up, etc. Which is my broader point here. 

The Bush's, the Cheney's, the Clinton's, and others, come from an era where you could beat the hell out of someone politically, without losing yourself and becoming worst than the person that you are saying is so bad for the country. And I miss that era of American politics. The smash mouth, take no prisoners, compromise is surrender style of American politics... I believe escalated during the Bush/Cheney years in the 2000s. And it's gotten worst the last 16 years. But they never viewed Democrats as the enemy, or as Un-American. But just as their political opponents. Which is why there was such bipartisan gathering of both Democrats and Republicans at the Vice President' funeral today. 

You can follow me on Facebook and Threads.

You can also see this post on WordPress.

Bruce Bartlett: The 50-Year Republican Plan for Total Victory

"Following is a book proposal I put together last year tracing the historical road to Trump, which I believe began in 1974. He is the culmination of a number of actions, trends, and institutional developments that coincidentally started approximately the same year. My agent told me the book was unpublishable and she refused to send it to any publishers. But since then, a number of books have come out examining the history of the conservative movement and how its evolution plowed the ground for Trump and fascism. I gave up on the book, but could be motivated to give it another try if there is an editor out there who wants to contact me about it at bartlettbruce@verizon.net. Alternatively, I may take some of the chapter ideas and develop them here if readers show an interest. Leave a comment. BB

I have spent a great deal of time in recent years thinking about where all the craziness came from. I had a front row seat when the seeds were planted in the 1970s, as the right began its 50-year march through all levels of government, the courts, the media, and every other important political institution.

I moved to Washington, DC in the fall of 1974 to go to graduate school, a conservative in a liberal town. I had been a member of Young Americans for Freedom during college and remember clearly having to dodge anti-Vietnam War protesters on my way to Air Force ROTC drills in uniform. When I see today’s campus protests I have a strong sense of déjà vu and remember that conservative opposition to Vietnam War protests was a key factor fueling a change in strategy toward the left.

I was interested in history, especially what was called “revisionist history.” I thought there had been a conspiracy to cover-up the Roosevelt Administration’s responsibility for the Pearl Harbor attack. I planned to write a master’s thesis on the subject at Georgetown. I mention this because my interest in revisionism brought me in touch with people and organizations on the conservative fringes that were important in creating a conservative worldview that was much different from the one that existed in the 1930s through the 1960s. It was a more aggressive conservatism, radical and militant. It was not the conservatism of the country club or the Chamber of Commerce, where the main concern was labor unions. The conservatism of the early 1970s was more ideological, less partisan—many conservatives despised the Republican Party for its timidity and willingness to cut deals with Democrats—and broader in its interests and the sorts of strategies it was willing to use to achieve victory.

Watergate. Obviously, the central event of 1974. To understand its political importance on the right, one must understand that many conservatives viewed Nixon as a liberal in terms of policy, a view now shared by most historians. Nevertheless, because he was under attack by Democrats and what was widely perceived as a liberal media, conservatives circled the wagons around him. I remember the conservative Stan Evans telling me that he never liked Nixon until Watergate. When Nixon was forced out of office conservatives saw this as a liberal coup. The importance of this absurd belief is that the right became much more alienated from society and adopted a more aggressive approach to fighting the left...

Source:Brince Bartlett was a longtime Conservative Republican activist in the 1970s and after that. 

From Bruce Bartlett

I don't know if I completely disagree with what Bruce Bartlett is arguing here... but from where I am, I can see a complete disagreement with what he's saying. I just have a few issues with him and one is what it actually means to be a Conservative. 

Bruce Bartlett seems to go by the idea that everyone on the Right, is a Conservative. Which is ridiculous, because the far-right doesn't really believe in anything that has to do with conserving. They are always trying to blow things up and take on, if not take down the establishment. When the fact is being a Conservative, is for a large part about being part of the establishment and conserving it. 

I think what this is really about is how much the Republican Party has changed the last 60 years. Before Richard Nixon, this was a country club, white-collar, very wealthy, center-right, political party. And all the blue-collar, small town, religious fundamentalist types, were Democrats, in most cases. 

Today, the Republican Party still has that white-collar-country club wing in it, but most of those folks are what I would call today, Yuppiecrats. Those Democrats are JFK Democrats, as well as fake leftists, who talk and act like Socialists. But who live like white-collar, liberal capitalists, who love capitalism and liberal democracy as the real Liberals and Conservatives, while they're bashing those liberal values in public. 

I think what really changed the Republican Party, was Watergate. For the Richard Nixon loyalists, (people who are very similar and in many cases the same voters as MAGA) what President Nixon and his Administration did in response to the anti-war-left, and the militant far--left in the early 1970s, with their Plummers Unit and their secret national security state, and how they tried to cover up Watergate... those actions taken by the Nixon Administration, were no worst than what Democrats did when they were in power before Richard Nixon. And they've never forgiven the Democrats, as well as mainstream Republicans and the mainstream media, for taking down Richard Nixon. 

I don't think there has ever been a "50 year plan for total victory" by the far-right in the Republican Party. But when Newt Gingrich was elected to the U.S. House of Representatives in 1978, he got to works fairly quickly to put together a plan that would win back the House for Republicans. At the time Newt Gingrich was elected, House Republicans only had 145 seats in the House and they picked up 15 seats in 1978. It wasn't until 1994 that Republicans won back the House. But as former U.S. Representative Robert Walker wrote for the Ripon Society in 2014 about the Conservative Opportunity Society:

"Gingrich and COS were mostly younger Members of Congress who had a desire to see the party fight to become a majority.  Gingrich recognized that the change he wanted would take legislative activists committed to using the congressional processes for political battle and development of a unique agenda.  The Members he recruited for COS were conservatives, moderates and pragmatists who shared a willingness to engage the Democrats on national issues.

Early leaders of the group included Vin Weber, Hank Brown, Duncan Hunter and me.  We began meeting on Wednesday mornings in 121 Cannon and agreed that we had to develop a compelling agenda.  The agenda needed to be visionary with a clear view of economic, cultural and societal change.  So, we reached out to futurists, including Al Toffler and John Nesbitt, and met with them for hours at a time.  What came out of those sessions was grounding in the emerging information economy and the magnitude of the change that the new economy would produce.  The futurists’ insight provided us with the foundation for the principles and programs we would advocate... 

From the Ripon Society

Newt Gingrich has always been a hyper-partisan figure, at least rhetorically. He was always very pragmatic in how he governed when he was Speaker of the House and perhaps even when he was House Minority Whip in the early 1990s. 

But with Newt Gingrich and these other populist-right figures like Trent Lott, U.S. Representatives like Vin Weber, Hank Brown, Duncan Hunter, and many others, from the 1980s and 90s... this is where the Republican Party doesn't become more or less conservative, but more populist. And they go from primarily a center-right, country club, white-collar, political party, to a party that includes a lot more blue-collar, working-class, religious fundamentalist voters. Which is the Republican Party that we see today.

But there's never been 1 plan put together where the far-right would just take over the Republican Party, but the entire U.S. Government... except for what the Heritage Foundation put together with their Project 2025 last year. 

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

You can also see this post on WordPress.

Why Donald Trump Is Supporting The Congressional Votes To Release The Epstein Files

From Yaron Brook: 

"Trump Now Wants to Release ALL EPSTEIN FILLES !! But Why ?!" 

Source:Yaron Brook with a look at 1 of Jeffrey Epstein's & Ghislaine Maxwell's acquaintances. 

From Yaron Brook

The President's official statement on why he now support the House vote to release the Epstein files: 

"As I said on Friday night aboard Air Force One to the Fake News Media, House Republicans should vote to release the Epstein files, because we have nothing to hide, and it’s time to move on from this Democrat Hoax perpetrated by Radical Left Lunatics in order to deflect from the Great Success of the Republican Party, including our recent Victory on the Democrat “Shutdown.” The Department of Justice has already turned over tens of thousands of pages to the Public on “Epstein,” are looking at various Democrat operatives (Bill Clinton, Reid Hoffman, Larry Summers, etc.) and their relationship to Epstein, and the House Oversight Committee can have whatever they are legally entitled to, I DON’T CARE! All I do care about is that Republicans get BACK ON POINT, which is the Economy, “Affordability” (where we are winning BIG!), our Victory on reducing Inflation from the highest level in History to practically nothing, bringing down prices for the American People, delivering Historic Tax Cuts, gaining Trillions of Dollars of Investment into America (A RECORD!), the rebuilding of our Military, securing our Border, deporting Criminal Illegal Aliens, ending Men in Women’s Sports, stopping Transgender for Everyone, and so much more! Nobody cared about Jeffrey Epstein when he was alive and, if the Democrats had anything, they would have released it before our Landslide Election Victory. Some “members” of the Republican Party are being “used,” and we can’t let that happen. Let’s start talking about the Republican Party’s Record Setting Achievements, and not fall into the Epstein “TRAP,” which is actually a curse on the Democrats, not us. MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!" 

From the President of the United States

As Fred Schneider wrote back in August: 

"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. 

When the far-right of the Republican Party was talking about "family values", morality and character, the need for these things in our government, that was just something they used to attack Democrats. That's not what they care about. Someone could literally be a convicted felon, a serial liar and adulterer... if that person is on their side and represents their political values. And Mr. Trump's professional celebrity base, would probably just view him as a bigger "rockstar" and "badass", after the Epstein files are released...

From The New Democrat

I'm going to respond to 1 point that Yaron Brook made here about how the President will now try (try being the key word) to block the release of the Epstein files. But first I want to respond to what the President said why he says (says being the key word) he supports the House resolution to release the Epstein files. 

So this I think this is the President's key point here: 

"As I said on Friday night aboard Air Force One to the Fake News Media, House Republicans should vote to release the Epstein files, because we have nothing to hide, and it’s time to move on from this Democrat Hoax perpetrated by Radical Left Lunatics in order to deflect from the Great Success of the Republican Party, including our recent Victory on the Democrat “Shutdown...

Similar to the Russia investigation, that was conducted by Trump DOJ back in 2017-18, as well as the Republican Senate led Russia investigation that was conducted during those 2 same years, or in the early days of COVID back in late 2019 early 20... President Trump has referred to the Epstein files, as a "hoax". Why?: 

Because we now know that Putin Government in Russia, not just wanted Donald Trump to win the 2016 presidential election, but they did what they could to make that happen. That is something that President Trump's own intelligence community back in 17-18, also believed based on the intelligence that hey were receiving. 

And because of COVID 19, the American economy was essentially forced to shut down to keep people away from each other as much as possible. Which helped eliminate the pandemic, but did a lot of damage to the economy, that we're still paying for. And this all happened on President Trump's watch, so he got the blame for it. 

And since the President's own Attorney General (Pam Bondi) told the President that he was "all over the Epstein files", that's why he's never wanted them released, regardless of what he tells his followers on social media. Even without the release of the Epstein files, we now know that Donald Trump and Jeffrey Epstein were longtime... I don't want to say friends (which I might get into later) but social acquaintances. Which make Mr. Trump a social acquaintance of a serial pedophile and sex trafficker. And according to the Epstein emails, Mr. Trump knew about Epstein's inappropriate behavior with young girls and women. 

I mean, the whole, damn, thing, (meaning the Epstein files and the Trump-Epstein relationship) is a total embarrassment to Donald Trump. And if they get out, we'll know how embarrassing the Epstein files are for the current President of the United States. 

And the reason why I'm not going to say that Donald Trump was ever friends with Jeffrey Epstein... I mean a friend of Donald Trump, is like a dog that doesn't bark. Something just seems off about that. It's hard to imagine any intelligent, sane, sober person, (good or bad) who knows Donald Trump well, actually being Mr. Trump's "friend". Why? Because the only person that he's ever cared about is himself. You can't be someone's real friend, if the only person that you care about, is yourself. 

And I think Yaron Brook made a key point here: 

"Donald Trump announced that the Justice Department would launch an investigation into other people who were associated with Jeffrey Epstein. Those people being Democrats. And because of this investigation, they won't legally be able to release the Epstein files, because they are part of an ongoing criminal investigation... (I'm paraphrasing)

I agree with Mr. Brook that this will be the President's next political play here to prevent the release of the Epstein files. 1 problem with that: if both chambers of Congress not just vote to release the files, but do it overwhelmingly (the House vote was over 400 votes to 1 today and the Senate gets an overwhelming vote as well) and then the President signs that bill... the longer that The White House and Department of Justice don't turn them over to the media, the longer this story will remain in the news. And it will look like that President Trump still has something to hide. 

And just 1 more final point about and 1 reason why I and the rest of The New Democrat have been calling for the release of the Epstein files since August: 

The American people know Donald John Trump very well. Don't fall for the whole "well, we didn't know that about him before we voted for him"... that is complete garbage. Voters either knew who Donald Trump was before they voted for him in 16, 20, and 24... or they simply didn't care. There's just too much information, facts, and evidence about Mr. Trump to know who he is, what his background is, how he does business, runs his own life, how he treats people... to not know what kind of man he is. 

My point is the people who voted for Donald J. Trump for President 3 times, didn't vote for him because they thought he was champion of high morality and character, or electing him to sainthood, etc. In 2024, they voted for him because the cost of eggs and milk, was just too, damn, high for them. (I'm being a little flip with that) They voted for him to make America affordable again. So releasing the Epstein files couldn't make a man that people already know as an: 

insurrectionist

womanizer

sexual assaulter

adulterer

liar

business fraudster

conman, look any worst to the American public, that he already does right now.

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

You can also see this post on WordPress.

CBS News: Epstein Files Put Focus On Divisions in Republican Party

"The Epstein files are putting a greater focus on the recent divide within the Republican Party. Robert Jimison, congressional correspondent with the New York Times, joins CBS News to discuss." 

Source:CBS News 3 of Donald J. Trump's worst political nightmares in this photo. 

From CBS News

New York Times Congressional correspondent Robert Jimison made a key point that's really about the state of the Republican Party right now. He said when he was talking about what does America First mean and what does Make America Great Again mean:

"This is the battle of the Republican Party right now. What does America First Mean and what does Make America Great Again mean. Whether that means supporting issues like tax cuts and health care... I think there's a broad consensus, a broad agreement that it's affordability that brought Republicans that resounding victory in 2024 and gave them The White House and both chambers of Congress. But they haven't yet seen the results of that materialize in policies that they want to see... (A close paraphrase) 

As Erik Schneider wrote about populism last week: 

"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... 

From The New Democrat

So that's the state of the Republican Party right now. You have 1 side who I guess represents the populists (led by U.S. Representative Marjorie T. Greene and others) who are talking about issues like affordability, and health care, where Americans have real issues with President Trump on. And you have the President representing the oligarchs and people who don't have to worry about those issues because they never affect them. So they don't worry about them and don't think about them at all, because they don't see them as their problems because these issues don't affect them personally. 

The New Democrat has never viewed Donald John Trump as a populist. I mean that sounds like a joke: "The Populist Donald J. Trump". The only time he's ever had any ides what it's like to be an average American and trying to figure out how he's going to pay his own bills, is probably when he went through his last bankruptcy back in the mid 1990s and was borrowing money from his brother, just to pay for his own cost of living. 

But there might still be a true populist wing in the Republican Party led by people who represent a lot of average Americans and people who come from average means themselves. And those are the people that U.S Representative Marjorie T. Greene is trying to speak for right now. 

2 months ago I and the rest of The New Democrat would've viewed Representative Greene as an escaped mental patient, who wandered onto the U.S. Capitol and declared herself as U.S. Representative for the American people. But the last couple of months, she sounds like she's finally growing up. 

Now maybe this is just an act and she truly wants bigger things for herself in American politics. Maybe she's finally back on her medication. (Ha, ha) But a true populist cares about the lives of ordinary people in their community. And maybe now that's what she really is. 

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

You can also see this post on WordPress.

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.