France’s Left Learns Rioters Don’t Check Voting Records

 

person 1: two things I came across today, and I don’t know if it’s apocryphal, one of these made-up sayings, but I’d never seen it before. But Charles de Gaulle, in 1959, talking about Muslims in France, compared it to a salad dressing, the oil and vinegar, and you could take it and shake it up, and it’s mixed, but eventually, the oil and vinegar separate. And that was his view of what France would become: an unassimilable Muslim population. Not that he did anything about it.

person 2: Yeah, he was actually—he allowed a million Muslims from Algeria to come into the country.

person 1: Right.

person 2: And after the collapse of the Pied-noirs in Algeria. And he didn’t even have a—at least Spain had a coastal enclave so that they could monitor immigration, although the current prime minister is destroying it. But he just pulled everybody out and then brought a million people with him.

person 1: Yeah.

person 2: And that gave a signal. It’s a very strange—I think everybody that’s listening is as confused as I am.

It’s a very, very strange mindset that somebody comes to the United States from a place where there’s no security, there’s no freedom, and there’s no prosperity, and suddenly this host gives them lavish health, educational, food, and housing subsidies, and almost immediately they—and I’m generalizing, I understand, but it seems like it’s the majority now—they enlist in the Left, and they start lecturing the Indigenous population about everything that’s wrong with your country.

It’s the worst country, said [Rep.] Ilhan Omar. I hate—God knows I hate the United States, says Hasan Piker. [New York City Mayor] Zohran Mamdani, you know, giving us lectures about everything that’s wrong with our immigration laws.

You’d think they’d have a little humility and gratitude, like most of the traditional immigrants. I hope—we have 53, 55 million that weren’t born in the United States. I hope the majority, and I think they are—I know so many wonderful immigrants.

But it’s very hard for people to come from a particular region en masse and then create a ghetto or an enclave and claim it as their little toll inside America and say to America: We want your economic prosperity. We are going to have freedom for ourselves as protected by your Constitution, and we, of course, have security, so we won’t have tribal warfare. The next village or town won’t kill us, or a dictator won’t. But that said, we’re not gonna assimilate. We’re just going to expand, expand, and make our little home country inside America, recreate it.

person 1: Yeah.

person 2: And it’s—

person 1: And not only enjoy these expensive benefits, but then … [commit] fraud. Engage in these hundreds of billions of dollars of fraud, all these various autism daycare centers. … Birth—we’re gonna talk about birth tourism later.

Yeah. I mean, the immigrant communities of Somalia and others are, they’re just unfathomable, what they’re doing here and their contempt for America.

person 2: I know it. And I was listening to the woman running in Colorado and Upstate New York. One is from Ethiopia, and I think one is—I don’t know where she’s from. But they can’t finish a sentence without “white, white, white,” or, like Mamdani, “I’m gonna go after white neighborhoods.”

So, when I was collating all these things, I asked myself, I guess they have statistics that show that the host white population and their resentment is committing all these crimes. But when I looked at the fraud, and I looked at hate crimes, and I looked at interracial crimes, it turns out that the so-called Indigenous white population is overrepresented as victims, underrepresented as victimizers, underrepresented as crime perpetrators, overrepresented as victims of crime, with one exception.

In the black community, most black violent crime is committed against other blacks. But in interracial crime, it’s committed overwhelmingly against whites, about 7 to 1, depending on the—

And so, what I’m getting at is there’s this hatred of the Indigenous population, if I can use that term, or what they call “white, white, white,” that they’re so obsessed with, but they don’t produce data that show that this particular targeted population is doing all these bad things to them, other than the Left.

I mean, the Left is giving them the proverbial caricature of a Karen, a very, very wealthy, liberal, affluent woman who feels terrible about the plight of the world and votes a strict left-wing ticket no matter what. And I guess she’s white and she’s exempted, but there’s a racial element of hatred, and I don’t quite get it.

And the hatred, that’s why there’s no assimilation. And I think it’s the wages, Jack, of—it’s almost like all of these things we’ve just been putting fuel on. We’ve been making a big bonfire—wood, fuel, gasoline—and it got bigger and bigger and bigger and bigger with the DEI, the separate graduations, the separate dorms, the hyphenated names, the cultural appropriation.

And we just—it was just insidious. We just said: OK, that’s kind of silly. Safe spaces, yeah, we understand. OK, if you’re blonde, you can’t have cornrows. We get that.

And then it just exploded. The match, it just exploded now, and it’s exploding in Europe. It’s exploding, as we see in this election cycle.

And I’m not exempting the socialists. The socialists are the people who are the puppet masters in Europe. And I think here too. Big money, big money—the Soroses and the Singhams and all those people.

person 1: Yeah. We’ll get into that in a second, but just to pick up on your Karen, lefty Karen line of an American, but I’m sure the one outside of pure fires, videos of fires of the Limoges town hall, etc., there’s that one video going around of the woman, the shopkeeper—

Attractive middle-aged woman who is saying, “Please, no, stop. But I’m one of, you know, I supported you.”

And she thought, as you’ve talked about many times, the lefties think that they are immune by voting to let this madness into the country, by voting Left. Somehow they’ll be exempt. Somehow they bought insurance.

But it’s come to bite them in the hiney,

person 2: It reminds me of Danton or St. Just or some of the early revolutionaries trying to reason with the Jacobins. But I’m one of you. But I agree with you. No, put your head down. We’re chopping it off.

These revolutions get more—they always eat their own as they get more and more radicalized until they’re so incoherent they blow up, and we’re getting to that point where they’re gonna blow up.

I think this is gonna affect the midterms, I really do, because I think if the word gets out, and you can see it on—I know today I went on the internet and looked at some of the coverage. You can really see that CBS, ABC, AP, CNN—they don’t want to cover this. And to the extent they do cover it, they talk about students not having enough books.

Did you see the looting of the Louis Vuitton store, the handbags that were all coming out? I think somebody had a little meme that said, these are—France didn’t give their students tote bags, so they were forced to go into Louis Vuitton and get bags for their books.

person 1: And now they’re being sold on some of these secondhand online luxury item resellers.

person 2: There’s also a racial element and a religious element. There was a—I can’t verify it, so I hesitate because it hasn’t been—but it’s all over social media about Marseille and other places where they’re targeting non-Muslim stores and shops, especially Jewish shops, like Kristallnacht in Germany, but not Muslim shops.

So, if you were to identify your shop or store as Islamic, you would not be touched.

person 1: Yeah, there is a video that—not here. This is one of our sisters, and then they go off. They’re not—because it’s owned by a Muslim woman.

person 2: If that’s true, it’s sort of like Germany and Kristallnacht, where they just targeted shops that were Jewish. We’re going really backward.

I do blame also, I’ll be very candid, everybody, I do blame certain—not just the people on the left, but certain people on the right that traffic in all of this antisemitic, Jewish, Jew, Jew, Jew, Jew, Jew.

And if you’re not careful, you’re gonna unleash the animal spirits that are always suppressed, the anti-Semitic violence that occurs if you keep trying to target Jews, Jews, Jews.

Because it’s not like you’re in America in 1950 and you’re targeting Jews, Jews, Jews in the antisemitic tropes. It’s not like “Gentleman’s Agreement” or something like that, the Hollywood film that dealt with it.

We have a large population, minority population, maybe 5 to 7 million, who hate Israel and they hate Jews, and they’re from the Middle East, and they’re pro-Hezbollah and pro-Hamas.

So, when you say the Jews did it and Israel’s evil, it’s not just crazy Americans who are going to get incited. You’re inciting a group of people who are much more serious than you are. And they really do hate Israel, and they hate the West.

When you saw at Limoges the cupola fall, or you saw that—I’ve seen it in Marseille, that very famous statue of Marianne, I think, Marianne. She’s the symbol of the revolution or the republic, excuse me, the French Republic.

And you see the Duomo in Italy, where there’s fire, you know, not very far from that famous Gothic cathedral. You can see that they really do hate this civilization, Western civilization.

And you ask yourself, all of these iconic buildings, it’s like all these Europeans are living in an ancient treasure house, and they’re kind of like museum guards, but they haven’t created—maybe high-speed rail or the Chunnel or something—but what have they created?

They can’t defend themselves. Their economy is shot. Their gas is $9 a gallon, and they have these welfare programs that are not sustainable. Their higher education is not competitive in a global sense.

And the Russians despise—the Russians hate them with a passion because they lecture the Russians, and the Russians think they’re weak.

And the only thing really, to tell you, that’s stopping Russia from going into Europe are two things, three things.

What’s left of the Ukrainian army is down to 28 million people, or 27 million. Thirteen million have left, but they’re fighting heroically.

And France and Britain, for now, they have about, together, about 300 or 400 nuclear weapons, and the United States.

Take those three things away, and [Russian President Vladimir] Putin would just walk through that continent.

And some of the Scandinavians, the Finns and the Swedes, they have very sophisticated arms. But other than that, it’s—

And that really characterizes why they’re so paranoid about Putin and the United States, [Russian President Volodymyr] Zelenskyy, all of these melodramas.

They all have a central text that they have destroyed their economies, they’re ashamed of their culture, they have this rioting in their streets, they have this unsustainable immigration, open borders problem, and they can’t deal with it.

Because to deal with it would refute their entire postwar, postmodern leftist dogma, and they’re just paralyzed.

person 1: Yeah.

person 2: And that’s what—and if you don’t believe me, go play what Jack just mentioned. I’ve watched it twice, [French President Emmanuel] Macron’s speech, and it’s on the one hand, on the other hand; yes, but; of course, maybe.

And it’s just gibberish. It’s gibberish. He thinks that because he’s kind of good-looking, like [California Gov.] Gavin Newsom, and he has his hand gestures, like Gavin, or vice versa, that we’re gonna be convinced?

person 1: Yeah.

person 2: Or like [Canadian Prime Minister] Carney—they remind me of, like, the Three Stooges: Carney, Gavin, and Macron. They’re all a lot. You think about it, they all think they’re technocrats.

They’re all empty suits. They all have that sort of, I’m dignified in my really nice, natty suit, but I’m also hip.

And they’re completely incompetent, and they have the Midas touch. Everything they touch turns to dross.

The Best of Ephesians – Paul Writes As an ‘Ambassador in Chains’

 

This week, we continue our discussion of St. Paul’s writings with “The Best of Ephesians.” Because of you, last Sunday’s “The Best of Romans” appeared on Townhall’s “Trending” list. RealClearReligion reposted it on Monday, and on Tuesday, it ranked on their “Most Read in Past 24 Hours” list.

All of this proves that St. Paul’s writings are forever beloved. His Christ-centered teachings are personally significant and take on new meaning at different stages of one’s life.

Paul’s letter to the Ephesians was written between AD 60 and 62, while he was under house arrest in Rome. He called himself “the prisoner for Christ Jesus for the sake of you Gentiles” (Eph. 3:1), yet he was not defeated but part of God’s purpose. Paul explains why one must honor God by living a rewarding Christ-centered life.

During Paul’s time, Ephesus was a vibrant and influential city in the Roman Empire, located at the crossroads of major trade routes. For that reason, Paul made it a center of Christian evangelism and lived there for about three years. Today, Ephesus is in modern-day Turkey.

Fortunately, I have visited Ephesus twice. First in 1983, when excavations were barely underway. Then, to my surprise, in 2022, the major ruins of Ephesus had been unearthed and assembled. While walking down the main street, one could feel its powerful, sophisticated ancient urban vibe. We stood in the town square where Paul preached the message of Christ, which was carried well beyond Ephesus.

Since this is a “quick” Bible study, a limited selection of verses was chosen as “best” based on my opinion. They are listed in the order they appear.

We begin with the letter’s third verse. This could stand on its own as a prayer affirming that believers have God-given gifts which, through Christ, are everlasting:

“Praise be to the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us in the heavenly realms with every spiritual blessing in Christ” (Ephesians 1:3).

Next is an all-encompassing verse that explains why we should believe in Christ:

“In him we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins, in accordance with the riches of God’s grace that he lavished on us. With all wisdom and understanding” (Ephesians 1:7-8).

Believers are set free from sin by forgiveness because He died on the cross for our sake. That occurred because of God’s grace, meaning his love and kindness. Below, the passage explains that grace, as a God-given gift, cannot be earned by works:

“For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this is not from yourselves; it is the gift of God— not by works, so that no one can boast. For we are God’s handiwork, created in Christ Jesus to do good works, which God prepared in advance for us to do” (Ephesians 2: 8-10).

However, our faith drives us to do good works because of our love for God and Christ.

In chapter 3, Paul writes a magnificent “prayer for the Ephesians.” Here is a segment:

“And I pray that you, being rooted and established in love, may have power, together with all the Lord’s holy people, to grasp how wide and long and high and deep is the love of Christ, and to know this love that surpasses knowledge—that you may be filled to the measure of all the fullness of God.”

“Now to him who is able to do immeasurably more than all we ask or imagine, according to his power that is at work within us, to him be glory in the church and in Christ Jesus throughout all generations, for ever and ever! Amen” (Ephesians 3:14-21).

The truth and power of those verses reflect what Jesus said about Paul (then known as Saul) after striking Saul down on the road to Damascus:

“This man is my chosen instrument to proclaim my name to the Gentiles and their kings and to the people of Israel” (Acts 9:15-16). Hence, Paul’s letter to the Ephesians went viral, resulting in Christian converts far and wide.

Paul begins chapter 4 by again reminding readers that he is not free, yet he recognizes a greater purpose for his captivity:

“As a prisoner for the Lord, then, I urge you to live a life worthy of the calling you have received” (Ephesians 4:1).

In his letter, Paul preached unity among followers of Christ, emphasizing the concept of one all-powerful God — a message aimed at Romans and Greeks, many of whom were pagans, given that Ephesus was a cultural and economic crossroads:

“There is one body and one Spirit, just as you were called to one hope when you were called; one Lord, one faith, one baptism; one God and Father of all, who is over all and through all and in all” (Ephesians 4:4-6).

Next, Paul addressed conflicts among Christians, but the principle applies to all relationships:

“In your anger do not sin: Do not let the sun go down while you are still angry, and do not give the devil a foothold” (Ephesians 4:25-27).

The following verse often appears in church marriage handbooks:

“Be kind and compassionate to one another, forgiving each other, just as in Christ God forgave you” (Ephesians 4:32). And this one too:

“Follow God’s example, therefore, as dearly loved children and walk in the way of love, just as Christ loved us and gave himself up for us as a fragrant offering and sacrifice to God” (Ephesians 5:1-2).

One could say that Paul was the first marriage and family therapist, writing about husbands, wives, children, and parents in chapters 5 and 6, all within the context of Christ and the church.

Our brief tour of Ephesians concludes with its most famous passage, “The Armor of God,” which begins:

“Finally, be strong in the Lord and in his mighty power. Put on the full armor of God, so that you can take your stand against the devil’s schemes” (Ephesians 6:10-11).

God’s Own Armor For You.” Paul goes through the Roman battle gear and describes each piece in terms of how Christians will fight against the evil powers that seek to stamp out the truth of Christ’s teachings and the Word of God. Here is an excerpt:

“In addition to all this, take up the shield of faith, with which you can extinguish all the flaming arrows of the evil one. Take the helmet of salvation and the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God” (Ephesians 6:14-17).

The meaning of Paul’s armor message, which I then quoted from Pastor David Kim, was that “the full armor is meant to bring strength, stability, and encouragement so you can receive all that God has for you.”

In Ephesians, Paul’s inspired teaching encouraged Christians to “live a life worthy of the calling you have received.” While “an ambassador in chains,” Paul strengthened and grew the early church about 30 years after Christ’s resurrection, serving as His “chosen instrument.” Amen to that!

Death in the Old Testament

 Thanks for joining today’s study. I appreciate my loyal readers and welcome newcomers. My goal is to simplify Bible topics and concepts so as not to intimidate those with little biblical knowledge or no faith. This is an interactive study where comments are encouraged to enhance the discussion, since the Bible is complex, open to interpretation, and shaped by one’s faith walk or tradition.

I am always thrilled to receive emails from readers, especially those who have returned to the Bible or are beginning to read it because of this study. Keep sending them.

Moving on, today’s topic affects us all. Regular readers know that God is my “assignment editor.” I felt “called” to write about death immediately after learning of the untimely passing of Sen. Lindsey Graham and what he said shortly before. While reportedly experiencing severe chest pain, Graham “joked”: 

“I can’t die now. I still need to do the Russia sanctions, get Iran sorted out, and do Israeli-Saudi normalization.”

The senator’s “I can’t die now” quote was widely reported. Initially, I saw it without the second sentence. My first thought was that God’s timing is beyond our control. Graham’s “joke” confirmed my favorite saying: “How do you make God laugh? Tell him your plans.”

Only God knows when our time on earth will end, and those with faith in Christ hope to spend eternity with Him. In the meantime, we must strive to glorify Him by using the gifts and talents He has given us, while also loving our neighbors and helping those less fortunate.

Now let’s review some verses that address this uncomfortable topic, starting with the Old Testament/Hebrew Bible and continuing with the New Testament next week. 

The first biblical mention of death appears in the second chapter of Genesis, where God warns Adam not to eat from a certain tree in the Garden of Eden:

“But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat of it you shall surely die” (Genesis 2:17). (Dig deeper in Vol. 110.)

Two chapters later, the first human death (a murder) was recorded when Cain, out of jealousy, murdered his brother, Abel (Genesis 4:1-15). Cain, a farmer, was angry that God partially accepted his harvest sacrifice but fully accepted his brother Abel’s sacrifice, which “brought fat portions from the firstborn of his flock.” The verse reads:

“Now Cain said to his brother Abel, ‘Let’s go out to the field.’ While they were in the field, Cain attacked his brother Abel and killed him” (Genesis 4:8).

A few chapters later, the Bible records the first of three mass-casualty events: the death of all earthly human and animal life, except those saved on Noah’s ark. Humankind’s wickedness grieved the Lord, so He took drastic action, granting Himself a “do-over”:

“So the LORD said, ‘I will wipe from the face of the earth the human race I have created—and with them the animals, the birds and the creatures that move along the ground—for I regret that I have made them.’ But Noah found favor in the eyes of the LORD” (Genesis 6:7-8).

The second event with massive death, the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah, was also due to wicked behavior. 

Third came the Plagues of Egypt, most notably the 10th plague, which killed all the firstborn Egyptian boys but “passed over” the firstborn of God’s people. Led by Moses, they were saved by the blood of the lamb on their doorways, as God instructed (Exodus 12:23). (See Vol. 214 for more details.)

Obviously, God determines when death will occur and spares those He chooses. His reasons are sometimes harsh and difficult to understand, especially in tragic circumstances involving children, entire families, war, and, most famously, God’s Son.

Returning to Moses, here is his death passage, which many consider unfair (in bold below) given his leadership as a faithful servant of God:

“Then the Lord said to him, ‘This is the land I promised on oath to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob when I said, ‘I will give it to your descendants. I have let you see it with your eyes, but you will not cross over into it.’  And Moses the servant of the Lord died there in Moab, as the Lord had said. He buried him in Moab, in the valley opposite Beth Peor, but to this day no one knows where his grave is” (Deuteronomy 34:4-8).  

Do you know why God forbade Moses from entering the Promised Land? (See Vol. 86.)

Next, we explore the most popular death-related Psalm, number 23. Written by King David, it offers a comforting message often read at funerals:

“The Lord is my shepherd; I shall not want. He makes me lie down in green pastures. He leads me beside still waters. He restores my soul. He leads me in paths of righteousness for His name’s sake.

“Even though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I will fear no evil, for you are with me; your rod and your staff, they comfort me. You prepare a table before me in the presence of my enemies; you anoint my head with oil; my cup overflows. Surely goodness and mercy shall follow me all the days of my life, and I shall dwell in the house of the Lord forever” (Psalm 23).

For those who believe in the Lord, no words better summarize death: it is not to be feared, and if you believe in Him, you “shall dwell in the house of the Lord forever.”

Finally, two verses from Ecclesiastes beautifully frame death (if that is possible for someone in mourning). First is a famous passage, incorporated into the classic 1960s pop song “Turn! Turn! Turn!” that I wrote about in Vol. 102. Boomers will enjoy watching The Byrds’ 1965 performance on the Ed Sullivan Show, singing:

“There is a time for everything, and a season for every activity under the heavens: a time to be born and a time to die, a time to plant and a time to uproot” (Ecclesiastes 3:1-8).

Second is a profound verse that explains an important concept about death for those who believe that our earthly life does not end but takes on a new form:

“…and the dust returns to the ground it came from, and the spirit returns to God who gave it” (Ecclesiastes 12:7).

To fully understand this verse, we must read the Genesis account of human creation:

“Then the LORD God formed a man from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being.” (Genesis 2:7).

God created us from dust, and to the ground we shall return, while our immortal spirit returns to the Creator. 

Due to length restrictions, this study reviews only a handful of death-related verses, but I hope you have been comforted or even enlightened by my selections.

Tune in next week for a discussion of death in the New Testament, focusing on the promise of eternal life through Jesus. Here is a preview of the most important verse:

“For God so loved the world that He gave His one and only Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish but have eternal life” (John 3:16). Amen to that!

How Are We Doing With the Midterms Seven Weeks Out?

 Look, I can’t tell you that everything is going to be OK for us patriots in the midterms. I think it will, but I’m not sure. Nobody knows for sure. What I do know is what the correlation of forces, to my mind, indicates. It indicates another 2022, a year when we Republicans were going to clean up against an unpopular, semi-conscious president. And we did OK. Not great. OK. And it looks to me, from where I sit, from who I’ve talked to, from what I’ve seen, and yeah, from my gut, that that’s the high-water mark for the Democrats. They might do OK. They might get the House by a few seats, and they might cut our lead in the Senate. That’s just my perspective, though. I’ve talked to well-placed optimists and doomers (one who, you know, says we lose the House and 50-50 in the Senate if we are lucky). But I don’t know. You don’t know. Nobody knows.

Let’s look at the big themes, then get down to specific cases. What do the Democrats have going for them? History, for one. History doesn’t necessarily repeat itself, but it often rhymes. The party in power, especially in a second term, tends to struggle in the midterms. People get tired of the status quo. The problems add up, the friction and the fog of war slow the progress, and people get bored. That gives Democrats another advantage: excitement and intensity. And boy, are they ever excited and intense about taking us out. They can’t wait to crawl out of their old folks’ homes, cat-overrun condos, moms’ basements, Hollywood mansions, university dorms, and perverted communes to vote out those wicked patriotic Americans of the Republican Party. They would crawl over broken glass to vote against us or at least hire illegal aliens to do the crawling over broken glass that American Democrats won’t do. Every single one of them is going to vote, probably several times.

That intensity leads to their third advantage: the polls. Negative polling can demoralize Republican voters. But to the extent the polls are not actively bent to support the Democrats (which some of them manifestly are), Democrat intensity skews the polls because Democrats actually answer them. Anecdotes are evidence of nothing but anecdotes, but I like to informally poll fellow Republicans about whether they ever respond to political polling. I never do. And they tell me they never do. I don’t know who the Republicans answering these polls are, but I haven't met one.

The polling is terrible for us if you take it at face value. It has us losing in places we have no business losing. But I just can’t make myself believe it. The polls don’t fit the fundamentals, and they’re too darn convenient for the opposition. Is that wishful thinking? It may be, but it’s wishful thinking based on polling’s track record of failure. Remember the famous 2024 Ann Selzer Iowa poll that had Kamala three points up on Trump? Trump ended up beating her by something like 13 points. And just a couple of weeks ago, Hasan Piker’s Hamas-diddling puppet Abdul in Michigan was supposed to win by double digits over his moderate (sic) Democrat opponent, but he ended up barely squeaking to victory by a point or so. The polls are wrong a lot, and always in one direction. When’s the last time you found a polling error that favored a Republican? That’s about as likely as finding leftovers in JB Pritzker’s fridge.

Of course, the polls could be right. I don’t think they are. Given the dire unanimity of the current polls, disbelieving them means betting on both the malice and the incompetence of the pollsters. I’ll take that bet, especially when so many are polls from outfits you’ve never heard of, like the “University of College/Pepsi Challenge Public Opinion Survey” or the “Geebo Strategies Online Solutions.”

What do we have in our favor? Well, we have a ton of money. That’s good. Plus, the folks in the know whom I’ve talked to like the strategy of waiting until after Labor Day to really start spending. Democrats have been spending for a while, but traditionally you spend early to create a positive image for your candidate and tear down the other guy. That used to work, but will it work now? This is a very partisan environment. If you’re a Democrat, we already know what we think of you, and all the ads with you and Mee-maw sitting on the porch talking about values you don’t actually believe in aren’t going to change your image as an avatar of a political party that supports crime, communism, castration, and open borders.

We also have Donald Trump, who’s good for turning out our voters. His ability to enrage the other side is already baked in, but he’s going to be out and about everywhere rallying our troops. That’s good. And while the convention was slammed for low ratings, it did what needed to be done. It set a positive tone and motivated our base.

This election is all about turning out our base. We now have a decade of experience getting the kind of voters in our coalition to come out and vote when Donald Trump himself is not on the ballot. We better turn them out. That we can’t is everyone’s big fear. But the base staying home because it’s mad seemed much more plausible when the Democrats were just annoying rather than a threat to our way of life. It’s easy to say, “Who cares?” when, at their core, both parties are composed of people who generally like America and want what’s best for it. But that’s not true with today’s Democrats. They want to flood us with Third World barbarians, mutilate our kids, take our guns, tax us into poverty, and outlaw normal people. Yeah, there’s an affordability problem, and there’s a crime problem, and there are lots of other problems, but the Democrats caused all those problems, and everyone knows that it’s not like they’re going to fix them. America has become vastly more partisan, and vastly more binary, and I’m thinking that very few Republicans are going to be able to swallow the idiotic notion that we need to show the dumb Republicans among us (and there are a lot of dumb Republicans among us) what-for by allowing the election of a bunch of communist pervert-enablers.

I just don’t think Republicans are going to stay home in droves, much less actually vote for Democrats. I do expect the polls to tighten as we get closer to Election Day, largely because that’s when pollsters have to start thinking about their reputations and will take at least a couple of their fingers off the scale. It always happens.

So, let’s look at the races. There’s just too much going on in the House to go through individually, but our maps will do a lot to limit any damage. The House is going to be tough because we only have a handful of seats in our majority, but some of the folks I’ve talked to were confident about it in private. These people have nothing to lose by telling me what they really think. You can take it or leave it. But while Team Black Pill will get all the regime media coverage, know that there are a lot of GOP guys out there who think we can do OK in the House.

The Senate remains our firewall. We have a 53-seat majority. Democrats need to net four seats to overcome JD Vance’s tiebreaker vote. Let’s ignore the wildcard scenarios, like whether Lisa Murkowski or John Fetterman might switch parties to ensure a majority. Let’s find those four seats, if we can. We’ll start with the seats Republicans are defending. Keep in mind, the polls are negative for Republicans in pretty much all of them.

I’ve talked about Texas and that blasphemous imp Talarico already this week, and for the reasons I set forth, I think we hold it.

With the guy with the Nazi tattoo having been replaced by the guy who has kids with his second cousin, Susan Collins has a very good chance of keeping her seat in Maine. It would be pretty wild for the Maple Syrup State to swap out the chair of the Appropriations Committee for a guy who makes family Thanksgiving dinners awkward with sexual tension. She’s likely to win.

North Carolina is probably the Republicans’ toughest fight, with Michael Whatley struggling against that state’s less masculine version of Abigail Spanberger. Roy Cooper is a straight-up leftist pretending to be a moderate, and North Carolina is a purple state. I think we lose that one, but we shouldn’t give up.

Dan Sullivan in Alaska has to contend with Dem dirty tricks like ranked-choice voting and a doppelgänger on the ballot. It will be tough. I think he holds – a lot of Alaskans depend on oil, and the Democrats want to end the industry. But it will take money and effort.

Jon Husted is allegedly struggling in Ohio against leftist retread Sherrod Brown. The same is true in Iowa, with Ashley Hinson against Josh Turek. Both of these are red states. It’s hard to toss out an incumbent like Husted, and Hinson is a strong candidate. It’s going to take money and work, but I think we pull it off and keep both seats. There is also some crazy talk about Democrats expanding the map to Kansas and Florida. That’s just not going to happen, and if it does, it’s such an apocalypse that nothing else is going to matter anyway.

Now, the best defense is a good offense. What states are we going to take from the Democrats? Jon Ossoff is getting the full-court press from the regime media in Georgia; he’s an even more beta Beto, but they do like young, glib, good-looking guys. He’s up against Mike Collins, who’s a good old boy, and who I’ve gotten to know a little from interviews. The dude is smart. He ran a trucking company. When you talk to him, he doesn’t talk to you in hack clichés. He talks about money, organization, getting out the vote, and what matters. Do not underestimate him the way a lot of people seem to. Governor Brian Kemp, who backed somebody else in the primary, just decided he wanted to remain a viable GOP candidate in 2028 or later and has endorsed Collins. Let’s see if he turns his formidable Republican machine out to snatch that Senate seat; if he does, that makes him viable in the future. If Kemp can’t help recapture the seat, what good is he? In any case, we have a decent chance in Georgia, but let’s be conservative and assume we don’t; though if we do, that destroys all the Democrats’ dreams once and for all.

In New Hampshire, John Sununu seems to have a decent shot at beating Chris Pappas, who’s another Spanberger Democrat who talks moderate but would vote left. New Hampshire is a purple state, and they do elect Republicans. The name Sununu still means something there. Again, my conservative nature tells me that it’s more likely than not that we lose, but if we win, oh boy.

In Minnesota, Michele Tafoya is running against a lunatic, pervert-loving communist woman in a state that elects lunatic, pervert-loving communist women of all genders. But enough about Tim Walz. We’re probably not going to win this one, but there’s that outside chance.

And then we come to Michigan, where Mike Rogers, a straight-up veteran patriot, is going up against Abdul El-Sayed, a straight-up Islamist communist who makes AOC look like William F. Buckley. Here we’ve got a real opportunity, and I think it’s more likely than not that the good people of Michigan are going to want to be represented by a resolutely normal guy rather than a guy who dreams of imposing socialist sharia on a country he despises. I think we win this one.

So let’s tally it up. I think we lose one we had, and I think we gain one we didn’t. I think we have a couple of other pickup opportunities in purple states, but it’s hard for me to see them picking up any in our red states. It could happen, but I don’t think it will.

So I put the Senate at 52 to 54 GOP.

This is just a snapshot just under seven weeks from the midterm election. That’s an eternity. Anything can happen. And anything probably will happen.

True Democratic Socialists Can’t Run on Their Real Platform

 

I’d like to talk about the current rise of the Democratic Socialists of America and the idea of socialism itself.

Socialism innately is antithetical to human nature. Most people want to keep the profits of their own labor, and they don’t think the government, especially an unelected bureaucracy, can manage an economy, a supply-and-demand economy, better than average people can.

In other words, in the United States, 360 million people, all operating on agendas that they think are best for themselves and indirectly for their country, are smarter than a few experts in a central bureau, like the Soviet Union, issuing commands. And we know that’s true because socialism has never worked.

There are now socialist governments in Europe. The EU has 100 million people more than the United States. Their gross domestic product is $10 trillion less. China was socialist. It still has command-socialist elements in its economy. They have four times the population. Their GDP is $10 trillion less than ours.

In other words, an American capitalist economy, even with its socialist fringes, one American produces more than four of his Chinese counterparts, 30% more in goods and services.

So, the socialists know that, so they can’t run on what they want to do. That is, take over utilities, command the economy, open the border, and pretty much do what the Democrats already wanted to do, which, and to be frank, the Democrats are socialists prior to the democratic socialists absorbing the Democratic Party.

Pack the court, end the filibuster, bring in new states, destroy the Electoral College, defund the police, recognize BLM and Antifa, etc. That was the Democratic Party, and the Socialist Party agreed with all of that and joined them.

So, socialists know that that’s not popular. They’re not going to run on it. They may carve out districts in Boulder, in the Upper West Side, in parts of Chicago, in California, and where they’re completely blue socialists, carved-out left-wing districts, and socialists may be honest.

But in purple districts, in statewide races, they can’t say who they are.

So, if Abdul El-Sayed, the Michigan Democratic nominee, has said on record that he follows Sharia law, or that fireworks or football or traditional American pastimes like Thanksgiving are silly, or that he wants to take over the health care system and abolish private health insurance, or he wants to tax the rich to distribute, or he wants basically open borders, he’s not going to tell you that.

You know what he’s going to do? He’s going to put a cowboy hat on, and he’s going to talk about sports and that he was a high school athlete, and he’s a good old boy from Michigan.

If you’re Mr. [James] Talarico in Texas, he’s not going to tell you he believes there’s a multigendered Jesus, or that God has no gender, or that meat-eating is terrible and you should have vegetarian diets only, or that you should abolish private healthcare and nationalize the medical industry. He’s not going to say any of that to Texas.

You know what he’s going to do? He’s going to walk around in a rented truck and a cowboy hat and talk about how great Texas beef is.

Up to a point. Up to a point.

When he gets elected, as we see with Mr. [Zohran] Mamdani, did Mr. Mamdani in New York ever tell us that he was going to confiscate private apartments he felt were unfair to renters? Did he ever say he was going to make multiple food markets and say that there would be no ID to use them?

Because when he initially said you had to have an ID to come in there, then he was contradicting himself because he felt like he was [Immigration and Customs Enforcement]. You have to have an ID to show you’re a legal citizen. Well, he was requiring IDs to go into a socialist—not now.

So, what he said in the campaign and what he’s actually doing are two different things.

If you elect a Talarico or a [Troy] Jackson in Maine or an El-Sayed in Michigan, you’re going to get something completely different from what they campaigned on. You’re going to get a socialist radical agenda, much of what you’ve already seen under the Biden administration.

You’re going to get an attempt to open the border, mass amnesties for illegal immigrants, systematized national healthcare directed from a bureaucracy, a subsidized energy sector, a war on fossil fuels, an isolationist policy aligning with countries like Spain, Cuba, Nicaragua, not the revolution that’s happening in Latin America now, where country after country is rejecting communism and socialism, embracing Americanism and free markets, and the Western Hemisphere is becoming basically a pro-American continent.

You’re not going to see any of that.

One final warning. Socialists have a mean streak. They don’t like us. They think that we’re parochial and we’re uneducated and we’re nationalistic, and they’re utopian globalist philosophers. So, they try to needle us, needle us.

That’s why El-Sayed said he wanted to get rid of, he thought that fireworks were silly. We’re silly. Thanksgiving, silly. Football, silly.

That’s why Talarico thinks these people think God or Jesus are male. They’re silly. There are multiple genders. And these guys that sit down with that big steak, that just doesn’t make sense.

I’ll end on this anecdote. There was a 9/11 commemorative group, and they were signing a declaration commemorating 9/11 as the anniversary is upon us.

Mamdani has been criticized, criticized that he has brought Islamists into the government and antisemites. And he’s saying that he would arrest Benjamin Netanyahu, and he has, in the past, talked about defunding the police. He’s in a veritable war with the NYPD in New York.

OK, so what does he do when he signs this? He takes the ceremonial pen. Who would you give it to on a commemoration of 9/11?

I think you would say, “Well, the firefighters were heroic.” And then somebody would say, “Well, I think the NYPD was too.”

OK. “How about the Red Cross?” Yes.

“So I’m going to give this to the NYPD, the pen to the … ”

No. No, no, no, no, no.

He’s going to give it to his Islamist, legal counsel, who defended a lot of Islamist terrorists, including the brother-in-law of one of the hijacker suicide bombers that helped kill 3,000 Americans.

But he’s not going to … He’s not stupid enough. He’s not going to have him sit next to him, as you would think, to receive the commemorative pen that he signed this document, this commemoration document.

You know what he does instead? He turns to the only Jewish major commissioner that he has, Ms. Jessica Tisch, the commissioner of the NYPD, and she’s Jewish, and she’s NYPD, and he says, “Would you hand this to Mr. Ramzi Kassem?”

Think about that imagery. What do socialists do? He’s basically needling her and us, and saying, “I’m going to have as my little servant somebody from the NYPD and somebody who’s Jewish to hand the pen over to someone who hates the NYPD, hates the United States, and is antisemitic.”

And that’s what he did. They will continue to do that for one reason. They do not like the United States at its creation. They did not like America as it matured, and they despise it now at its fruition.

What Lindsay Clancy's Attorney Did on the Courthouse Steps Was Abhorrent

 

Lindsay Clancy’s attorney, Kevin Reddington, went bonkers on the courthouse steps today in Plymouth, Massachusetts. He was unprofessional, graceless, and all-around insane. He thanked the female jury forewoman for outing the one juror who was dead set on convicting Lindsay Clancy. 

He thanked the jury, except for that one, saying the rest of the body was “robbed by one man, whatever his agenda was, who stole seven weeks from the lives of these other jurors.”

🚨 NOW: Lindsay Clancy's defense attorney is now PUBLICLY ATTACKING the one male juror who held out to force a mistrial, saying he's "PROUD" of the female foreperson for blowing the whistle on that juror

Disgusting.

"Where do I begin to thank these jurors — minus 1? The… pic.twitter.com/FUoOGYGcmP

— Eric Daugherty (@EricLDaugh) September 4, 2026

Says he hopes the lone male jurors can sleep at night, and says he wasted 7 weeks of the jury’s time.

— Bill Melugin (@BillMelugin_) September 4, 2026

…Reddington insisted that this is not a time for gloating” and then declared how he “crushed” the District Attorney …

— Jonathan Turley (@JonathanTurley) September 4, 2026

Reddington’s attack on the holdout juror in front of the courthouse was, in my view, an outrageous and reckless moment. It would warrant a response from the judge about stoking the rage against this one juror.

— Jonathan Turley (@JonathanTurley) September 4, 2026

Absolutely repugnant that Lindsay Clancy’s defense counsel is calling out the lone jury holdout in light of the recent spate of political violence, assassination, and attempts at same.

This is why the jury should have been sequestered. And if retrial, it’s guaranteed to be a…

— James A. Gagliano, DPS (@JamesAGagliano) September 4, 2026

Omg. This is sickening.

"This is your show, sir. This is your show." — gleeful Lindsay Clancy supporter to the defense attorney while he's surrounded by the media

You hear that? M*rdering 3 kids is one big "show" to them

Realize who we are up against. pic.twitter.com/yT8RnaytsH

— Eric Daugherty (@EricLDaugh) September 4, 2026

Astonishing statement from the defense to accuse the holdout juror of costing the other members of the jury their lives when his client admitted to killing 3 babies. https://t.co/P6uigp63Fw

— Tricia McLaughlin (@TriciaOhio) September 4, 2026

Jonathan Turley says Reddington was remarkably "reckless and dangerous" when he attacked the holdout juror outside the courthouse.
"In an age of rage... that juror's name could very well come out with all these internet sleuths. He just put a target on him with those types of…

— Miranda Devine (@mirandadevine) September 4, 2026

Reddington is graceless.
Attacks DA Tim Cruz: "Cruz knows that he was crushed" and mocks Cruz's advocacy on behalf of Cora, Dawson and Callan.
Then thanks the jury "minus one".
Says the jury was "robbed by one man, whatever his agenda was, who stole seven weeks from the life…

— Miranda Devine (@mirandadevine) September 4, 2026

It’s reckless. He’s starting a lynch mob, because now these Lululemon freaks are going to find out who this individual is and target him. Maybe that was the long game. 

You can see why this guy is Clancy’s lawyer. 

Also, he claims he won the case. He did not. It was a mistrial, and the Plymouth County DA can and should refile charges. 

Clancy killed her three kids in January 2023 with exercise bands, claiming postpartum psychosis and overmedication drove her over the edge. 

This idiot Lindsaystan is standing behind DA Tim Cruz shaking her head and holding up her fingers in an L for "loser" as he explains this case was about Cora, Dawson and Callan.
"We're here because those children are not," he said. "Our job is [to ensure] that the victims are… pic.twitter.com/AIbTrOW1TN

— Miranda Devine (@mirandadevine) September 4, 2026

Is This What Cost Francesca Hong the Election in Wisconsin?

 

Francesca Hong is likely recovering from the Wisconsin gubernatorial campaign, where the far-left candidate seemed like a lock to win. She fell short by 3,211 votes to David Crowley, who Wisconsin voters didn’t want but came out on top after Republicans ran a blitz on Hong’s past remarks about a host of things, including, bizarrely enough, Thanksgiving. These attacks could’ve been saved, as Hong is, at least on paper, viewed as the weaker candidate. Yet she also didn’t counterattack well, being more willing to soak up the abuse. It obviously didn’t work, but one expenditure was absent from her campaign: broadcast ads. And some are saying that it cost her the campaign (via Notus):

Francesca Hong’s Wisconsin gubernatorial campaign embraced the new era of campaigning for progressive candidates, from a social media-dominated bid to her democratic socialist-influenced policy platform.

But part of her razor-thin loss to David Crowley on Tuesday could be explained by the traditional, or a lack thereof: broadcast TV ad spending.

Despite leading the Democratic field by double-digit margins before the primary, Hong was the only active candidate to seek the governorship without running broadcast TV ads, according to ad-tracking service AdImpact.

Some strategists think the Hong campaign’s decision to focus on digital platform advertising ultimately led to its demise, costing her key parts of the electorate.

“In a primary, voters are more persuadable,” Democratic strategist Jared Leopold told NOTUS. “Especially in a smaller primary, it’s a mistake to try to narrow cast too much because you actually do need to hit a wider swath of a primary electorate, because more people are likely to change their votes at the end than in a general election.”

[…]

Exit polls show Hong won several counties helmed by colleges and certain cities like Green Bay, while Crowley swept the majority of Wisconsin’s rural districts, as well as Milwaukee County and its suburbs. Hong, however, appeared to overperform in rural counties in the state’s northwest — including St. Croix and Douglas — which also happen to sit in Minnesota media markets that saw fewer political ads on linear broadcast channels.

Even so, Hong’s lack of broadcast ads likely cost her blocs like older voters who can drive turnout, strategists say.

“It’s a mistake to not communicate with a part of the electorate,” Leopold said. “There’s still a lot of people, particularly older people, who watch a lot of TV.”

What Does Francesca Hong Have Against Holidays?

 We already know Francesca Hong supports crazy policies. As a dues-paying, card-carrying member of the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA), Hong supports the group's platform, even if she lies about doing so on Fox News. That means the abolition of the Senate, the presidency, and the Supreme Court, as well as amnesty for all illegal aliens, the abolition of our borders and ICE, and the closure of prisons and the defunding of police. 

But we also have to ask if Hong would cancel holidays, too, because she sure doesn't seem too keen on the major ones. 

In 2020, Hong called to cancel Thanksgiving. Not because of the COVID pandemic, but because the holiday celebrates "colonialism" (among other things). "Cancel Thanksgiving. Should have done this in 1621."


    That's the resurfaced message from Wisconsin Democratic gubernatorial candidate Francesca Hong as she closes in on the Democratic nomination.

    Another old post also has critics talking after Hong said she was on the verge of… pic.twitter.com/RA92kL5jbM
    — Fox News (@FoxNews) August 1, 2026

"Cancel Thanksgiving," Hong wrote. "Should have done this in 1621. If it takes a worldwide pandemic for us to realize we should stop celebrating colonialism and the original superspreader event that killed indegenous [sic] folx and women so be it."

Here's a link to the archived post.

In December 2019, Hong's work computer needed some help from IT. The tech changed the computer's background to Christmas trees and snow. Hong was triggered by this, too.

    IT bro who was working on "our" computer remotely changed the background theme to snow and Christmas trees. I feel slightly attacked...
    — Francesca Hong For Governor (@FrancescaHongWI) December 17, 2019

"I feel slightly attacked."

    Just so everyone knows where I stand, I won’t cancel Christmas as governor either. https://t.co/uD49Gg4wfU
    — Tom Tiffany (@TomTiffanyWI) August 2, 2026

Thank goodness.

Hong also hates Valentine's Day.

    I miss working in a restaurant every day...except on VDay.
    As if we weren't invisible enough to those who don't recognize the emotional & physical labor of service work, the worst of humanity comes out from folks "celebrating" on another day capitalism tells you how to show love.
    — Francesca Hong For Governor (@FrancescaHongWI) February 14, 2022

"As if we weren't invisible enough to those who don't recognize the emotional & physical labor of service work, the worst of humanity comes out from folks 'celebrating' on another day capitalism tells you how to show love," she wrote on X.

Hong isn't a fan of Halloween, either.

    I don't allow myself to work Halloween weekend or the day of. I would actually ask every single person in costume to leave.
    — Francesca Hong For Governor (@FrancescaHongWI) October 27, 2019

We bet she's a blast at parties.

There are some holidays Hong likes, however. Look how highly she speaks of and celebrates the commie holiday known as "May Day."

    May Day is about worker power, and so is this campaign. Tomorrow, we're showing up alongside the people who are organizing to make better possible. See you out there! 🌹 ⁠ pic.twitter.com/UlK0G1hQl8
    — Francesca Hong For Governor (@FrancescaHongWI) April 30, 2026

Her appearances included a "living wage" rally in Milwaukee, and an illegal immigration rally in both Milwaukee and Madison, followed by a rally in Janesville for "International Workers' Day."

    Scenes from May Day, 2026. 140 years after American workers risked everything for the 8-hour day, the fight for what workers deserve is still ours to carry. And we will. 🌹 pic.twitter.com/y8LwBDNwRq
    — Francesca Hong For Governor (@FrancescaHongWI) May 1, 2026

She cannot win the governor's race. Wisconsin cannot afford to have a governor who hates the holidays that give us time off and bring us together.

But that's what socialists do, of course. By attacking Thanksgiving, Christmas, Valentine's Day, and Halloween, she's trying to rip apart our cultural fabric so they can dismantle society and rebuild it into a world where we get off on May 1 instead of the last Thursday in November and December 25.

Helicopter Parents Could Learn From Their Trad Moms and Dads

 Helicopter parents are getting worse.

The Wall Street Journal reports that a growing number of Gen Z parents are actively intervening in their children’s job searches, interviews, hiring processes, and even early career issues.

According to the Journal, parents are calling companies about their adult children’s performance reviews, benefits choices, and even calling in sick for them.

According to one survey, 20 percent of Zoomers had a parent attend a job interview with them.

One staffing executive had to fire a 24-year-old twice — once to the employee, who failed to show up for meetings four times, and again to his irate mother who demanded her son be given another chance.

Needed: Trad Parent Wisdom

Ironically, the parents who are hovering over their children now grew up two or three decades ago under trad parents who raised them in an opposite manner.

Not only did our trad parents not obsess over us, they made us go outside to play and not come home until supper, and we knew we had better not be late.

We were free to roam, invent, and discover on our own. We learned how to socialize, make friends, and deal with some of the jerkier kids without a parent anywhere to be found.

True, families were bigger back then and there was always an older sibling around to help us get out of scrapes.

When a big bully busted up my hand-built go-kart, my big sister kicked the tar out of him — he was two years older and 70 pounds heavier than she, but I will never forget the image of her sitting on his back, pounding her fists into his sides as he cried like a baby.

Trad parents didn't give us unwarranted praise. Rather, our parents specialized in admonishing us for the millions of things we were doing wrong — not getting to school on time, not getting high enough grades, not keeping our beds made.

In fact, if we were ever accused of any wrongdoing by other adults, our parents sided instantly with the accusers.

“What did you do now, Tommy?”

We had to prove, beyond any reasonable doubt, that we were not at fault — though, truth be told, we usually were at fault.

Adults Must Figure Life Out on Their Own

When my parents dropped me off at college, they didn't worry about the life challenges that awaited me. They could barely contain their glee that I wouldn't be eating everything in their refrigerator or racking up auto repairs on our Ford Pinto with Jim Rockford maneuvers (don't ask).

They gave me a big jar of peanut butter and some crackers and advised me there was no point in writing home for money — as there wasn't any.

I admit my blue-collar father did intervene in my studies. Worried I would never find a job as an English major, he insisted I minor in something practical.

Thanks to his meddling, I became the only person to ever graduate from Penn State with a major in English and a minor in air-conditioning and heating.

In any event, our trad parents knew that the process of becoming a well-functioning adult required us to figure most things out on our own.

Looking back, that is the greatest gift they gave us.

End Helicopter Parenting Before It’s Too Late

As I said, it’s ironic that so many of today's parents, who enjoyed a trad-parent upbringing, are suffocating their kids’ development by endlessly meddling in their affairs.

It has gotten so bad, reports the Journal, that employers increasingly view heavy parental involvement as a red flag — a signal that Zoomers with especially meddlesome parents likely lack independence and the ability to make their own decisions.

I sure hope these kids figure out how to function on their own before their turn comes to run the country.

Or one day, during a live White House press conference, the president will be asked a tough question and his mother will grab the microphone.

“I don’t appreciate the tone of these questions!” his mom might say. “And for the record, it’s not his fault he was late to the NATO summit — the traffic was terrible and his alarm didn’t go off!”

The Strange Alliance Between Islam and Socialism

 One of the things that is perplexing and often a topic of conversation is this new American-Western European alliance or absorption of Islam and Marxism-socialism-communism. In other words, people who identify as radical Muslims, often in their alliance, include people who are traditional Western Marxists, and it doesn’t seem possible for a variety of ways.

There’s a lot of antitheses. Do we really believe that these upscale people in blue enclaves in the United States who declare themselves socialist and are voting for people like Zohran Mamdani, or Ilhan Omar, or Rashida Tlaib, who are proud, and active, and often fervent Muslims, tolerate gays? Do you really believe if you said, “I am gay, and I’m proud of it, and I want to announce that in Saudi Arabia,” you wouldn’t be in trouble?

Do you really believe that if you went to Iran and said, “I want to repeal all the sodomy laws,” you wouldn’t be in trouble?

Or if you went, let’s say, to Egypt and you said, “I wanna have a trans, sexual support group,” you wouldn’t be in trouble? Do you really believe that upscale, independent women in Western cities, maybe unmarried, professional, doesn’t that bother them a little bit when they ally themselves with radical Muslims who tell them that, as far as men go, their dream is going to an Islamic heaven and having the sexual use as if they’re almost tools of 72 virgins?

Does that go well with a book editor in Manhattan or the head of an NGO in Denver? I don’t think so.

Another thing that’s quite different is Islam believes in Allah, and that’s it. All other people who are non-believers are doomed to hell, and the duty is to spread worship, loyalty, fealty to the Muslim Allah.

But throughout the history of socialism and Marxism and communism, all of them agree on one thing, that religion is really the opiate of the masses. They feel that class struggle is harmed or negated by people who believe in a God. In the Christian sense, they feel that, blessed are the meek, blessed are the poor.

That Sermon on the Mount doesn’t do anything. It basically says there will be social justice in heaven, but not here. If you’re poor, you go to heaven by being morally better than the rich man. Remember, it’s harder for a camel to get through the eye of a needle than a rich man, Jesus says, to go to heaven.

So, the message for believers is that there is social justice in heaven. The message for a socialist, communist, Marxist is it’s right now. There is no heaven. There is no God. We have to get social justice now.

Another thing that’s very different is Marxists believe in the state control of the means of production, and socialists believe that this—there can be private property, but mostly the utilities, the railroads, the steel companies, most all of the muscles of a society are owned also by the state.

But they believe in a commission, a committee, a chairman. They don’t believe that one exercises power through royalty or succession, although most communist and Marxist states, which we see in North Korea and we see in Iran, they’re very similar in some ways. But, in the Arab world, monarchy is pretty much de rigueur, as we see in the Gulf states.

But Marxism says, “No, we don’t believe in kings. We overthrow them.” That was what the revolutions of 1848 were about. That’s what the French Revolution was about. That’s basically what the Bolsheviks were trying to get rid of an imperial dynastic tsar. So, that’s another antithesis.

Another thing is the Arab world is based on tribalism, that your first loyalty goes to people who look like you, speak a dialect of Arabic like you, and have a local or regional affinity, a proximity to you.

That’s always been the challenge of the modern Arab nation or state. How do you include people from seven, 10, 15, 20 different tribes who have fought each other for centuries and only come together when coerced to, for example, under the Ottoman Empire?

But Marxism is very different. Your first allegiance is not to people who look like you.

It’s to the global proletariat, the oppressed, the Comintern. Socialists believe that they have more in common with people in Europe who are fellow socialists than they do with rich people or, or people who are devoutly religious in their own country.

So tribalism is part of Islam’s foundation. Globalism is central to the socialist or the communist or the Marxist.

However, all of that said, someone’s going to say, “Well, Victor, they’re alike. They have a coalition. Zohran Mamdani is a hardcore Marxist, and he’s a hardcore Islamicist, and so is Ilhan Omar, and so are almost all the people in Dearborn, Michigan, it seems like, and so are these new socialist candidates that are popping up like flowers everywhere in blue cities and urban areas.”

So, what’s the similarities? One, they hate Western civilization. They can’t stand the values of Western civilization, free speech, religious opportunity, market capitalism, etc. They both hate that and Islam has been, has been at war with the West since the seventh century, and it’s fought Westerners not just in the Crusades, but all through the history of the Byzantine Empire, all through the history of Europe and North Africa.

And when [Osama] bin Laden said the great tragedy was that Islam lost its hold in Europe, what he was basically talking about was the Battle of Tours and the stopping of the Islamic movement northward into Europe. They, of course, have, in the Quran and its related apocrypha, there’s a lot of hatred of Jews.

They hate Israel with a passion. So do Marxists, socialists. I’m not sure why they do, given the creation of Israel was based on a kibbutz system, which is socialistic in nature, and many of the original generation who settled in Israel even before World War II came there as dissidents from Eastern Europe and Russia, and they believed in a socialist future.

But that’s all ancient history now. As of now, what draws Muslims to the new left-wing hardcore socialist and communist, and what draws them to include rather antithetical Muslims into their movement, they hate Israel with a passion, and they hate Jews.

There’s another, similarity. They hate capitalism.

They do not believe that a person should have freedom of opportunity to start his own business, to make a profit. In the Islamic world, interest is frowned upon officially. Not that the Gulf states are run … The Gulf states are run on hypercapitalism, but officially they find, euphemisms and mechanisms to get around prohibitions in the Quran for hypercapitalism or laissez-faire capitalism.

And of course, capitalism is the main enemy of Zohran Mamdani and others who feel it’s unfair, it doesn’t share the wealth. They believe in the message not of the Americans, “Give me liberty or give me death,” a revolution to ensure political freedom, but a holistic, totalitarian, three-hundred-and-sixty-degree revolution of fraternity egalitarianism.

In other words, we’re not just going to give people freedom to speak. We don’t want them to have freedom to speak. We want to make them equal on the back end by the use of government coercion.

Both of them hate democracy then. They don’t like the people voting because, in the Arab world or the Muslim world, there will be people who object to the role of women, especially in the modern age, or the role that intolerance for sexual minorities or the intolerance shown Christians.

And so, they will object, and they wouldn’t want to express that objection. That’s taboo. And we know from the history of socialism, they say they believe in free speech, but very quickly socialists try to outlaw it, and when they become communists, they kill for it.

That’s another difference. And both of them justify violence.

They believe the violent method is necessary for the, desired end. And so you see people who are committing … Who are the people that commit violence? Who was the person just this week in New York that stabbed somebody? Who was the person in Europe that tried to run over people at a gay party?

Who are the people protesting ICE? Who are the people on the campus protesting violently? They are either radical Islamicist or they’re radical socialist communist Antifa types, or often they’re mixed together in the same demonstration.

Finally, remember that Hitler himself said he was a national socialist.

Yes, he made deals with crony capitalism, but even though he said he despised Bolshevism, he said after he was looking back in his final days that he admired Joseph Stalin’s communism, and he said that if he had defeated the United States and Russia, he would have executed American leaders, but welcomed Stalin in kind of a genteel captivity.

And by the same token, Hitler said that he preferred Islam to Christianity. He had a great deal of admiration for the Grand Mufti. There was an alliance of radical Islam with national socialists. They both hated capitalism, and they hated the same thing as we’ve just reviewed, and they liked many of the same things.

Hitler was not a hypercapitalist. He was a socialist, a national socialist. And in some ways, even though he said he despised Bolsheviks, they had a lot in common.

So, remember, next time you see this bizarre, weird, surreal alliances or people shouting Allah Akbar or, power to the people, spread the word. They’re not as different as you think.

Dating In Your 40s As A Man: Why Apps Feel Broken (And What to Do Instead)

 

If apps feel like a waste of time, you’re not wrong. Dating apps promise convenience. But if you’re dating in your 40s as a man, they often deliver the opposite: frustration, flakiness, and dead-end conversations that go nowhere. This can knock your confidence and leave you feeling rejected. However there is another way 🙂

As a dating coach with over 15 years experience helping men like you, in this blog I’ll share:

Why dating apps feel broken (especially at this stage of life)
Why in-person dating actually works better for men over 40
And how to shift your dating strategy without feeling like you're starting over

🚫 Why Dating Apps Are Failing You (And Men Like You)

    You’re Not Marketing Yourself To Attract The Women You Want

At this point in life, you probably know a lot about who you are; but you may not know how to market yourself to the women you want. You may not have very many photos of yourself full stop (it’s vain and awkward right?) Whilst dating apps demand perfect photos. You may not know how to write prompts that are the right mix of sincere and fun, without sounding like every other guy out there. You might be overlooked for not being flashy, ultra-online, or chasing trends. It’s not a reflection of your value—just the design.
Man in 40s sheltering woman with this jacket
“C’mon quick kiss… no one can see us.”
2. ….And Even If You Do, You’re Facing Stiff Competition

Even if you get great photos, write witty prompts and use AI to craft messages… so has every other guy out there. Dating apps are saturated and often have a user base that’s two-thirds male. They’re the digital equivalent of walking into a bar and there’s 2 men for every woman. Inevitably this means women get overwhelmed, and many men never get a shot. Some studies place the average match rate for men at 0.6% – meaning they have to like (and message) 140 profiles to get a match! Then you have to get from match to a first date, second, third. When you look at the hard stats, the results are shockingly low. The important point for you is not to see this as a reflection on your worth, and attractiveness; as a man over 40 this is just the state of play on dating apps.
3. You Get Filtered Out—Before You’re Even Seen

With age settings on dating apps, many women will filter you out, even if you look and feel great. It’s just human nature: If a woman is given an age range to select between, she’ll often cut off at milestone birthdays for example, if she’s 32 she may select 32-39, and lose all the matches over 40. In reality if you met her in person, and you had a great connection, it’s likely that she wouldn’t care that you’re a couple of years older than she had imagined her ideal partner to be. I’ve coached many men who have seen a drop over in their dating app matches after they’ve gone over 40, and an even sharper decline after 45.
4. The Effort Doesn’t Equal the Return

How many times have you spent 30 minutes writing a message, only to get ghosted? For mature men, this feels inefficient—because it is. Your time and energy are better spent in places where connection happens organically. Not only do dating apps pose lots of problems for men who are 40+ in terms of getting onto a date, even if you get there, the process doesn’t feel that rewarding. Instead, successful dating as a man in his 40s boils down to doing the harder thing (getting out of your house to meet women in real life) to make your life easier (better connections, more dates and a better all round experience.)
✅ Why IRL Dating Works Better for Men Over 40

    Your Strengths Show Up in Person

It’s well known that women aren’t that visual in how they experience attraction and choose partners. The bad news is that dating apps are like window shopping, and they often prompt people to rely on choosing people who look like their type. The good news is, once you cut out the middle man and meet her in person, all of your other strengths that create attraction can register with her. In real life, your tone, humor, eye contact, and presence carry weight. Women pick up on energy, maturity, and warmth—things that just don’t translate through a screen.

Apps hide your strengths. In-person reveals them.
2. You Stand Out from the Crowd

Most men your age aren’t showing up at community events, dance classes, or wine tastings. If you are? You instantly stand out—not just because you’re present, but because you’re engaged. How do I know this? I work with women too! Women in their 30s and 40s often spend a lot of time wondering where you are hiding! The truth is, most men over 40 have let their social circles shrink (it’s just not the same as when you went to college) and their few remaining friends are coupled up. Losing your wingmen means your “social life” might revolve around going to work, hitting the gym, and catching up 1-1 with old friends. You don’t need a dating coach to point out that this isn’t getting you in front of enough women!
Man in 40s riding bike with woman
“I’ll go look for a charging station.”
3. Shared Context Creates Natural Chemistry

When you meet someone at a concert, on a hike, or through mutual friends, you’re already sharing something meaningful. That’s miles better than “So, what do you do?” over an app chat that fizzles out. Most people find it easier, and more natural, to verbally communicate rather than try to portray their personality on a dating app. Also when I ask women how they would ideally like to meet their partner – through friends is the dream. Meet her through your social circles and you get an automatic boost in terms of how seriously she’ll consider your connection. For women, meeting a guy on an app is a boobie prize: Instead she wants her friends to be telling her about a great guy she must meet. This also translates neatly to her effort levels: Anything less than a spark filled first date will get you ruled out on an app, however if you’ve met in person she’ll be more willing to give it a shot.
4. You Avoid the Ghosting/Game Playing Trap

In real life, conversations are humanized. There’s more mutual respect, less game-playing, and fewer people disappearing mid-conversation. Women in their 30s have some experience with dating. This can mean they’re finely tuned to what they want, and don’t want. Dating apps are highly impersonal and don’t create a sense of safety for her when you meet. This means one message that slips up in its tone can lead her to freak out and unmatch or block you. Whilst this is also her responsibility to be less judgemental, people tend to give others more mutual respect and flexibility when you have a real world connection.
What if you don’t have much relationship experience?

Before we look at how to meet women in real life it’s worth addressing, “how does this differ if you’re dating as a man in his 40s with little experience?” As a single guy in his 40s you might:

Have tons of dating experience and be clearer than ever about what you want.
Returning to dating after a divorce, or long term relationship, and feeling like you’ve missed out on a big chunk of dating experience. 
Have reached this life stage without yet having a significant relationship, and are worried this reflects badly on you.

To start with, regardless of your relationship experience, the same rules apply! Dating as a man in his 40s will be easier for you to focus IRL rather than online. Secondly, however you made your journey to being 40 – you’ve got to own it. Even if you don’t have much dating experience, in your 40s you will have greater knowledge of who you are, be more experienced generally, and an attractive choice for women who value maturity and stability in a partner.
💡 What to Do Instead (How to Date IRL Without Making It Awkward)

    Put Yourself Where Connection Can Happen

Go to places where you’re likely to meet women who match your interests and values. Meeting women in person also creates a filter – it takes a lot more effort for her to show up at an event, versus simply putting a profile online. Here’s some of my favourite spots for you to meet women:

Fitness studios (yoga, pilates, group hikes, spin, bouldering, social dance.)
Cooking classes or wine tastings
Singles, networking and speed dating events
Bars that professionals will attend to catch an after work drink.
Volunteering or spiritual groups
Live music, art walks, or talks

Pro tip: You might worry that some of the women you meet will already be in relationships. This is true – about two-thirds of women will already be partnered up, and of the single women only roughly half will be actively looking to meet someone. However, the fact she has the time to show up to an event, means it’s less likely that she already has a partner/ family. The other thing to remember is, even if she’s already coupled up, that you can still have a mutually rewarding, fun, sociable conversation with her… and she may even have a friend she’s keen to introduce you to.
2. Don’t Just Show Up – Say Something!

Even if you’re regularly showing up at tons of well targeted events, simply showing up won’t be enough. Women aren’t that visual (i.e. she’s unlikely to find you super attractive before you’ve spoken to her) and also women won’t be proactive (i.e. she’s unlikely to start a conversation with you.) Now, you may wish she did come over and speak to you, but if you wait on a clear signal – you’ll be leaving a lot of potential dates on the table. Instead, time to get on board with how fun it can be to initiate. Here’s two simple ways to get started with this:

Be direct at singles, or speed dating events. If you’re at an event and you already know you’re both single, then there’s less need to tread carefully – instead strategic boldness will set you apart from the other men in the room. Recently one of my coaching clients went to a singles event, and saw one woman he really wanted to speak to. A perfect moment didn’t arise, so before he left he took his chance by walking right up to her and saying, “I know I’m interrupting your conversation, but I didn’t want to leave this event without coming over and introducing myself…” (Yup, terrifying but also the stuff of romantic movies.) He was in a rush so wrapped up quickly by saying, “I’d like to get to know you better, and talk more another time. My taxi’s waiting, but let me grab your number.”

Be socially smooth if you meet a woman through a hobby or fitness activity. Whilst bold and daring pays off at singles events, smooth and sociable is a better shout when you’re not sure why a woman is there. Approach a woman boldly at the gym and it may seriously backfire! Instead start a chat based on something you see or experience (how busy it is, the instructor, the music playing). If she’s receptive, swap names. If you continue speaking, swap social media. A subtler approach will allow you to feel out opportunities in a socially intelligent and attractive way.
3. Say Yes to More Invitations & Don’t Be Afraid To Ask (Seriously)

Most men over 40 shrink their social circles. Flip that. Say yes to dinner parties, reunions, events. Even if there’s no one you’re interested in—you’re practicing connection. It also will help your social life to gain momentum. Be the guy who not only says “yes” to invites but is a solid value add to social gatherings: Man the BBQ, organise the playlist, help clear the dishes, relay a great anecdote, be a fantastic listener.

This will increase how socially attractive you are, you’ll make new friends, gather more invites, and eventually meet women who are single through your social circles!

Also don’t shy away from asking for introductions. This isn’t cheesy—it’s smart. Tell a few trusted people:

“I’m open to meeting someone great. If someone comes to mind, I’d love the introduction.”

Women trust referrals. And your friends likely know women who are single but done with apps too.
4. Build Confidence in Your Real-Life Skills

If it’s been a while, practice small talk. Learn to show warmth. Smile more. Start a few low-stakes conversations in line at the café or at the gym.

You’re not trying to “pick up” women—you’re showing that you’re approachable and curious. That’s rare and attractive. If you focus too heavily on your goal of meeting a woman, it’s going to be easy to register the initial steps you take as failures, rather than successes. Instead your first goal is to work on your process and give yourself a ton of credit for the work you put in.

Here are some simple initial goals that are achievable and realistic:

Research real life dating venues and events that work for you (don’t be disheartened if a few events you go to are duds, this is part of your refinement process.) 
Checkout chit chat: This means whenever you have the opportunity you start a small social conversation with the people you meet in your everyday life. 
Swap in woman-friendly hobbies: Drop one free weights session for a spin class. It’s okay to change up your schedule slightly to give you more opportunities. 
Work from a co-working space or cafe rather than from your home. 
Focus on paying compliments and making her day. It takes time to learn how to get great at talking to women in real life, to start with focusing on breaking the ice. 
Say “yes” to any social invitations, and if you hear other people discussing a get together be proactive and ask to come along! 
Remember you are a guy who has a lot to offer - so when you talk to a woman you add to her day, and you don’t take away from it.

👊 The Mindset Shift That Changes Everything

Instead of chasing attention on apps, shift your mindset to:

Creating opportunities for connection
Being present and open in your daily life
Enjoying the process, not forcing the outcome

This isn’t about “trying harder.” It’s about showing up in ways that naturally highlight your strengths.

As a man over 40, your calm confidence, values, and experience shine in person. That’s where you build trust. That’s where you connect. That’s where dating gets interesting again.

It takes bravery to build a new routine, and to talk to attractive women in real life; but it’s also far more rewarding and successful. So quit outsourcing your self esteem to dating apps, and start embracing just how attractive you can be as a man over 40 dating in real life.

President Trump Sparked the Counterrevolution to End the Destruction of America

 

I’d like to speak today about revolutionaries and counterrevolutionaries. Whether we realize it or not, we’ve been in a progressive revolutionary cycle for about 50 years.

And by that I mean there has been the effort of most of the Democratic Party, and now the radical elements to accelerate that efforts as emblemized by the democratic socialists to take control of government, expand it, redistribute income so that many people in blue states especially are paying over 10% of their income, in addition to 38% of their federal tax or two or three percent in Obamacare tax and other add-ons.

And it’s not very difficult to pay 50% of your income or more for the taxpayer who’s salaried without much write-offs. And the welfare state, which has distributed over twenty trillion dollars since this started under the Great Society, is getting bigger and bigger, at least until Donald Trump.

And this progressive revolution doesn’t believe in borders. It has let in—we have now 53 million people that were not born in the United States, and in California, it’s over a quarter of the population. It’s all-time high percentage-wise, 16% foreign-born.

They don’t have confidence that you, the people, will buy into the progressive project. And so, they want to import a demographic that is poor and needy on the idea that they will be constituents that will trade their votes for subsidies.

And we saw that with the Somali community in Minnesota, and we’ve seen it with other communities here in California.

And so, the progressive project has given us a real revolution. We never imagined that there were going to be more than two genders or sexes. We never imagined that they would try to normalize biological men taking over women’s sports or dressing among young teenage girls. We never imagined that.

We never imagined that prosecutors would let out career felons who had committed violent acts the same day they were arrested. We didn’t know we were gonna empty the prisons because we felt that punishment, penal punishment was too mean.

We never really felt that our only real democratic country and ally in the Middle East, Israel, we would try to disassociate ourselves, and we would try to romanticize terrorists like Hamas.

But what I’m getting at, this was the progressive project. It was anti-American, it was anti-Western, and it glorified other modes of civilization, so to speak: socialism, communism, anarchism. And it was very critical of the very society who had enriched most Americans.

I say most—the middle class of America is the largest middle class in the world and the most affluent, and our poor are better off than most middle class and upper middle class in other places.

It’s important to remember that there has not been a counter-revolution. Ronald Reagan was the first and really last Republican president that had an economic counterrevolution. It was quite successful. He lowered the tax rate. He deregulated the economy, and by 1983-84, he was growing the economy at 7% GDP growth.

And then, of course, that was watered down in subsequent years. But the two Bushes, candidates like John McCain, Bob Dole, Mitt Romney, their agenda was to slow down the revolution, but not to try to overturn it.

What do I mean by slow down? Kind of advise Hollywood that they didn’t have to be so anti-American and have movies that talked about race, class, and gender ad nauseam. Try to tell professional sports not to be weaponized.

Try to tell K-12, calm it down a little bit. We don’t need sex education in the first grade, and there’s nothing wrong with a teacher occasionally giving a prayer that she inadvertently forgot was illegal.

Calm down. You don’t need to send the FBI to school board meetings, that kind of thing. We don’t need to take the knee at sports and ridicule “The Star-Spangled Banner.”

So, this revolution had infiltrated K-12, the corporate boardroom, the universities especially, the media, the foundations, and popular culture. But the Republican and conservative movement had just tried to slow it down.

And then came Donald Trump.

He was not—he’s surely not a revolutionary. We were in the middle of a revolution, but he was not a trimmer either. He was a true counterrevolutionary.

The first term, he was not familiar with Washington. He made appointments with people who did not agree with him—not just they did not agree with his methodology, but they didn’t agree with his counter-revolutionary agenda.

But it was still in places working. And what was the result? The result was COVID-19 and the COVID-19 lockdown, and it was aborted.

The second time he came around, he tried to finish the counterrevolution. So he pretty much demolished the subsidies for green energy and re-emphasized oil and gas production, and we became the greatest producer of oil and gas in the history of civilization.

He sort of said, “We’re not going to regulate AI and robotics, cryptocurrency, genetic engineering, drone. We’re not gonna legislate them out of business. We’re not gonna have antitrust and complete investigations of all these people. We’re gonna promote it. We’re going to promote these new innovations and new technologies.”

And lo and behold, we’re ahead of the Chinese in almost all of them now.

He didn’t just say, “I am worried about the military. It may be that DEI has discouraged a particular demographic that over generation after generation has provided the largest percentage of our combat units, namely white males.”

He did away with DEI. And what was the result? All of a sudden, we have met all of our recruitment figures.

He didn’t just say, “Well, the border’s been open. I know that we’ve let in 10 million people a year over four years. I know that 10,000 were coming a day under Biden. I understand that, so maybe I’ll say no more catch and release. Or maybe you have to apply for refugee status in, say, Mexico.”

No, no.

He said, “I’m going to finish the wall. I’m not gonna let anybody stop me. This time there’s going to be a wall, and we are going to deport people. We’re gonna deport a million people in my first year, and we’re gonna make sure a million others self-deport, and we’re gonna go after 500,000 with criminal records.”

He didn’t just say, “I am very worried about Latin America.

“Under [Barack] Obama and under [Joe] Biden, we saw a wave of left-wing governments, and the Panama Canal is in danger. Venezuela has the largest oil reserves really in the Western Hemisphere, if not the world, and they are exporting convicts and drugs to the United States.”

He didn’t just say that.

He went down there and basically threatened Panama that we would take over the canal unless they honored our Panama Canal treaty and expelled the Chinese from trying to control the entry and exits of the canal.

He said to [Nicolas] Maduro, “You better stop because you’re exporting terror and communism and bullying your neighbors.”

He didn’t, and he extradited him and ended that threat.

And now as we look at Ecuador, Peru, Chile, Bolivia, Argentina, El Salvador, Dominican Republic, I could go on, they’re mostly center right.

So, he staged a strong counterrevolution by reinforcing the Monroe Doctrine that had been rejected by the Left, and he made South America and Central America now a free market and, for the most part, a society that’s pro-American, with some notable exceptions.

For example, in Nicaragua, a beleaguered Daniel Ortega and a beleaguered Castroite government in Cuba that are both now for the first time in years isolated.

In addition to that, he made our allies stronger. He used unorthodox methods. He was the proverbial gunslinger who came in to help the townspeople who were ossified and couldn’t deal with the robber barons or the cattle barons or the outlaws, and then he cleaned up the town, and then they got tired of him because of his methodology and rhetoric.

But nonetheless, he said to our allies, “We’re not gonna be in NATO unless you’re real NATO members. You’re not NATO members. You’re not arming yourself. You’re not abiding by your commitments.”

Same held true to Canada. And lo and behold, now we have much stronger allies, and the alliance is stronger than ever.

What am I getting at? Donald Trump is not a revolutionary. He’s a counterrevolutionary.

And what is he trying to do? He’s trying to undo the entire half-century progressive project within four years. That’s an impossible task. And yet he’s trying to do it.

He’s the first authentic counterrevolutionary since Andrew Jackson.