The fact that Rashida Tlaib, an agent of the “Palestinian” jihad that is working for the destruction of Israel, is a member of the United States House of Representatives is an indication of how profound the rot is in American politics today, and how deeply the forces of jihad have infiltrated. She doesn’t recognize, of course, the fact that the Arabs left Israel in 1948 because the Arab Higher Committee told them to do so. You can find documentation of this in The Palestinian Delusion. And now she wants a “right of return,” which this resolution includes. That would involve millions of fake “refugees” (for the UN, even the children, grandchildren, and great-grandchildren and beyond of someone who left Israel in 1948 is a “refugee”) entering Israel and making it into a twenty-third Arab Muslim state. This resolution is a call for Congress to back the ideology of those who attacked the United States on September 11, 2001.
“Rashida Tlaib Introduces Resolution ‘Recognizing Ongoing Nakba,’” by Corey Walker, Algemeiner, May 15, 2026:
US Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-MI) on Thursday reintroduced a congressional resolution recognizing the 78th anniversary of what she described as the “ongoing nakba,” using the Arabic term for “catastrophe” deployed by Palestinians and anti-Israel activists to refer to the establishment of the modern state of Israel in 1948.
The resolution, introduced on the anniversary of Israel’s independence, accuses the Jewish state of carrying out “ethnic cleansing,” “apartheid,” and “genocide” against Palestinians, language that many pro-Israel lawmakers in Congress and advocacy groups strongly reject as inflammatory and inaccurate. The measure also calls for renewed US support for the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA), an agency that has faced mounting scrutiny from Israel and several Western governments over allegations that employees participated in or supported Hamas’s Oct. 7, 2023, massacre across southern Israel.
In a statement announcing the resolution, Tlaib argued that the so-called nakba “did not end” with the Arab-Israeli war in 1948 and continues today through Israeli military operations and settlement expansion.
“War criminal Netanyahu and his cabinet have repeatedly threatened to ethnically cleanse the entire Palestinian population in Gaza, annex the land, and permanently occupy it. Today, they are extending these same threats towards southern Lebanon,” she said, referring to Israel Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and military operations against US-designated terrorist groups Hamas and Hezbollah. “As we mark the 78th anniversary of the Nakba, we honor all of those killed since the ethnic cleansing of Palestine began and all those who have been forced from their homes and violently displaced from their land.”
Activists often invoke the term “nakba” when discussing the displacement of some 750,000 Palestinian Arabs following Israel’s War of Independence, many of whom left the nascent state for varied reasons, including that they were encouraged by Arab leaders to flee their homes to make way for the invading Arab armies. At the same time, about 850,000 Jews were forced to flee or expelled from Middle Eastern and North African countries in the 20th century, primarily in the aftermath of Israel’s declaring independence.
Tlaib’s resolution is co-sponsored by several prominent progressive Democrats, including Reps. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (NY), Ilhan Omar (MN), Ayanna Pressley (MA), and Summer Lee (PA)….
The resolution also calls for a so-called Palestinian “right of return,” a demand insisting that potentially millions of descendants of Palestinian refugees should be able to return to the land of Israel, a step that, according to proponents, would result in the abolition of the world’s only Jewish state….
While refugees are generally defined as those who flee a country out of credible fear of persecution, UNRWA uniquely defines Palestinian refugees to include all descendants of those who left the land, regardless of where they were born….
https://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/TLAIB-PALESTINIAN-FLAG.jpg336640Jihad Watchhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngJihad Watch2026-05-18 05:32:042026-05-18 05:37:56Democrat Rashida Tlaib resolution recognizes ‘ongoing nakba,’ calls for ‘right of return,’ that is, destruction of Israel
Editor’s note: This is a lightly edited transcript of a segment from today’s edition of “Victor Davis Hanson: In His Own Words” from Daily Signal Senior Contributor Victor Davis Hanson. Subscribe to Victor Davis Hanson’s own YouTube channel to watch past episodes.
Jack Fowler: So, let’s start off with corruption in Maine. And here’s this—Steve Robinson posted this on X the other day. “Maine Democrats are actively recruiting voters who have never lived in Maine and never paid taxes in Maine.
“Maine Secretary of State Shenna Bellows, who previously tried to disenfranchise Maine voters by removing Donald Trump from the ballot, has publicly admitted that noncitizens are registered to vote in Maine. She’s refusing to give Harmeet Dhillon [from the Justice Department] Maine’s voter files so that the Department of Justice can prevent noncitizens from raiding our elections.
“And Bellows has partnered with the Community Organizing Alliance. This is a, quote-unquote, ‘migrant-run ACORN-style group created by the alleged Medicaid fraudsters at Gateway Community Services.’” Etc., etc.
You know, Maine was once a bastion of republicanism. It has important elections coming up, Victor, and we’re gonna talk about that separately with [Graham] Platner. But this is that infamous woman who tried to keep Donald Trump off the ballot. And she is a pure ideologue and in a position of power.
Your thoughts?
Victor Davis Hanson: Well, I think there’s two issues here. One is Platner and the worry about him. The rumors are, and these are alleged rumors, but I think Mark Halperin mentioned them, that his long social media history, which is pretty crazy. Women need to wear Kevlar pants if they don’t want to be raped. White people, rural people are stupid and lazy. He’s a communist.
Fowler: All cops are bastards.
Hanson: All cops are … Yeah. And I don’t know how you can be on 100% disability for post-traumatic stress syndrome and then say you’re going to run for Senate because you’re disabled. But he’s doing that. And of course, no one has called him on it.
The other thing is if you have a candidate like that and you’re going to nominate him over, she’s not very moderate, the governor, but that he was going to win. And then once he’s in the general—Susan Collins, I know that a lot of the true-blue conservatives like us, Jack, get irritated with her, but she has to operate in the confines of Maine.
And I would say, I haven’t looked at her voting record, but I imagine—don’t you think it’s 75% or 80% with the administration?
Fowler: Yeah.
Hanson: On key votes, the SAVE Act and things like that, she disappoints, but she gets elected. And she’s smart. There’s no comparison between the two.
So, the point I’m making is that he is out of the ordinary. He also represents this new strain of elite, very wealthy—here in California, Tom Steyer is really off the scale, hard-Left, but a billionaire. We saw [Zohran] Mamdani. His two parents are billionaires. I mean, they’re not multimillionaires, but they’re very affluent. They’re from a very exclusive family in Uganda.
And then we go to Platner. He went to Hotchkiss School. He’s the son of a famous architect. His father was a lawyer. His mother is a restaurateur. So, he’s among the elite, and yet he keeps yelling and screaming about billionaires and millionaires. His parents are millionaires, no doubt. He grew up as a millionaire.
So, there’s a problem with him. And when you’re a Democrat and your heart says, I love this guy, but your brain says, he’s not gonna be electable under normal circumstances, then you opt for the change the system. And the change the system is what they always do.
James Carville outlined it. He said, when the Democrats come in, no more filibuster. No more Electoral College with a national voting compact solution to that. Four more Democratic senators under the Washington, D.C., and Puerto Rico entrance. And pack the court. What does that show? He doesn’t have confidence in the Democratic message appealing to 51%.
They don’t have confidence that this guy can win. So, when they do that, they either open the border or they try to say that felons can vote or they try to change the system, and that’s what they’re doing, whether it’s off the radar or transparently in Maine because they have a problem.
And as I said, Mark Halperin reviewed his problems, and apparently, allegedly, there’s a lot more to come, Jack, about him. His record.
And it’s very ironic, well, not ironic. I should apologize for that. But the Democratic Party made such a fuss about Elon Musk’s Nazi salute. It wasn’t a Nazi salute. He saluted like we’ve seen everybody do that. Cory Booker, I think Elizabeth Warren. They all do it.
And they’ve said nothing about this Totenkopf death head, Third Panzer Division [tattoo] and also used as the Einsatzgruppen people at the death camps, and he knew. People have said, that were in his cohort, he knew what it was. He bragged about it.
He’s changed his story twice. He said, well, you know, I didn’t really know what it was until I ran for Congress, I mean, for Senate. And they told me what it was. And then he’s also said, well, you know, I was brainwashed. I imbued or absorbed this toxic Marine culture. And that made me do it.
So, he can’t tell the truth. And he thinks he’s going to win. Put it this way. 30 years ago, if you were a Democrat and you wore a Nazi tattoo for 20 years and people knew about it, that would exclude you from being nominated.
Today in the Democratic Party, the fact that he had a Nazi tattoo and he removed it will mean, A, the grandees will explain it away, or wink, nod, it will be something that will be of value because of the rising antisemitism.
It sends a message. It sends a message, and he’s reiterated again and again and again about Gaza, Gaza, Gaza, genocide, Israel, Israel, Israel, cut off—so that sends a message to the new Democratic Jacobin Party. And it’s not the Democratic Party anyway. It’s a Jacobin Party, a French revolutionary party. And they have institutionalized antisemitism. So, when a candidate sends those signals and we think they’re disqualifying, we’re in a time warp. That was 20, 30 years ago.
It’s not now.
Fowler: Victor, I want to—we have to talk about Tucker Carlson now. Here’s a headline: “Tucker praises Maine Democratic Senate candidate Graham Platner.” Quote, “I certainly appreciate his foreign policy views, and I appreciate how different they are from everybody else in his party. I haven’t met him yet, and I plan to meet him.”
Hanson: Wait, wait, wait, wait, wait, wait. How is he different than anybody else? He’s representative of the Democratic party, isn’t he?
Hanson: I mean, everything he’s right with Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders and the older guard that has flipped like Nancy Pelosi and Schumer. They’re for that stuff now. He basically wants open borders, doesn’t care about illegal immigration, critical race theory, DEI, transgender, all of that stuff. He can’t get elected if he wasn’t.
He’s a green guy, no fossil [fuels]—all of that stuff. And the whole He-Man, white working guy, all in the tough talk, and often laced with profanities, all of that is just superficial pablum for this mythical white working class that’ll vote for him because he’s tough.
It’s kind of insulting to the white working class because the people that I see in my neighborhood that are white working class, are pretty well-informed.
Fowler: Yeah.
Hanson: But I don’t know what Tucker-
Fowler: Oh, you said F, I’m going to vote for you.
Hanson: Yeah. I don’t know what Tucker means, but if he says that he would prefer Graham Platner, and I guess he does, because he didn’t say at the same time, he’s an interesting person. I want to interview him. But of course, I’ll also interview Susan Collins because her record, even though I don’t embrace it all, has been more representative of my entire life in the conservative movement. He didn’t say that.
So, I assume that he likes Graham Platner not because his views are at odds—I’m giving him the benefit of the doubt—with the new hard-Left Democratic Party, unless Tucker’s gone the whole Bill Kristol route. I don’t know if he has or not. Or Max Boot route. I don’t think he has.
But he must like him because Graham Platner has been outspoken in his hatred of Israel, Gaza, genocide, all this stuff. And that, it seems to me, that that’s—and he’s had people on—he has appeared with people who have endorsed, and correct me if I’m wrong, I think he’s appeared with or he’s talked with people who have been classified as pro-neo-Nazi. Really, you know, there’s kind of the Darryl Cooper, I don’t know how you’d [say it], revisionist.
So, is that why Tucker is attracted to this new face in the Democratic Party? Because if you look at the totality of what he said, it’s no different than “the squad” or AOC. It really isn’t.
Fowler: Yeah.
Hanson: And I thought Tucker’s criticism of Donald Trump was, I am a principled conservative, and I voted for Donald Trump and campaigned for him and frequented Air Force One and Campaign One. And I was at Mar-a-Lago, habitué a lot. And I did this because I agreed with 90% of his platform. I thought that’s the reason why.
And I still haven’t been enlightened by anybody. Candace. Any of them. Why, if you disagree with him on a particular issue, like you classify the 60-day, and it hasn’t been 60 days of kinetic activity, it’s been 40 days, maybe less, against Iran. You want to classify that as a forever or endless war, that he campaigned against. Okay, that’s a legitimate opinion.
But why would you take one particular issue and then say, well, I thought it over and I don’t like that wall that’s growing on the border. I don’t like the idea there’s no illegal immigration. I don’t like the idea we’re deporting 500,000 criminals. I don’t like the deregulation, the tax cuts. They’re all an abomination.
No. It’s just you crossed me on one issue and I’m done with you. Unless they can cite others, you know, that you don’t like Trump’s language or you feel that his impulsiveness or when he wasn’t respectful of the dead, with Rob Reiner’s passing, or he uses the F-word on his—something like that. But you have to come forward with something that would nullify your whole life’s conservatism.
Fowler: It’s interesting because one of the criticisms from Tucker was—recent criticisms—was that Trump was the Antichrist. And then he was interviewed by The New York Times this past weekend who—and he denied saying it. And they showed the video he clearly—yeah.
Hanson: I saw that. And he said he didn’t know what the Antichrist was, so how could he say that? And that would suggest that somebody always says things he knows.
Fowler: Yeah.
Hanson: Tucker gave an interview with the mayor of Bethlehem, who flat out said that Christians have been fleeing his city because of Jewish pressure, when in fact one of the destinations they go is to Israel, and they’re fleeing Muslim intolerance.
So, you don’t need to know everything to say something. He did say that. The Antichrist—you know, he said he didn’t know what the Antichrist was. And as I remember in the Bible, I’m just doing this—it’s in John, I think. It’s in Revelations, too. The Greek word for it is pseudochristos. The pseudo just means false. The false Christ.
And I have a feeling, isn’t he referred to in Acts or Letters as the person who, as the end of days come, he’s gonna be popular and work miracles?
Fowler: Yes. Right.
Hanson: But he’s not satan or Lucifer. He’s some type of—he’s not referred to very much in the Bible. He’s some person who’s going to emulate Christ and try to deliberately fool people. And then rob them of eternity through his sin. And they’re following his sin as deluded people.
And so if he meant that, I don’t believe he doesn’t—he’s very religious, so when he says, I don’t know what the Antichrist is, when he’s talking about Trump as the Antichrist, and he said that Trump had used foul language on Easter, and that Trump was a very magnetic person, you get the impression he did know.
Because he was trying to, I think, say that Donald Trump led us, in what I thought was a moral crusade, but it was a pseudo-crusade. Maybe that’s what he meant. I think he did. I just don’t believe that someone that aware and well-read and familiar with Christian exegesis does not know what the antichrist is.
We publish a variety of perspectives. Nothing written here is to be construed as representing the views of The Daily Signal.
Victor Davis Hanson is a senior contributor for The Daily Signal, hosting a podcast and producing video commentaries four times per week, and writing a weekly column. Follow on VDHanson. Website:https://victorhanson.com/.
https://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/The-Maine-Election-Scam.jpg360640The Daily Signalhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngThe Daily Signal2026-05-10 12:11:372026-05-12 05:24:49The Maine Election Scam: Noncitizens, Radical Elites, and the Death of Democracy
It is time to understand just how far the Democrat Party has fallen in discrace.
Here’s a list that may help you understand what hills they have chosen to die on:
Defund the police and replace them with social workers
Force social engineering onto our military e.g. CRT/DEI/Climate Change/LGBTQ , etc. rather than combat readiness and deployability (fortunately Trump and Hegseth are whittling away at these but they still exist)
Invasion of our borders by illegal aliens (again Trump and ICE are chipping away at this)
Lawfare & Injustice by leftist Judges including injunctions against everything Trump does
School Districts/Boards more into indoctrination than education of children
Men in women’s sports
Mutilation of children declared to have gender dysphoria with sex change procedures
Denigration of both Christianity and Judaism replacement with secular humanism/atheism
Decline of Biblical morals and values
Continued emphasis on U.S. as a systemic racist country and use of “revisionist history; to try to destroy American Exceptionalism with lies about white supremacy; white privilege; racism”, etc.
Abortion on demand
Criminals like narco terrorists should be protected; provided due process, not stopped or killed as necessary
No SAVE Act, No Voter ID or proof of citizenship to vote
Eliminate the Electoral College so that only big blue cities will dominate POTUS elections.
Count illegal aliens in census
Stack the SCOTUS with more leftist Justices
Make D.C. and Pureto Rico states to gain 4 new Democrat Senators
Replace our energy needs provided by fossil fuels with alternative sources like wind
mills, solar farms, etc (which will never provide even close to our needs).
Use violence against political opponents
Hate Christains and Jews
All of above amount to Trump Derangement Syndrome, and so forth — what did I miss?
Michael Bloomberg, Warren Buffett, Pierre Omidyar, Tom Steyer and George Soros’s own son, Jonathan — are major funders of the left. Together, they have contributed at
least $2.7 billion since 2000 to groups pushing abortion, gun control, climate change alarmism and liberal candidates.
https://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/Democrats-Really-Want-to-Carry-Water-for-Don-Lemon.jpg332640Royal A. Brown IIIhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngRoyal A. Brown III2026-05-08 05:16:582026-05-08 05:19:53Hills Democrats Choose to Die On
While America tries to process what happened at Saturday night’s White House Correspondents’ Dinner, the chaotic images of what could have been a mass casualty event will be impossible to forget. The horror-stricken faces of men and women huddling under tables, Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) sprinting down the hallway with his security detail, the sound of trays clattering to the ground as SWAT teams leapt over tables and drew their rifles are etched on all of our minds. But as grateful as everyone is that a massacre of some of the country’s highest-ranking leaders was thwarted, incredibly serious questions remain — not the least of which is how we got here in the first place.
To everyone’s relief, the 31-year-old gunman who raced through the magnetometers was tackled and subdued before he could kill anyone. Still, the harsh reality remains: this is the third serious attempt on the president’s life in less than two years. We are officially, as National Review’s editors warn, in the grip of a deadly insanity as a nation. “The feverish opposition to Trump — who is another Hitler, according to the left, and might be the Antichrist … provides a permission slip for sundry fanatics and losers to resort to political violence.”
Meanwhile, throwaway posts about lowering the temperature and “ending the hostility” abound from Democrats, who have yet to acknowledge the lethal environment their government shutdown created. Instead, House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) took to Fox News to try to paint the violence as a bipartisan problem. “Listen,” Jeffries told Shannon Bream Sunday, “I think that here in America we can have strong disagreements, but it’s important for us to agree to strongly disagree without being disagreeable with each other. And it is certainly the case that violence is never the answer, whether it’s targeted at the Right, the Left, or the center.”
It’s a convenient soundbite for the leader of a party who’s decided to roll the dice with American security for the last 70 days. As RNC Chairman Joe Gruters fired back, “Democrats can issue all the hollow calls for ‘unity’ they want, but their actions tell the truth — they’ve repeatedly blocked funding for DHS and the very law enforcement agencies tasked with protecting Americans. You cannot inflame division, undermine public safety, and then pretend to stand for peace. Until Democrats fully fund our security, their words are worthless.”
Thanks to Jeffries and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), the very Secret Service agents who stopped Saturday’s bloodbath are working without paychecks. “It’s really important that law enforcement did their job,” former Acting Homeland Security Secretary Chad Wolf agreed before adding, pointedly, “And I’ll just reiterate, Secret Service is part of the Department of Homeland Security, which remains unfunded at this day and time. And so, these agents and officers are doing their job despite the Democrats in Congress refusing to fund them.”
“It’s outrageous,” Scott Jennings argued on CNN Sunday. “We’re not paying these guys. The [Democrats] who’ve got [Homeland Security] shut down need to think long and hard about last night … [and] what that means to [an officer] who has to show up and take a bullet. Every American ought to be outraged by it.”
Fury continued to pour in from GOP leaders, who’ve tried for weeks — and failed — to reopen the agency tasked with U.S. security. Now, Republicans can’t help but wonder if a shortage of resources might have led to the opening that madman Cole Allen exploited. “Democrats have caused THE LONGEST GOVERNMENT SHUTDOWN IN HISTORY,” the speaker fumed. “Democrats REFUSE to pay law enforcement for over TWO MONTHS because they want to reopen the border for criminal illegal aliens. Democrats’ shutdown is not just DISTURBING — it’s DANGEROUS. Protect American citizens. Fully fund DHS.”
To all the “anti-American Democrats,” Senator Tommy Tuberville (R-Ala.) declared, “it’s time to get your head out of you’re a** and fund our national law enforcement. ALL Americans deserve to live in safety and without fearing for their lives.”
One thing that should come of this nightmare, Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche stressed, is the Democrats’ cooperation in reopening the department. “I hope this is a wake-up call to Congress,” he emphasized on Fox News Sunday. “I hope this is a wake-up call that the games that they’ve been playing, really with the lives of the men and women protecting them, should end.”
Even the president, reflecting on the heroism of the night before, could only shake his head at the situation Schumer’s party has created. “The Secret Service and all law enforcement was … outstanding. … They stopped him cold. … And you just look at them. They were these strong, solid people who’ve got to get paid. You know, this is a group that is not being paid. If you think about it, you know, the Democrats are holding up their pay.”
After Saturday’s incredibly close call, Schumer’s party may be forced to the negotiating table on optics alone. Tired of waiting, Republicans had teed up a reconciliation bill to muscle the funding through on their own two days before the attack at the Washington Hilton happened. It was a last-ditch effort to break through the wall Democrats had built to protest ICE, despite how vulnerable it made the country.
Johnson had expressed optimism on Saturday’s “This Week on Capitol Hill” that his caucus was “finally on the path to get [it] done.” But frankly, he argued, “it’s rather shocking that we’re in this situation. … “The Department of Homeland Security is the third largest department of the federal government — with 10 agencies beneath it. And all of them are tasked with keeping America safe. It’s gone unfunded because the Democrats are playing political games. So we’re going to have to do this on our own. It’s shameful … but that’s where we are.”
Almost prophetically, the speaker pointed out what a “scary and dangerous” situation the country was in. “And the Democrats want to play political games. I just don’t know what else to say about it.”
The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.
https://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/Outcry-Erupts-over-Dems-Refusal-to-Fund-Secret-Service.jpg336640Family Research Councilhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngFamily Research Council2026-04-28 13:44:592026-04-28 13:51:42Outcry Erupts over Dems’ Refusal to Fund Secret Service, DHS after Mass Assassination Attempt
Day after day, new Virginia Gov. Abigail Spanberger and her fellow Democrats demonstrate how much of their agenda is simply about securing power.
Spanberger signed a bill Monday that added the Commonwealth of Virginia to the National Popular Vote Compact, which is a misguided and downright unconstitutional attempt to get around the Electoral College in presidential elections.
The compact, which has now enlisted 18 states and the District of Columbia, would make the state’s Electoral College votes be whatever the national popular vote is, potentially nullifying democracy in the name of democracy.
I’d like to note that this move is awful for several reasons, the first one being that the National Popular Vote idea is a toxic one that undermines America’s federal, constitutional system.
The Electoral College really is the best method for a country as large and diverse as the U.S. to choose presidents. It ensures that the only truly “national” election for an office as important as the presidency relies on a consensus of states and the varied polities represented by the states.
The Electoral College ensures that the interests of the American people aren’t just represented by states like California and Texas, but by Wyoming and Delaware too.
I chose that mix of modern red and blue states for a reason.
The Left has pushed particularly hard for the Electoral College’s abolition in recent years because they believe switching to a popular vote favors them.
That sort of held until 2024 when President Donald Trump won the election and the popular vote too.
There is a perception that big states are blue and small states are red, but that’s not true.
The electoral map is mixed and constantly evolving. The idea that giving small states a slight comparative advantage favors Republicans isn’t true when you consider tiny, deep blue states like Rhode Island.
The electoral map is, as always, in flux.
Changing the system that has been remarkably effective since the beginning to serve the temporary interests of one party is foolish and shortsighted. Adding more “democracy” to our presidential elections is hardly a guarantee that we will have better presidents.
Fortunately, the Founders created a system not reliant on pure democracy. They made one that prevents large-scale constitutional changes without a massive amount of buy-in from the states the Left seemingly wants to bypass.
But more democracy for the sake of democracy is not really what this is about. This is about the fortunes of the Democratic Party and the Left in particular right now.
They look at America and see an electoral map that looks increasingly stacked against them.
Blue state uninhabitability for middle-class Americans means that the states with Democratic majorities are bleeding electoral votes, and the situation will soon be much worse.
As David Marcus, a Fox News columnist, sagely put on X, the following information is almost certainly why Virginia Democrats are “going for broke” with power grabs.
Big, blue states are getting less “big.” Red states are reaping the benefits. And that means that without a switch to something like a national popular vote their electoral road to the White House looks increasingly steep.
This National Popular Vote move is very on brand for Spanberger and the new Democrat majority in Virginia. They’ve spent much of their early days in power passing as many far-Left laws as possible, most notably focusing on changes to ensure that their current majority becomes permanent.
That’s why, despite Spanberger saying years ago that gerrymandering is “detrimental to our democracy,” she’s signed off on one of the most extremely partisan redistricting plans in the country.
Democrats did this while essentially bypassing a Virginia constitutional amendment that established a bipartisan redistricting commission.
Spanberger’s popularity has tanked, but it seems the reasoning is that popularity doesn’t matter so much if the game can be jerry-rigged to keep themselves in power. It’s not the worst bet, though these schemes often have a way of backfiring.
The moves accrue little benefit to effective governance in Virginia, of course. But they do deliver maximum benefits to Democrat politicians who undoubtedly hope that they can make the commonwealth a one-party state and yet another lab of left-wing social engineering à la California.
That Virginia Democrats signed off on the National Popular Vote Compact stems from similar reasoning.
They need to solidify wins now. The “affordability” message was just election-time sloganeering. The party is just as radical as ever. And now that it’s pulled off a win, the party won’t let the lie go to waste.
Both the ruthless redistricting plan and the National Popular Vote sign off demonstrate that the Democrats aren’t going to change their policies to win over voters. Instead, they intend to change the system so they won’t have to.
The Daily Signal depends on the support of readers like you. Donate now
https://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/Virginia-Gov.-Abigail-Spanberger-DS.jpg332640The Daily Signalhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngThe Daily Signal2026-04-20 14:53:312026-04-20 14:58:21Virginia Dems Sign Onto National Popular Vote Compact. It’s All About Power, Not Democracy.
There are lots of Democrats in Congress: several hundred of them, in fact. Many of them are to be deplored. A few — Ilhan Omar and Rashida Tlaib come swimmingly to mind — are fifth columnists in America’s war of self-defense against the global jihad. And then there is Senator John Fetterman from Pennsylvania, a remarkable man who, when it comes to Israel, in the Democratic Party is at times a voxclamantis in deserto. At other times his voice is that of someone who demonstrates his absolute mental freedom to speak forthrightly in support of the Jewish state, which has made him a lonely man in his party, someone who, as Brahms’ motto (borrowed from his friend Joseph Joachim) puts it, is “frei aber einsam” — “free but lonely.”
He’s a curious fellow, often seen wearing his shorts and pullovers, a 6’8” apparition as he lopes along through the Senate Office Building. He wears shorts. He goes sockless. He wears hoodies. But he makes more sense on one matter than any of his colleagues wearing Ermenegildo Zegna suits and Canali ties. John Fetterman has consistently upheld the right of Israel to defend itself, using whatever means the IDF deems appropriate, and has vocally supported the embattled Jewish state more than any other senator from either party. On the walls just outside his office, he has posted photographs of the Israeli hostages. He has spoken out about the Trump administration’s willingness to negotiate with the masters of deception in Tehran over their nuclear program; he doesn’t think negotiations will do more than allow Tehran to stall for time, as it continues to race forward with its enrichment of uranium to a level of 60% purity, one step below weapons-grade. He thinks Trump’s negotiator Steve Witkoff should be called home, and supports the American military’s efforts against the Islamic Republic.
More on Senator Fetterman can be found here: “Fetterman: ‘Insane’ for Democrats to view Israel negatively,” by Sarah Davis, The Hill, April 10, 2026:
Sen. John Fetterman (D-Pa.), a fierce advocate for Israel, on Thursday slammed the increasing Democratic criticism of the country over its joint operations with the U.S. against Iran.
The lawmaker cited a Pew Research survey released this week, which found that 80 percent of Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents have a negative view of Israel.
“That’s insane. You know, that’s our special ally,” the Democratic senator told Fox News’s Jesse Watters on Thursday evening.
“That’s the only place in the region that has the kind of values in the kinds of way that we live and what we want here,” he continued. “As a Democrat, how is that possible that 8 out of 10 view Israel as a negative thing as Democrats?”…
“I think more Democrats should listen to me and say be on the right side of history and holding Iran accountable, and if you have to pick a side, pick our side, pick civilization, pick Israel,” Fetterman said.
And he affirmed his support for the U.S.-Israeli military operations against Iran, calling the effort “necessary.”…
Senator Fetterman is famed for wearing his hoodies, shorts, and sneakers even when at work, but to make up for it, he has the best-dressed mind of any Democrat in Congress.
https://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/SEN.-JOHN-FETTERMAN-UNDERSTANDS-AND-HONORS-JEWISH-LAW-2.jpg374640Jihad Watchhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngJihad Watch2026-04-14 04:43:102026-04-14 04:47:25Senator Fetterman, a Voice Crying in the Democrat Wilderness
Democratic Rep. Eric Swalwell resigned from Congress as he faces allegations of sexual assault and other misconduct from several women.
“I am aware of efforts to bring an immediate expulsion vote against me and other members,” he said in a statement. “Expelling anyone in Congress without due process, within days of an allegation being made, is wrong. But it’s also wrong for my constituents to have me distracted from my duties. Therefore, I plan to resign my seat in Congress.”
Swalwell’s political career imploded as multiple women accused him of sexual misconduct, including rape and unsolicited explicit messages and nude photos. The congressman ended his campaign for California governor on Sunday as he hemorrhaged support.
A former staffer told CNN that she was heavily intoxicated after a night of drinking with Swalwell in New York City in April 2024, when she woke up to him having sex with her in his hotel bed. I was pushing him off of me, saying no,” the woman told CNN of the incident, which she said happened after she had stopped working in Swalwell’s office. “He didn’t stop.” She was one of four women who described misconduct by Swalwell, who was running for California governor. Others alleged that Swalwell sent them unsolicited nude photos or explicit messages.
In his resignation announcement, Swalwell again apologized for past “mistakes in judgment,” but vowed to fight the “serious, false allegation.” The statement seemingly referred to the claims made by a former staffer, whose story was first reported by the San Francisco Chronicle on Friday.
https://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/podcast-2659476_640.jpg360640Conservative Commandos Radio Show and AUN-TVhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngConservative Commandos Radio Show and AUN-TV2026-04-14 04:34:412026-04-14 04:37:16Accused Rapist Swalwell is out! Just resigned Congress!
Those who have opposed this war will be inducted into the national hall of shame. And here we are talking overwhelmingly about Democrat leadership.
The readiness of Trump to identify the clear and present danger to our country of the maniacal regime in Iran, both regarding their acquisition of nuclear weapons and development of a massive arsenal of long-range ballistic missiles, will secure Trump’s place in history as a great leader.
American action in Iran has also brought forth with clarity where the rest of the world stands.
We now better understand the lack of principles of our so-called European allies and the squishiness of NATO. We now better understand the evil and threat lurking in Russia, China, and North Korea.
And particularly interesting is the potential realignment that will emerge in the Persian Gulf, as suddenly the Arab nations in the Gulf have found themselves attacked by the Iranian maniacs. We may see a great solidifying of U.S. relations with those oil-rich Gulf nations, and we may see an historic solidifying of their relationship with Israel.
It all has made the security picture even clearer to Trump, who is requesting in the 2027 budget a 50% increase in defense spending, from around $1 trillion to $1.5 trillion.
The current war has made abundantly clear the inadequacy of our defense spending, now hovering at an historic low of 3% of gross domestic product. We live in a dangerous world. The motto “peace through strength” has never been clearer.
But how do we add $500 billion to our defense budget when we are running multitrillion dollar deficits at home and we’re carrying national debt greater than 100% of GDP?
There is one answer. We must step up finally and revamp and reform the massive waste in our federal spending—now approaching 25% of our GDP.
The U.S. Government Accountability Office reported last year that the federal government loses $233 to $521 billion in fraud. It also reported improper federal payments since 2003 totaling at least $2.8 trillion.
In 2024 alone, the Government Accountability Office notes improper payments in Medicare, Medicaid, and SNAP (food stamps) of $95.5 billion.
When Republicans moved to reform Medicaid in the “One Big, Beautiful Bill,” Democrats went crazy and took us to a government shutdown.
The best way to manage gasoline prices is to increase supplies of oil and gas. Democrats are forever obstacles to this, making discredited claims about climate. Recently, Microsoft founder Bill Gates, once a climate change enthusiast, has repudiated “the doomsday view” of climate change, saying it “is wrong.”
We may well see in the midterms that voters indeed see Democrats as the clear and present danger to the nation.
COPYRIGHT 2026 CREATORS.COM
We publish a variety of perspectives. Nothing written here is to be construed as representing the views of The Daily Signal.
The Daily Signal depends on the support of readers like you. Donate now
https://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/House-Minority-Leader-Hakeem-Jeffries-D-N.Y.jpg332640The Daily Signalhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngThe Daily Signal2026-04-13 08:56:092026-04-13 08:59:47Democrats Are Clear and Present Danger to the Nation
As the almost 50-day partial shutdown drags on, travelers have definitely found some creative coping mechanisms for their long waits at U.S. airports. In Houston, one man went viral for walking up and down the security line with a vodka bottle, pouring shots for annoyed adults. Atlanta’s Hartsfield-Jackson brought in live entertainment, a violinist who was supposed to ease some of the tension. “[A] violin playing like on the deck of the Titanic. Is it that bad?” one passenger joked. And in Baltimore, volunteers passed out “pick-me-up snacks.” Now that TSA workers are finally getting paid, Americans’ aggravation is starting to subside — just not where Congress is concerned.
What was a four-hour checkpoint in Houston had dwindled to just 10 minutes on Monday, PBS reported — a world of difference from the endless nightmare passengers were experiencing just 48 hours earlier. After weeks of maddening scenes across the country, there are signs that things may slowly be returning to normal. On Capitol Hill, though, there’s been no reprieve from the biggest standstill: Homeland Security funding. But that’s about to change.
While the president found a workaround for TSA agents, the two chambers have been logging long phone calls in search of a solution to turn the lights on across DHS. As Politico points out, “While about 50,000 airport security officers are now getting paid under Trump’s executive action, thousands more workers remain furloughed or working without pay. Those include more than 2,000 employees of the premier federal cybersecurity agency, more than 4,000 FEMA workers as well as more than 1,000 Coast Guard civilians.”
On Wednesday afternoon, the situation took a dramatic turn when the two GOP leaders — who were at odds on strategy before the Easter recess — released a joint statement agreeing to compromise on their differences. In it, House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) and Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) both agreed to swallow pieces of the other chamber’s proposal in an effort to get all of Homeland Security funded.
“In the coming days, Republicans in the Senate and House will be following through on the President’s directive by fully funding the entire Department of Homeland Security on two parallel tracks: through the appropriations process and through the reconciliation process,” they explained. “We appreciate,” they continued, “that Senator [Lindsey] Graham (R-S.C.) and the Senate Budget Committee have already initiated the process of developing a budget resolution that will ensure border security and immigration enforcement will be funded for the balance of the Trump Administration and insulated from future attempts by the Democrats to defund those agencies.”
Translation: House Republicans will be pressured to accept the Senate’s proposal to partially fund Homeland Security in exchange for Thune’s help in passing another reconciliation bill (which would presumably finance ICE and Customs and Border Patrol). Of course, the advantage of reconciliation, that tricky budgetary process the GOP used to move the One Big Beautiful Bill, is that it lets conservatives bypass the Senate’s 60-vote threshold and get legislation over the finish line with a simple majority — an absolute necessity in the era of absurd Democratic obstruction.
Last Friday, House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) pushed hard to bring the Senate-passed proposal to the floor — to no avail. Wednesday afternoon, he reiterated that position, posting that it was “time to pay TSA agents, end the airport chaos and fully fund every part of the Department of Homeland Security that does not relate to Donald Trump’s violent mass deportation scheme.”
Assuming that position holds, the Democrats’ help will be crucial in getting the Senate bill over the hump in Johnson’s chamber, where some conservatives were already grumbling about the new, two-track plan. But even they must recognize the quandary leadership is in when Minority Leader Chuck Schumer’s (D-N.Y.) party is determined to put political messaging above American safety.
“We operated under a belief that while our country is in the midst of an international armed conflict, Democrats might finally come to their senses and understand that defunding our homeland security agencies is beyond reckless and very dangerous,” the two leaders pointed out. “[But] it is now abundantly clear that Democrats place allegiance to their radical left-wing base above all else — including their own power of the purse — which means open borders and protecting criminal illegal aliens. That is not acceptable to Republicans in Congress, nor is it to the American people. We cannot allow Democrats to any longer put the safety of the American public at risk through their open border policies, so we are taking that off the table.”
By early Thursday morning, the new plan was already moving. In its pro-forma session, the Senate sent its partial funding bill back to the House, where action will likely be taken early next week. Meanwhile, conservatives are bracing for the wild race toward reconciliation.
The challenge, most people agree, will be political discipline. There’s always a temptation for the party chasing reconciliation to throw every possible thing at the wall and see if it sticks. But this cannot be a catch-all, conservatives warn. “I would keep it as simple as possible so it could pass,” Johnson reiterated. While some Republicans will want to slip in Iran funding, pieces of the SAVE America Act, or other logjammed bills, an injection of too many priorities could “kill the whole thing,” one senator acknowledged anonymously.
“If you want to keep all of our members tight,” outgoing Senator Thom Tillis (R-N.C.) insisted, “… we need to agree to parameters and not allow scope creep.” The majority leader echoed the sentiment. “We’re just trying to make sure we keep our expectations realistic,” Thune said.
One advantage of the idea is that Republicans could fund all of DHS for multiple years — sparing them (and the country) this headache every time Homeland Security appropriations comes up. On that, both chambers agree. “We’re going to send [the House something] that actually funds DHS for the next three years. We’re not going through this again with the Dems, okay?” Senator John Hoeven (R-N.D.) emphasized.
Rep. Kevin Hern (R-Okla.) wonders if the House can find a sweet spot on reconciliation the second time around. “The reality is, we will be fine in the Senate,” he explained, recognizing that Thune can still lose three Republicans on reconciliation and still pass the bill. “The House is where we’re going to have the problem,” he cautioned on Tuesday’s “Washington Watch.” But we’re going to have people in swing districts [who] are going to have a real problem with it. The speaker knows that. We all know that, and we’re working hard to try to figure out a way forward.”
Singling out the perpetual thorn in Johnson’s side, Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.), Hern acknowledged, “… There are a lot of reasons why we don’t have the full vote margins that we need. … And we know that we have one member [who’s] going to vote against everything that we do going forward. So we can’t lose any[one]. And that’s a very difficult situation when you’re trying to pass something as monumental as a second reconciliation bill.” Especially when the president throws down this timeline: “I am asking that the Bill be on my desk NO LATER than June 1st,” he posted Wednesday.
But the current situation isn’t just unsustainable, it’s historic. “Listen, not every single Democrat is against funding the security of our border and ICE,” Hern wanted people to know, “but the stranglehold by the Democrat[ic] leadership is making it such [that] if you vote to do the right thing for America, you’re a bad person. [And] I do think that it’s unprecedented.”
The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.
https://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/Johnson-Thune-Hatch-Plan-to-End-DHS-Shutdown.jpg336640Family Research Councilhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngFamily Research Council2026-04-02 12:11:262026-04-02 12:12:38Johnson, Thune Hatch Plan to End DHS Shutdown and Launch Second Reconciliation Push
The pain the Democrats are inflicting on the American people — out of pure spite — is largely being ignored by the Democrat media complex. While Americans stand for hours in snaking TSA lines, the media runs cover.
ABC News did a segment on the 4+ hours travelers are forced to wait on security lines without ever mentioning that the reason for these delays is the Democrat government shutdown.
Airlines: On Friday, our TSA workers got a $0 paycheck. From the letter signed by 10 CEOs: There are very few issues upon which 9 out of 10 Americans agree. However, in recent polling, 93 percent of your constituents across the country supported paying federal aviation workers during government shutdowns. Furthermore, 88 percent of Americans said long lines and extended wait times at airport security checkpoints are likely to be repeated if TSA officers continue to work without pay during future shutdowns…. It’s past time for the government to make sure that TSA officers, U.S. Customs clearance officers at airports and air traffic controllers are paid for the job they do.
Wall Street Journal: The Editorial Board of the Wall Street Journal: As the lines at airport security get worse, frustrated travelers should know who’s to blame: Sen. Chuck Schumer. Democrats have refused to fund the Department of Homeland Security, producing a shutdown that now has dragged on for a month. TSA airport screeners are calling out of work, since they aren’t getting paid. The Transportation Security Administration’s nationwide absence rate on March 6 was 8%, according to agency figures obtained last week by CBS, but in some places it has been much higher. “At Houston’s Hobby Airport,” the network reported, “53% of officers called out on March 8, with 47% calling out the following day.” The wait hit three hours. Other TSA workers are outright quitting, and it’s hard to blame them. They received a partial paycheck last month. Then on payday last week they got nothing. This financial hardship arrives only months after last fall’s shutdown, when Mr. Schumer didn’t reopen the government for a record 43 days. Do Democrats think TSA staff should simply put up with this treatment?.
Britt: Alabama Senator Katie Britt (R): TSA officers have gone 74 days without a paycheck in FY26 because of Democrats’ two shutdowns. This is absolutely unacceptable. Democrats need to end their political posturing, stop using our TSA agents as political pawns, and fully fund DHS.
https://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/LONG-LINES-AT-AIRPORTS-GR.jpg318640The Geller Reporthttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngThe Geller Report2026-03-18 05:42:002026-03-18 05:43:49CEOs of Nation’s Leading Airlines Publish Open Letter Pressing Democrats to Open Government
In World War II, the U.S. Navy operated “ice cream” barges behind ships to make sure our sailors had a few comforts in the most terrible war in human history.
That we were able to operate such a fleet is a testament to American logistical magnificence, but if it were in operation today under President Donald Trump, the corporate media would have accused the War Department of engaging in “extravagant” spending.
There have been plenty of pernicious, media-concocted scandals associated with Trump’s presidential tenure in the last decade, but I contend that “lobstergate” may be the dumbest.
Several prominent publications ran with headlines in the last week about how War Secretary Pete Hegseth created an apparently lavish budget for steak and lobster.
These stories were based on a report from government watchdog Open The Books about a surge in the military food budget in September.
The report was straightforward and acknowledged that this sort of spending has been going on for more than a decade as the Pentagon uses up its end-of-year budget. Open The Books acknowledged that this late-year spending surge has happened “regardless of which party controlled the White House.”
That didn’t stop the deluge of misleading headlines making it seem like Hegseth and Trump were spending money on steak and lobster just to stuff their own faces.
“The Pentagon blew through a total of $93.4 billion that month by spending, for example, $6.9 million on lobster tail; $15.1 million on rib-eye steak; and $225.6 million on furniture. There were 272 orders of doughnuts and three-tiered fruit basket stands that cost $12,540,” The New York Times reported Saturday with the subheadline “Tracking the Pentagon’s profligate lobster budget.”
The Times then quoted two unfunny professional funnymen, Stephen Colbert and Jimmy Kimmel, mocking Hegseth and the military for wildly spending on succulent meals.
“As Paul Revere declared on his famous ride, ‘One if by surf, two if by turf,’” Colbert said.
“What is this? My 600-pound defense department? How are they eating so much food?” said Kimmel.
Several high-profile Democrats jumped in on this narrative too.
This was from California Gov. Gavin Newsom on X.
No word on if Newsom is going to do anything about the likely tens of millions of dollars or more being squelched in hospice scams in his state, or the $24 billion spent on fighting homelessness that was never tracked nor reduced homelessness, or the billions of dollars spent over the last decade on the bullet train to nowhere.
Senate Minority Leader Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., also weighed in.
“Hegseth spent $93 billion in one month – roughly the cost of extending the ACA tax credits for THREE YEARS,” Schumer wrote on X. “But instead of lowering American’s healthcare costs, Hegseth used millions of taxpayer dollars on fruit baskets, Herman Miller recliners, ice cream machines, Alaskan King Crabs, and a Steinway & Sons grand piano.”
As Fox News pointed out, the amount of spending on military food—including steak and lobster—was essentially the same under President Joe Biden. So why didn’t he complain about this HUGE PROBLEM then? You know why.
Another critique came from an editorial in USA Today with the absurd headline “82 million can’t afford health care, but Hegseth gets lobster.”
Not only is it laughable that the money spent on military food in September could pay for the health care of 82 million Americans, but it is also downright ludicrous to think this money is going to Hegseth personally.
The author of the piece, Rex Huppke, wrote of the military giving food to troops that it’s “enough to make you want to grab a torch and pitchfork and start marching.”
I’d say the Fourth Estate should be more worried about the pitchforks than the men and women in uniform who have to do a lot more than just marching these days.
It’s certainly fair to criticize the government for how it spends the taxpayer money, and the Pentagon shouldn’t be above scrutiny. But this is hardly the first place we should choose to skimp, especially with all the military personnel currently in harm’s way.
The reality is that the U.S. military has, through most of its history, prioritized better food for our troops than other armies. We are a rich and powerful country with a penchant for logistics and supply chains.
Those qualities have allowed us to better supply our soldiers than any other mass army in the world. While I’m not saying that typical military rations are fine dining (“Unless you’re in the Navy,” as my Army Air Corps grandfather used to grouse), they’ve generally been a cut above most militaries.
And that’s for a good reason. It’s good for morale for an army to be well-fed. It’s certainly a lot better for warfighting than making the Navy go green and the other nonsense that money was wasted on under the previous administration.
They’re Americans, they should expect to have the best food and equipment in the world.
The lobstergate talking point is just mindless blather from people who’ve never thought twice about reducing the budget nor apparently thought once about the actual wellbeing of our military.
The Daily Signal depends on the support of readers like you. Donate now
https://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/War-Secretary-Pete-Hegseth.jpg330640The Daily Signalhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngThe Daily Signal2026-03-17 11:42:222026-03-17 11:46:41Media Is in a Tizzy Because We Give Troops Good Food Sometimes
Democrats are now fully aiding and abetting terrorist organizations:
Times of Israel: A bomb attack on protesters outside the governor’s mansion in New York City. An attack on the nation’s largest Reformed synagogue outside of Detroit. At least one student killed at Old Dominion in an attack from a gunman with a known history of supporting ISIS. In San Jose, Jewish-American diners attacked for the singular offense of dining in public while Jewish.
Fox News: Just a week earlier: A man with wearing “Property of Allah” kills three at an outdoor beer garden in Austin.
Washington Examiner: The list could go on. And yet: DHS has operated without funding since Feb. 14, after lawmakers failed to reach an agreement on reforms to immigration enforcement policies included in the funding package…. The war abroad has heightened the likelihood of attacks inside the U.S., which falls under the DHS’s jurisdiction.
Appropriations: On March 4, Republican leaders had issued a warning: Nearly three weeks into the Democrats’ shutdown of the Department of Homeland Security, the American people are facing an evolving threat environment. Democrats must agree to the bipartisan, bicameral funding agreement they helped negotiate in January. Senate Democrats irresponsibly shut down DHS, knowingly limiting the capabilities of the department responsible for protecting Americans from dangerous individuals.
This year’s midterm elections will likely shape the future of the Democratic Party and determine whether the Democrats continue their trend toward radical, far-left, neo-Marxist policies or return to the more center-left position the party popularized before the end of the Second World War.
In the wake of the 2024 presidential election that returned President Donald Trump to the White House, voters reported that they considered then-Vice President and Democratic presidential nominee Kamala Harris “too extreme.” Her policies included open borders, unrestricted abortion promotion, gender transition procedures for children, a borderline-socialist economic agenda, and more. According to NBC News exit polls, 48% of voters classified Harris’s policies as “too extreme,” while nearly 60% of voters told Fox News that they were “concerned” that Harris’s agenda is “too extreme.”
Of the more-than-one-quarter of Americans who described their 2024 presidential vote as against a candidate, rather than for a candidate, nearly 60% said that they were voting against Harris. Such survey results — in addition to Trump’s capture of both the electoral college and popular vote — seemingly indicated that far-left Democratic Party policies like those Harris championed were unpopular with the American public — unpopular enough to cost the Democrats the White House, at any rate.
Off-year elections in 2025, however, yielded mixed messaging for Democratic strategists and policymakers. Newly-elected Virginia Governor Abigal Spanberger (D) campaigned as a moderate Democrat, decisively defeating Republican opponent and ex-Lieutenant Governor Winsome Earle-Sears. (Despite Spanberger’s “moderate” image, she quickly began enacting far-left policies upon taking office earlier this year.) Meanwhile, avowed socialist and pro-immigration radical Zohran Mamdani not only won the Democratic nomination for the New York City mayorship, but bested former New York Governor Andrew Cuomo, running as an Independent after losing the Democratic nomination to Mamdani and became the first Muslim mayor of New York City. Socialist Katie Wilson (D) won the mayorship of Seattle, St. Paul elected a mayor who admitted to being an illegal immigrant, and Downingtown, Pa. elected an openly-transgender-identifying mayor.
Now, with midterm elections looming and the specter of 2028 not far off, the Democratic Party faces a dilemma. Some strategists are pressing to distance candidates from the radical policies that crippled Harris’s 2024 White House bid, while others point to the success of figures like Mamdani and Wilson, coupled with growing discontent over the Trump administration’s handling of affordability issues, as evidence that socialism and ultra-progressive social policies appeal to voters.
Option One: Move to the middle. Sunday and Monday, the Democrat-aligned think tank Third Way hosted its “Winning the Middle” conference in South Carolina, urging Democrats to take a more centrist approach and not nominate a socialist presidential candidate in 2028. According to Axios, Third Way President Jon Cowan called the Democrats’ far-left wing “out of touch,” warning that the party would face almost certain defeat if it were to nominate someone in the mold of socialist Senator Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), singling out ultra-progressive Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) as a potential successor to Sanders politically.
Cowan observed that groups linked to Sanders and Ocasio-Cortez have “flipped zero” contentious seats in the House of Representatives since 2018, but a spokesman for Justice Democrats, the organization predominantly responsible for Ocasio-Cortez’s election, responded that progressive groups are more focused on launching primary challenges against “corporate Dems in deep-blue seats” than on targeting Republican-held congressional districts.
Option Two: Lean into the far-left. Various ultra-progressive organizations are trying to persuade Ocasio-Cortez to launch a bid for the 2028 Democratic presidential nomination, again according to Axios. “One big reason: They see no clear alternative. Bernie Sanders (84) is too old — and no other Sanders-like pol with national punch is emerging,” Axios conveyed. The argument being put forth centers largely on the New York-based congresswoman’s name recognition and political cachet, which proponents say would automatically give her a boost in polling and allow her to raise an estimated $100 million through online fundraising alone.
Another point of consideration is a matter of timing: if the nomination seems to be out of Ocasio-Cortez’s reach, she could potentially drop out and pivot to a high-profile Senate bid, challenging incumbent Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.). “There’s a window of opportunity for a left-wing nominee that may not come again for a generation,” Axios reported. “Democratic-socialist and liberal victories in New York City and elsewhere — with potentially more this fall — have changed the political playing field.”
Flanked by former Sanders campaign advisors and strategists, Ocasio-Cortez and her team are reportedly keeping a close eye on congressional primaries and races this year in order to “validate the theory that voters are hungry for a left-wing outsider in 2028.” While Ocasio-Cortez has been a Sanders ally, reports suggest that she may have no interest in a White House run and could instead be preparing a network to support another far-left candidate. Other prospective White House contenders floated by Democratic Party insiders include pseudo-socialist Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.) and open-borders advocate Senator Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.).
If far-left, socialist-style candidates emerge victorious in high-profile congressional districts in November, or even if they defeat enough establishment-type Democrats in hotly-contested primaries, the party’s ultra-progressive wing will likely feel emboldened to run one of their own in the Democratic presidential primary for 2028.
In comments to The Washington Stand, FRC Action Director Matt Carpenter observed, “This internecine scuffle among the Democratic Party apparatchiks has been simmering since the party was dealt its biggest defeat in decades in 2024.” He recounted that shortly after Trump assumed office the second time, then-Vice Chair of the Democratic National Committee (DNC) David Hogg left the organization amidst a conflict over his commitment to primarying Democrats who were not far enough to the Left. “It’s been clear for a while that the fissure between the progressive and establishment elements in the party was going to widen into a canyon,” Carpenter said. “As the midterms and the 2028 presidential contest approach, these elements inside the Democratic Party will vie for control of the party.”
“My question is: is this simply a disagreement in party branding, or is this a legitimate disagreement in policy as well? The Democratic Party has planted its flag on the wrong side of a series of 80-20% issues, like late-term abortion, gender-transitioning minors, critical race theory, and so-called ‘diversity, equity, and inclusion’ initiatives, all of which are unpopular with a majority of voters,” Carpenter posited. “My sense is that the Democratic Party is merely debating how the party should brand itself, rather than any actual moderation in policy,” he added, pointing to Spanberger as an example. “Spanberger was cautious not to confirm accusations that she is a left-wing radical during her 2025 campaign, but in just a few short months, she has governed as a left-wing radical,” Carpenter noted. “The so-called moderates in the party will still push for the same radical abortion position and the most radical pro-transgender policies as the progressive wing. The only difference is that the so-called moderates are savvy enough not to campaign on them.”
But even if Democrats manage to secure a majority in the House in the midterm elections, the party will have to maintain momentum through 2028, and Democrats are already splintering over the potential of impeaching Trump — again. According to Semafor, Democrats are considering launching an “oversight” project if they retake a House majority, targeting corporations and firms that have cooperated with the Trump administration. “The shadow of Trump’s first term will hang over Democrats’ decisions,” Semafor opined, warning that Democrats may “encounter deep internal divisions over how far to go in conducting oversight while also passing their own agenda.”
Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.), for example, has already teased the possibility of impeaching Trump, specifically citing alleged violations of the Emoluments Clause of the Constitution, which bars presidents from accepting gifts from foreign governments or U.S. taxpayers. “The cardinal, original sin of Trump was to decide that he was going to use the presidency as a profit-making enterprise in his first term, and I would say that Congress should have impeached him for receiving millions and millions of dollars from foreign governments,” Raskin claimed.
During the first Trump presidency, Raskin was the lead impeachment manager for the second impeachment of Trump, centered on the events of January 6, 2021. Rep. Robert Garcia (D-Calif.), the top House Oversight Democrat, focused his attention on corporations partnering with the White House. “There [are] opportunities to look at not just corporations that we think are enabling some of Trump’s corruption,” he said, “but certainly corporations that are not supporting American families and not really focusing on affordability.”
Within just months of Trump’s return to the White House, some Democrats were already breaking out the articles of impeachment. Rep. Shri Thanedar (D-Mich.) led the charge, joined by a handful of other Democrats, but party leadership was hesitant to embrace the move. Semafor noted that Democrats are aware that they likely lack the Senate votes to convict Trump even if he’s impeached in the House. However, Democratic leaders have been less averse to the prospect of impeaching Trump’s Homeland Security Secretary, Kristi Noem.
Yet a third faction of the Democrats is less concerned with political retribution and more concerned with addressing issues like affordability. “We have to do oversight and accountability, and we have to talk about the affordability agenda, how we’re going to make life better for people if we are given the opportunity to lead, and if we’re given the opportunity to govern,” Rep. Pete Aguilar (D-Calif.) said. He warned that impeachments and investigations cost time and money; if high-profile progressives like Raskin promise impeachments, voters would undoubtedly grow impatient, demanding results that may never materialize.
Author and political commentator Philip Finkelstein suggested that Democrats appear unlikely to learn from their past mistakes. “Trump capitalized on far-left foolishness [in 2020], and he did it again in 2024. The liberal media and those in charge of the Democratic Party couldn’t — seemingly still don’t — see what the majority of Americans take to be common sense,” he opined.
Even though Joe Biden claimed victory in the 2020 election, Trump’s polling results demonstrated that his support was still strong. “Yet, four years later, the Democrats somehow saw fit to run Kamala Harris. Despite Biden’s own role in causing this disaster, the real mystery is how the establishment … thought it made sense to bypass the democratic process and nominate a gaffe-prone and unpopular vice president from California who had never won a single primary,” Finklestein observed. “The writing was always on the wall. Democrats lost, and they will keep losing national elections until they consciously choose a rebirth for their party. They need to remove from power within the party the faction that allowed Trump to paint everyone on the left as more deranged than his own unhinged brand of populism.”
The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.
https://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/Dems-Face-Political-Identity-Crisis.jpg336640Family Research Councilhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngFamily Research Council2026-03-03 10:59:542026-03-03 11:05:55Dems Face Political Identity Crisis That Even Midterm Elections May Not Resolve
President Trump’s actions this week have preserved what every American holds dear. The existence of everyone and everything you love and cherish is safer today because our president did what every president for the last 47 years did not have the courage to do.
For 47 years the threat of Iran getting a nuclear weapon has horrified the world. If Iran ever obtained a nuclear weapon, they might have used it on Israel and possibly even the United States itself. If Israel were hit with a nuclear weapon, Israel and the United States would have no choice but to respond in kind. That could provoke a response from Russia, China, or both. That is what you call a worldwide nuclear war.
I don’t know about you, but that is something I surely would not want to live through. Life on Earth would be a living hell.
All those rushing to condemn this military action against the Iranian regime were silent when Iran was butchering 32,000 of its own people. How in the world could they fire on their own countrymen who were peacefully demonstrating in the streets?
President Trump didn’t start a war with Iran. He ended a 47-year conflict that began during the Jimmy Carter administration.
Iran has now attacked eight neighboring Muslim nations in the past 24 hours. Omar condemned Donald Trump at the beginning of this attack, claiming it was uncivilized because it is Ramadan. So why is she silent now? Why is she not condemning Iran if this is such a sacred holiday?
I prefer a president who puts America’s interests first—one who confronts our enemies rather than sending billions of dollars to them. American cash on pallets delivered by the American Air Force in the middle of the night.
As John Fetterman said, referring to the ayatollah, “This is one of the most evil people that ever lived, and after 37 years in Iran, he has been eliminated. I can’t imagine why Democrats, Republicans—everyone—can’t celebrate that, because tens of millions of people in Iran are absolutely celebrating.”
Do we need to apologize to Iranian citizens for the ignorant liberals who wanted to continue seeing you murdered, raped, and brutally oppressed by a radical Islamic regime? Do we need to tell them, please understand not all of us are crazy and deranged like the left? The majority of us are celebrating your chance to finally be prosperous and free at last.
Can anyone explain to me why Democrats are suddenly worried that Iranian sleeper cells will now attack the United States from within? These are the same Democrats who opened our borders to let this threat in. These are also the same Democrats who want to disarm Americans and prevent us from protecting ourselves.
We have members of Congress who share the same beliefs as the ayatollahs and the leadership regime in Iran. The enemy is also here. They need to be removed and tried for treason. It is not hard to understand why Congress wasn’t notified about these military operations when you have people like Talib, Omar, AOC, Mark Kelly, and Chuck Schumer sitting there. Their loyalty is not to America or American citizens. Their loyalty is to their native countries and to regaining power for their beloved socialist Democrat Party.
How fast do you think these individuals would have given the plans of Operation Epic Fury to our enemies?
The United States will never be taken down by an outside force. The American people need to realize the real threat is already here. There is another enemy within.
I believe the world owes Donald Trump a debt of thanks!
https://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/podcast-2659476_640.jpg360640Conservative Commandos Radio Show and AUN-TVhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngConservative Commandos Radio Show and AUN-TV2026-03-03 05:11:562026-03-03 05:15:32PODCAST: President Trump’s Actions This Week have Preserved what Every American Holds Dear
Hello, this is Victor Davis Hanson for The Daily Signal. We’re heading, this year, in November, to the midterms. There’s a lot of opposition to the Trump counterrevolution. There’s talk of a Democratic resurgence.
But before we write off the Republicans—and I’m very confident. I think they’re gonna do well in the midterms, for reasons I’ve outlined before. Do we really want the alternative?
Because I think the way to characterize the new democratic socialist party is it’s sort of a graveyard of bad ideas. That is that, especially in the Obama administration and in the post-George Floyd period, we were told that there were new paradigms, new exegesis, new protocols, agendas that were going to be lasting and permanent, and change America for the better.
And they have been tried under former President Joe Biden, and they’ve been found wanting. And I think they’re mostly, now, relegated, as I said, to the boneyard, maybe, of bad ideas.
One of them was this idea that a previously small minority of people that suffered from gender dysphoria—maybe 0.001% of the population—was actually a huge group of oppressed peoples, in the manner of the civil rights plight of African Americans or Latinos. And therefore, we had to recognize separate restrooms for trans people. Boys—biological men, I should say, competing in female sports. And we just went whole hog.
I think all of us at work, all of a sudden, one day, we woke up and people were listing their pronouns. I haven’t seen that recently.
Anyway, we were told there was this large stealthy constituency of oppressed trans people and that they had innate grievances against the majority. And they were quite big.
I don’t think people bought into the idea that there are more than two biological genders. The rest, I think, as a recent Czech diplomat lectured former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton in Munich, Germany, the rest are socially constructed.
Nor did we really look at the effect of biological males competing in sports, especially contact sports—that can be volleyball or things like boxing—the effect of a biological male on female sports, and the fairness, or I should say unfairness, of it.
And of course, the transitional surgery, the effect on hormones. The Left had been so careful to warn us about Big Pharma and the medical industry and unnecessary procedures, and yet they were very undiscriminating and just kind of approved whole-hog the idea that you can make these radical surgeries on young teenagers and give them very dangerous drugs—steroids and hormones, antidepressants. And I think now we’ve seen the result of it. And it’s not gonna recur.
Open borders were another bad idea. And we had 10,000 people coming across the border. I think the iconic turning point was when Alejandro Mayorkas, the former Biden homeland security secretary, was standing on a podium and saying at the border, “The border is secure.” And you could see thousands of people coming in—10,000 a day, 10 million to 12 million over four years.
I don’t think anybody realizes the enormity of the task to find those 10 million to 12 million. They added to a pool of 20 million, giving us 30 million illegal aliens. And we had another 20 million people not born in the United States that were residents. Some were citizens, some were legal residents, some were on student visas.
But the point is, we have 53 million people, 16% of the population wasn’t born here, without any idea how to assimilate, acculturate, or integrate them into the body politic.
So, I think the idea of open borders, as Secretary of State Marco Rubio pointed out in Europe, is a dead letter. Nobody’s gonna come back and say, “We have to let in another 10 million or 5 million.” It impacts the poor. It swamps our social welfare network, as we’ve seen with 500,000 criminals. It spikes our crime.
Another one is the idea that we’re gonna live in a United Nations utopia and you really don’t need a deterrent military. Europe went down that path after the end of the Cold War, 1991, all through the ’90s and the new millennium. They disarmed. Germany went from having the biggest army in NATO to having one that wasn’t really an army anymore. Europe, despite its $20 trillion gross domestic product and despite its 500 million-plus population, is totally disarmed.
We ourselves let our defenses lax under Biden. I think everybody sees now, after the Iranian nuclear threat, what China’s up to, what Russia is doing in Ukraine, that you have to deter your enemies. And that requires a strong defense budget.
I think, as well, we owe—we’re getting into the trillions of dollars. And we’re anticipated to get to, in the next decade, I don’t know, it could be $40 trillion in debt. It’s not sustainable. The interest on the debt, right now, is larger than the defense budget. Europe is suffering the same malaise. But the idea of modern monetary theory—the Left told us—or that since we are loaning the money to ourselves and bondholders, it’s turned out to be bogus.
The fact is we ran up all of this debt because the Fed, during the Obama and first Trump administration and the first Biden administration, kept interest rates low, so we borrowed billions, trillions of more dollars, at rates as low as 2% or 3%. And now the rates came up. And we saw what a catastrophic idea that was when we have to service it.
I don’t think anybody’s gonna make the argument that we need more socialist entitlement programs funded by borrowed money. If you borrow the money and it’s unsustainable, you only have three choices: you can default on it and ruin the nation’s credit rating, you can confiscate money, or you can inflate your way out of it.
There’s a fourth, but I don’t see Europe, yet, learning that lesson: You can grow your economy and get greater revenues. That’s what we’re trying to do in the United States.
Fifth, finally, very quickly, I think diversity, equity, and inclusion has sort of been exhausted. It’s showed not to be unworkable, that is, how do you determine who is a victim and part of the victim/victimizer binary, historical grievances? If you’re Latino or black or Asian, do you prove that somebody was mean to you? Your great-grandfather was a slave—great, great. It’s very hard, if you’re one-quarter white, half-Asian, one-quarter Latino, what particular group are you?
It was an emphasis on superficial appearance, contrary to the content of our character. It was on the color of your skin. That didn’t work out too well. It gave people exemptions, and it said that, I, psychologically, if I make a mistake or I don’t work hard or I wanna apply to Harvard, but I don’t have the SAT scores or the grades of other people, I should get that. Or if I’m in a pilot training program or I’m a surgeon and I don’t quite make the standards, there’s other criteria, kinda like the Russian commissar system, where if you were ideologically pure, then you were given exemptions from performance.
And so, I think we now see that DEI is disruptive, it’s discriminatory. And I think, after experimenting with this under the guise of affirmative action, but especially, the last four or five years, people are sick of it. It’s incoherent. And it’s dangerous. It’s dangerous. It puts people in key positions in the economy, where life and death matters, and they are promoted or assessed or retained on criteria other than merit.
And so, we can sum up by saying there’s four or five things that went full-bloom, full-blast under the Obama and Biden administrations. And I think President Donald Trump and this counterrevolution were able to show the American people that the trans fixation, the open borders, the idea of being pretty much disarmed, deficits—I call it deficit socialism—and DEI didn’t work out.
There was a laboratory United States that tried these things, and it hasn’t worked. And Europe, I think, would agree that it has to follow the same pathway of reform or it’s going to end up a Third World country.
We publish a variety of perspectives. Nothing written here is to be construed as representing the views of The Daily Signal.
Victor Davis Hanson, a senior contributor for The Daily Signal, is a classicist and historian at the Hoover Institution at Stanford University and host of “The Victor Davis Hanson Show.” His website, The Blade of Perseus, features columns, lectures, and exclusive content for subscribers. Contact him at authorvdh@gmail.com. Victor on X: @VDHanson.
The Daily Signal depends on the support of readers like you. Donate now
https://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/VDH-DEMOCRAT-SOCIALIS-PARTY.png357640The Daily Signalhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngThe Daily Signal2026-02-22 11:11:052026-02-22 11:16:42The New Democratic Socialist Party Is a ‘Graveyard of Bad Ideas’
