Search Results

After suffering what could shape up to be their biggest electoral defeat in more than 40 years, the New York Times  opined that Democrats agree on one thing: They need to figure out what went wrong. New York Times  reporters Jess Bidgood and Adam Nagourney asked swing-district Democrats, like Representative Tom Suozzi of New York, who held onto his seat on Trump-friendly Long Island, what they thought, and Suozzi’s answer was revealing.   “Trump won my district by 19,000 votes. I won by 9,000 votes,” Suozzi responded. “Democrats should not be asking, ‘How could they vote for him?’ They should ask, ‘Why did they vote for him?’” Why indeed. Back in 2020, when Democrats lost seats in the House even as Trump lost the White House, Democrats did some polling and discovered that ‘Defund the Police’ really hurt their candidates, but that didn’t change the anti-police, get-out-of-jail-free policies of their leading elected officials. So, we doubt Democrats really want that question answered, or that they will accept the reality of the answers received. You see Democrats are really bad at listening to anything that contradicts their elitist narrative, so they think that it’s not their policies that are defective, it is their communications strategies and tactics that have failed. So, rather than accept the fact that voters want something different than what Democrats are selling they double down on “resistance” and blocking the policies that most Americans want their government to follow. The most obvious example of this problem for Democrats is the announcement by leading Democrats, such as California’s Democrat Governor Gavin Newsom, New York Democrat Gov. Kathy Hochul and Attorney General Letitia James, and Democrat leaders in Illinois and Massachusetts who have all announced plans to fight Trump’s plans to deport illegal aliens, get men out of women’s sports and clean up their states’ streets, and other popular Trump policies. American voters aren’t as dumb as Democrats think they are. Saying you are for border security, while your Party’s leaders oppose securing the border and fight to keep illegal aliens in the country doesn’t just step on the Democrats’ narrative, it insults the intelligence of voters. Another question about the 2024 election that Democrats won’t want answered in their “autopsy” of Kamala Harris’s defeat is “where did Joe Biden’s ‘missing’ 2020 voters go?” “It’s vital that we learn why turnout disappeared from 2020 to 2024 and much more,” former Democratic National Committee chair Donna Brazile wrote in an email to the New York Times’ Jess Bidgood and Adam Nagourney. How about the reason something like 12 million Democrat voters went missing in 2024 is that they never existed to begin with. We know there are something like 400,000 Georgia ballots for which there is no ballot image in the electronic system. And Democrats have successfully resisted attempts to pry open the records in other states, such as Pennsylvania, Nevada, Michigan and Arizona. It is very likely that much, if not all, of Joe Biden’s margin in those states in 2020 was manufactured from “harvested” mail-in ballots that had no connection to a real live voter. See our article “ How Democrats Sign Up Non-Citizens To Vote ” for just one of many ways that worked in 2020.   Between the end of the COVID pandemic and its relaxation of ballot security measures, and ballot integrity efforts by Republicans, replicating the 2020 steal was – if not impossible – at least much more difficult for Democrats. Finally, Democrats aren’t going to want to know or accept that content-free race-baiting campaigns aren’t working the way they use to. When you subtract the imaginary voters who didn’t show up to vote for Kamala Harris, Trump still vastly exceeded expectations in the Democrats’ urban strongholds and liberal states. “Kamala Harris won New York City by a thirty-seven-point margin, far shy of the nearly fifty-four-point margin of victory that President Biden held over Donald J. Trump in 2020,” Dana Rubinstein and Stefanos Chen wrote for the New York Times. In Cook County, Illinois, Barack Obama managed to capture 74 percent of the vote. Hillary Clinton didn’t fare much worse — retaining 73.9 percent. Kamala, for all of her talents, only managed 69 percent, reported Grace Curley in a must-read article for The Spectator world edition . Ms. Curley reported Trump gained twelve points in this year’s election versus 2020, in Boston and twelve points in Chicago, and made double-digit gains in Manhattan. In Grace Curley’s analysis, with which we agree, the Democratic Party was so focused on getting Trump, they didn’t leave time in their schedules to do anything else — including listening to their constituents.   Had Democrats listened – or asked the right questions is a better way to look at it – they would have discovered that their message of “Orange Man bad” did not neutralize the lived experience of urban dwellers suffering from the high prices of Bidenomics and the quality of life deficit brought on by the Democrats’ soft on crime and illegal alien coddling mayors, district attorneys and governors. Democrats will never figure out why they lost to Trump because they don’t really want to know the answer, which is that voters rejected their policies based on what they experienced in their everyday lives. Voters aren’t as dumb as Democrats think they are, and they correctly figured out who created the problems they want solved. No “new narrative” or bumping their campaign spending up beyond the nearly $2 billion they spent on Kamala Harris is going to reduce inflation, eject the illegal aliens who are ravenously consuming public resources, put criminals in jail, or solve any of the other problems Biden, Harris and the Democrats have created. George Rasley is editor of Richard Viguerie's ConservativeHQ.com . A veteran of over 300 political campaigns, including every Republican presidential campaign from 1976 to 2004, he served as a staff member or advance representative for some of America’s most recognized conservative political figures, including Ronald Reagan, Sarah Palin and Jack Kemp. A member of American MENSA, he served on the House and Senate staff and on the staff of Vice President Dan Quayle. Rasley is a graduate of Hanover College and studied international affairs at Oxford University's Worcester College. 2024 Election Kamala Harris campaign Military Readiness Cultural Marxism Hispanic male voters Male African-American voters Democrat contributions price gouging price controls first-time home buyers 25th Amendment public housing ActBlue donations Donald Trump campaign Kamala Harris campaign Kamala Harris senate record

Evidence is mounting that the Democrats’ major campaign theme – that Donald Trump is a “threat to democracy” hurt them more than it helped them. Kamala Harris, Joe Biden and other Democrats regularly compared Trump to Adolf Hitler as she tried to establish the idea in voters' minds that Donald Trump is an authoritarian fascist. Throughout the campaign Kamala Harris and her allies attempted to cast Donald Trump as a threat to the Constitution. And as the campaign drew to a close, Harris increasingly focused on warning Americans about the perils of reelecting Trump and offered an olive branch to disaffected Republicans. Harris also highlighted remarks from several former Trump officials, including his former chief of staff and retired Marine Corps General John Kelly, who described Trump as a "fascist." As our friends at Lifezette documented, this “anti-democratic rhetoric was picked up by the more leftist elements of the mainstream media. “It’s not alarmist: A second Trump term really is an extinction-level threat to democracy”, was the headline of a Vox article  published three days before the election. That, itself, wasn’t a standalone claim, with the New York Magazine  repeating the Democrat argument in September. Even now the dust has settled, corporations such as the Washington Post  continue to regurgitate the perceived threat to democracy.” Obviously, the results of the election confirm that kind of campaign rhetoric didn’t work. And there’s some growing evidence that it actually hurt Kamala Harris. NBC News reported that when voters were asked to choose among five issues, 34% of voters said democracy mattered most to their votes, while 31% said the economy. Abortion (14%) and immigration (11%) ranked as the next-most-important issues, while just 4% named foreign policy.   Men and women both said the state of democracy was their most important issue, followed by the economy. Two in 10 women said abortion was most important, compared with 8% of men. Immigration was ranked slightly higher among men (12%) than women (10%). Foreign policy lagged behind as a priority for both groups. However, in a hilarious turn of events, among those voters who identified threats to democracy as their #1 issue, Donald Trump garnered a majority of their votes. Roughly 3 in 4 voters said they think democracy in the U.S. today is threatened, with Trump being +4 with those who think democracy is “very threatened” and +1 with those voters who think democracy is “somewhat threatened.” It looks very much like Harris, ignoring the impact of four years of revelations about government spying on Trump and censorship of Trump and conservatives, ended up incentivizing her opponents with all the “democracy is on the ballot” rhetoric. George Rasley is editor of Richard Viguerie's ConservativeHQ.com . A veteran of over 300 political campaigns, including every Republican presidential campaign from 1976 to 2004, he served as a staff member or advance representative for some of America’s most recognized conservative political figures, including Ronald Reagan, Sarah Palin and Jack Kemp. A member of American MENSA, he served on the House and Senate staff and on the staff of Vice President Dan Quayle. Rasley is a graduate of Hanover College and studied international affairs at Oxford University's Worcester College. 2024 Election Kamala Harris campaign Military Readiness Cultural Marxism Hispanic male voters Male African-American voters Democrat contributions price gouging price controls first-time home buyers 25th Amendment public housing ActBlue donations Donald Trump campaign Kamala Harris campaign Kamala Harris senate record

Democrats suddenly realized what “cooperation” means and want Trump to welcome them “That’s fine for him to say, considering he’s the reason we’re all in this hellish nightmare now.” – Anonymous Democrat complainer upon listening to the “lower the temperature” conclusion of president senile Joe Biden’s post-election “cheer up” message, delivered last Thursday afternoon  at a suddenly very somber White House. I can’t speak for this unnamed and fictional Democrat – or any  Democrat, actually – but this thought must’ve been on the minds of panicked and nearly suicidal liberal party members last week. Fresh off a crushing and unanticipated (by them, at least) election loss to the ultra-hated arch-fiend “fascist” Donald J. Trump, all concerned were grasping at thin air for any semblance of explanation and blame to distribute. For Trump was so eminently beatable (again, to them) and open for savaging that it was inconceivable anyone could lose to him.   Of course, cackling Kamala Harris had just mumbled through her own concession speech the previous afternoon where she relayed to supportive onlookers, many of who had visible signs of crying their eyes out, that she had indeed called the successful Republican candidate, conceded the election and pledged to do anything within her power to assist with the transition from Biden-world to Trump’s MAGA within the next two months. Hence, both top Democrats have now done the previously unthinkable, namely conveyed that “fascist” Trump had beaten them and admitted defeat. In her tear-inducing speech, Kamala included a veiled jab at Trump, suggesting it was the duty of the losing candidate to officially give up and welcome the other side. But if Democrats had the amount of evidence Trump possessed after 2020 – with a huge number of irregularities and eyewitness accounts screaming “Fraud!” – they’d be lining up behind Mark Elias to draw out the process as long as possible.   The reforms instituted by the new leadership of the Republican National Committee accomplished what Ronna Romney McDaniel never did – they lawyered-up, did the handiwork before  the election and ensured that everything was on the up and up when push came to shove. And because of the precautions, no pushing or shoving was necessary.   Trump won a clean victory and the Democrats were caught without an alternative avenue. Senile Joe and cackling Kamala didn’t even have time to invent a “Russians stole the election” faux scenario to lean on. Were liberals left completely dumbfounded by the voters’ rejection? You be the judge.   Senile Joe Biden working furiously to ensure the Trump administration can’t fulfill its MAGA mission   In the meantime, senile Joe Biden himself has laid the groundwork for guaranteeing his presidential legacy will endure well into the next Trump administration. Chris Irvine at the Washington Examiner  wrote on three ways Biden is hoping to shore-up his legacy:   *         One , Biden administration, Congress, and unions try to ‘Trump-proof’ science   *         Two , Biden administration rulemaking blitzes aim to ‘Trump-proof’ federal government   *         Three , Biden’s ‘Trump-proofing’ foreign policy revolves around Ukraine and NATO   The Washington Examiner  compiled a three-part series on what the Biden administration is doing to preemptively throw a wrench in the Trump MAGA train’s wheels before the new personnel arrives to rearrange the furniture. Democrats aren’t stupid, and if there’s anything they know how to do well, it’s foul-up the water so it’s no longer drinkable.   Need a visual? Remember how the Japanese forces, when retreating in World War II, made it so the liberators couldn’t count on any life-sustaining resources when they took over? That’s the Trump people now. That’s not all. Imagine how the Democrat lawyers are preparing lawsuits to file in federal courts with potentially friendly judges seeking injunctive relief against common sense regulatory reform. We saw this quite a bit in 2017 when Trump attempted to use his executive authority to perform “extreme vetting” against refugees from Muslim “hot spot” countries  around the globe. The move was perfectly within his authority as president, yet one well-placed judge in the right court could halt the entire thing.   It's what Democrats do. What they can’t win at the ballot box or push through the legislative process, they’ll realize by damning up the system and perpetuating the status quo.   Trump administration staffers have this waiting for them when they get there. There probably won’t be snarky messages left for the newcomers this time, but the effect will be the same. We can only hope Trump and team learned their lessons from the first go-‘round eight years ago. They’ll have a narrow window to achieve real reform, so they’d best not waste it.   In addition, it’s remarkable how both senile Joe Biden and cackling Kamala Harris promised a smooth transition, and how both Democrats stated or implied it’s their “duty” to transfer power. In doing so, they may look as though they’re taking the high road, but they clearly have ulterior motives. Democrats went from swearing resistance if Trump returned to the White House to suggesting they’re born-again constitutionalists who are morally superior to their replacements.   The question is why would Democrats be wishing Trump well now? It’s not because they’ve really changed. With all three branches (executive, legislative and judicial) of government now firmly under Republican control, they don’t have much choice but to preserve what they have, which is the right to object.   Voters aren’t pleased with Democrats. Who knows, maybe the liberals begrudgingly acknowledge it. As the leader of the opposition, “Chucky” Schumer will speak to the massive crowd at Trump’s second inauguration in January. He’ll likely be roundly booed. Media pundits won’t call a truce on their assaults on Trump, either. They’re biding their time, believe me.   Democrats will fight the new Trump administration just as earnestly as they did the last time. They’ll employ the filibuster on every piece of legislation that they can, and will try to smear and defeat every Trump nominee who dares to venture through the confirmation process, hoping to pick off a Republican or two so as to pin as many scalps to the wall as they’re able.   The losers haven’t exactly come right out and confirmed it, but there’s a ton of blame going around in Democrat circles. The Biden holdovers are taking a ‘See, I told you so’ attitude with the group of party elites who pressured the old goat to step down. There are reports that Biden believes he would’ve won last week if he’d only been the party nominee, hubris he felt was well earned over the course of a half-century political career where he never lost an election.   Meanwhile, there are rumors Kamala Harris and her advisors are furious with Joe Biden for his refusal to stay out of the picture as the election neared. Many an observer surmised it was Biden’s “garbage” remark and subsequent Trump campaign appearances that provided the winner-to-be with all the easy-to-understand visuals he’d need.   The Obamas are confused as to what their roles will be in the Democrat party moving forward. Their magic seems to have evaporated, and Democrats have completely disappeared from positions of power throughout the government.   Now there’s no chance to regain a say on the Supreme Court. It will be at least two years before they can attempt a comeback on Capitol Hill, too. Their regulatory/deep state backups (the “insurance policy” that Peter Strzok once spoke of) will be besieged by Trump-ian reformers hankering to clean house.   So don’t be quick to believe the Democrats when they say they’re ready to help Trump undo everything Joe Biden and cackling Kamala Harris did in their one-term between Trump administrations. Here’s thinking they’ll make things as difficult as they possibly can – and they’ll have plenty of help from the swamp dwellers in the bureaucracy and deep state to do so.   Democrats may be blaming each other right now. But they’ll be back. Like cackling Kamala pleaded with the crowd to do during her “concession” speech – Never, ever, give up. Joe Biden economy inflation Biden cognitive decline gas prices, Nancy Pelosi Biden senile Kamala Harris candidacy Donald Trump campaign Harris Trump debates J.D. Vance Kamala vice president Speaker Mike Johnson Donald Trump assassination Donald Trump 2024 presidential election Tim Walz

As it became apparent that Donald Trump was going to be reelected President a steady stream of Democrats and Leftwing commentators showed up on TV and social media to call for “unity.” However, they weren’t volunteering to unite behind the Trump agenda that a majority of American voters had just endorsed, far from it. When Democrats call for “unity” in the wake of an overwhelming defeat, such as that which they suffered on November 5, 2024, they really mean two things: First, leave their agenda that voters just rejected alone; Second, don’t investigate or punish their crimes and maladministration. So, in the Democrats’ concept of “unity” the southern border would remain open, billions of dollars would continue to flow to organizations facilitating the influx of illegal aliens into our country, the interests of our enemy, the Islamic Republic of Iran, would be served, while those of our ally Israel would be stymied, children would continue to be mutilated in the name of transgender ideology, tax dollars would flow to abortion providers, Diversity, Equity and Inclusion would continue to sap our military readiness, election integrity would continue to be undermined, and, the vast government surveillance apparatus would continue to be deployed against law-abiding Americans, to name but a few of the more egregious policies “unity” with Democrats would preserve. “Unity” with Democrats would also prevent the Trump administration from investigating the many crimes and gross malfeasance of the Biden administration. Those responsible for the disastrous withdrawal from Afghanistan, the opening of our border and the implementation of illegal programs to import millions of illegal aliens and fake “refugees,” the illegal surveillance and censorship of law-abiding Americans, the vast waste of Biden’s Green Energy programs, the COVID oppressions, the oppression of the J6 protestors and the many other oppressions and malfeasance of the Biden years would go uninvestigated and unpunished. If the Democrats’ idea of unity prevails DHS Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas would leave government, pension intact, never having answered for the disaster at the southern border. General Kenneth McKenzie, Secretary of State Anthony Blinken and various other Pentagon, State Department and White House officials would never have to face the families of those killed at Abbey Gate. The number and the chain of command of the FBI and intelligence operatives at the Capitol on January 6 would never be known, and the bad actors in the Biden-Harris Justice Department would, like Lois Lerner, walk out the door pensions intact to go to work for Leftwing organizations dedicated to destroying Donald Trump and stymieing his agenda. You get the picture, there must be a reckoning before there can be unity. Even with a reckoning, unity will be difficult. As John Daniel Davidson observed in a recent column for the Federalist, "After those who broke the law are held accountable, and those who lied are ostracized and ignored, we will still face the problem of disunity and division among our people. We will still be two nations occupying the same territory, with two irreconcilable visions of what the country should be. We can’t paper over those differences, and we shouldn’t." 2024 Election Kamala Harris campaign Military Readiness Cultural Marxism Hispanic male voters Male African-American voters Democrat contributions price gouging price controls first-time home buyers 25th Amendment public housing ActBlue donations Donald Trump campaign Kamala Harris campaign Kamala Harris senate record

Representative Chip Roy (TX-21), Chairman of the Judiciary Subcommittee on the Constitution, instructed authorities to preserve evidence in cases related to the sanctity of life. Specifically, Chairman Roy requested authorities preserve the remains of five babies reportedly killed in illegal late term abortions in Washington, D.C., and to retain information on prosecutions of pro-life Americans.   The Department of Justice reportedly advised the Washington, D.C. Medical Examiner to dispose of the remains of five preborn children whose bodies were recovered from the Washington Surgi-Clinic in March of 2022. The D.C. authorities continue to ignore a previous request made by Representative Roy earlier this year. As Chairman Roy stated in his letter to Mayor Bowser, “To date, both the Executive Office of the Mayor and the Metropolitan Police Department continue to ignore my February 2024 request to confirm that the remains of these unborn babies will not be disposed. Future congressional investigations into potential violations and the sufficiency of existing law will undoubtedly be hampered if these remains and any related evidence are destroyed. These children deserve justice, regardless of which administration is in power.”   Chairman Roy further stated, “Future congressional investigations into potential violations and the sufficiency of existing law will undoubtedly be hampered if these remains and any related evidence are destroyed. These children deserve justice, regardless of which administration is in power. I renew the Subcommittee’s previous requests to preserve evidence as part of our oversight of potential violations of federal law and the DOJ’s directives to the D.C. Medical Examiner’s office.”   Chairman Roy further called upon Attorney General Merrick Garland and FBI Director Christopher Wray to preserve all evidence related to their agencies’ enforcement of the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances (FACE) Act, as current data suggest the Biden-Harris Administration has disproportionately used the FACE Act to target pro-life Americans with unwarranted retaliation.   Chairman Roy writes, “Accordingly, we formally request that you preserve all existing and future records and materials relating to FACE Act cases as part of our oversight of the use of this law. Specifically, DOJ and FBI must take all reasonable steps to prevent the destruction of all documents, communications, and other information, including electronic information, that are or may be responsive to this congressional inquiry.” The Committee on the Judiciary has jurisdiction over criminal law and federal law enforcement pursuant to House Rule X, perhaps the next Congress and Trump-appointed Attorney General will have a stronger view of what constitutes contempt of Congress by Democrats than the current administration has taken. The Capitol Switchboard is (202-224-3121), we urge CHQ readers and friends to call Rep. Roy to tell him thank you for protecting the unborn and to continue to pursue those who perform illegal abortions. Rep. Chip Roy DC 5 abortion evidence tampering sanctity of life late term abortions Department of Justice preservation of bodies congressional investigations Attorney General Merrick Garland FACE Act cases congressional oversight contempt of Congress

What holds the future for the Republican establishment? It’s something a lot of people are wondering these days as Democrats, independents and Republicans alike attempt to sift through the election data – and their feelings – leftover from president elect Donald J. Trump’s historic trouncing of Democrat nominee cackling Kamala Harris and president senile Joe Biden’s legacy on his way to a 300-plus Electoral Vote victory in Tuesday’s quadrennial national election.   The hours leading up to Trump’s win were no doubt sweet for his longtime backers, most of whom have sacrificed reputation – and friends – to stick with the outsider presidential candidate, a man who the “experts” predicted would destroy the party. “He’s not a real conservative”, many of the naysayers complained. “He’s unelectable”, others urged.   “Character counts”, still others added, figuring conservatives and Republicans could no longer use the character issue against the much looser anything-goes Democrats if they put aside everything they’ve purported to believe just to win an election and retain political power. The thrice married Trump and reported womanizer (in his younger days) wasn’t exactly the embodiment of purity in the mold of the Bush family and Mitt Romney, put it that way.   It seems like ancient history now, but Trump’s initial political foes were based in the Republican Party itself. Despite having helped mentor five successful children and several grandchildren (I don’t remember how many), Trump confronted constant questions about his personal past, something his enemies figured would bring him low in the prudish, judgmental Republican Party.   Besides, Trump didn’t bow low to the big government neoconservative faction in the GOP back then – or ever – and this was the same lineage that spawned the previous three party presidential nominees (George W. Bush, John McCain and Mitt Romney). This trio were favorites of the Big Business interests, the ones who gave the party a reputation for caring only about low taxes and cheap illegal immigrant labor while looking down on the “unwashed” working class – they were all Democrats anyway, right?   Needless to say, Trump broke the mold, so much so that most commentators suggest he brought about a complete realignment of the Republican Party’s base constituency. Trump was populist to the core, including promoting positions that seemed to contradict the GOP’s traditional free trade/aggressive foreign policy emphasis. Because of the sharp disagreements, the establishment Never Trump adherents broke away from the new Trump MAGA party. And they haven’t returned, citing irreconcilable personal differences with the bombastic “Bad Orange Man”.   Now, however, the Never Trumpers are dissidents without a party, neither welcomed by the Democrats – except maybe for Liz Cheney herself – or beating down the door at Republican headquarters to be let back in.   Will the outcast Bush-ies make a play to return in 2028 to try and wrest the GOP back from the term-limited Donald Trump and his legions of populist, ends-oriented followers? Does anyone want to talk about this now? In an opinion column titled “ Is it too early to talk 2028? ”, legendary commentator Cal Thomas wrote earlier this week at The Washington Times :   “… 2028 will be another open contest for the Republican nomination. … Nikki Haley is most likely to run in four years. She has strong support from many Republicans, as shown in the GOP primaries. And at least one other politician could be a formidable candidate: Virginia Gov. Glenn Youngkin.   “Virginia limits governors to one four-year term, so after next year, Mr. Youngkin will be free to devote his time to contemplating whether he should run for president and assembling a team should that decision be yes.   “Mr. Youngkin is anti-Trump in personality, policy and relationships. He is a kind man, not full of himself. In his State of the Commonwealth address this past January, Mr. Youngkin repeatedly used the word ‘we’ rather than the personal pronoun so favored by Mr. Trump. That was meant to share credit for accomplishments with legislators and voters, not to think more highly of himself than he should.”   Thomas penned the column before he knew how Trump did in the election, so he should be forgiven for neglecting to mention just how big the victory really was and what ramifications it will have on the future. It’s rare in politics when a politician can write his or her own ticket, so to speak, but Tuesday’s result changes everything for lots of potential 2028 hopefuls.   It shouldn’t be forgotten – and won’t be – by the MAGA grassroots that Trump believed he should’ve had the 2024 field to himself before the primary season even started, his reasoning being valuable resources could be saved for the “big” fight to take on senile Joe Biden or whomever the Democrats elevated. Trump’s primary win, he thought, was a foregone conclusion. Polls seemed to bolster Trump’s claim. It wasn’t just braggadocio, at least in the one instance.   Haley was the first to toss her hat in the 2024 ring, reasoning that Trump needed primary competition – from someone  – and the former president looked vulnerable to the party establishment and other DC swamp lizards, most of which she knew very well.   Nikki’s journey through the early voting states familiarized her with the process but didn’t clearly separate her from the others, most notably Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis. Both politicians adopted, more or less, the argument Trump was damaged goods because of his age, connection to January 6, 2021 and generally poor reputation with women voters, etc. And moderates who shied away from his “tone”. Different day, same old story.   Youngkin, if he does run in 2028, would compete with Haley for the establishment lane. The Virginian’s accomplishments are impressive, and he was a valuable late race surrogate for Trump this year in the Old Dominion. It didn’t matter in the end, since the blue state (for federal elections) went for cackling Kamala by about five points, a similar margin Crooked Hillary prevailed by in the commonwealth in 2016.   Haley and Youngkin would be on a number of pundits’ shortlists in 2028, particularly longtime ruling elites who will be glad to see Trump vacate his vaunted leadership position as favorite of the party voters. Trump has reached a plateau that very few Republicans ever achieve. From now on, to the great chagrin of the elites, Trump’s name will be mentioned alongside Reagan’s.   Trump came of political age in the Obama era and defeated two of the Democrats’ most cherished figures – Hillary and Joe Biden (via cackling Kamala Harris) – no easy task.   Scholars will debate for a long time whether any of the not-Trump Republicans, including Haley, DeSantis and Youngkin, could’ve won the election. Sure, there would’ve been a sizable group of Republicans who would back anyone against the Democrat nominee – just as they did for McCain in 2008 and Romney in 2012 – but would the newer vintage MAGA believers go along with anyone in Trump’s place?   That’s the dilemma in trying to replace Trump, because he has built a following of loyalists who aren’t particularly political, but they still appreciate Trump’s unique gifts and fighting spirit. No one would claim Trump is a gifted orator and there are others who know policy better than the 45th (and 47th) president, but Trump’s other-worldly political instincts cannot be discounted.   Whoever seeks to replace him after he “retires” will need the “it” factor more than most. Trump is more than just a showman who dabbled in politics and mastered communications in a similar way to Ronald Reagan. He’s correct when he claims that MAGA is a grassroots movement that captured the imaginations of the “forgotten Americans.”   No, MAGA brought on board former Democrat constituencies. The question will be whether other pols have the magic it takes to motivate these new Republican voters to participate and back the heir apparent.   Thomas mentioned Haley and Youngkin, but would either fill Trump’s shoes? Theoretically, Haley would start as a favorite for the 2028 nomination. She’s the “next in line” in a party that honors runner ups in ensuing presidential cycles. Further, she’s good on the stump, appeals to groups that Trump didn’t do well with and will be young enough to impress voters looking to replace an 82-year-old president once he’s run his course.   I just don’t see Nikki catching on. She’s too old-style Republican in an age when the party has changed drastically. As cackling Kamala herself would say, “there’s no going back.” The MAGA grassroots will look for somebody with Trump-like qualities as well as his America First platform.   Names? How about Josh Hawley. Or Tom Cotton. Or a mid-forties J.D. Vance (after a term as Trump’s vice president)?   And then there’s Ron DeSantis, who will have more experience as one of the nation’s most successful governors. Trump and the Floridian appear to have become friends again, which will be important.   Are Haley and Trump friends? I wouldn’t say so. Do you think Trump is going to support someone who he doesn’t believe will cherish his legacy and continue the mission?   Nikki is and always has been a political opportunist. She’s hanging around and saying nice things about Trump simply to preserve any semblance of competitiveness she has in Donald Trump’s Republican Party. Time and four years of another Trump term will separate the pretenders from the challengers.   The Republican establishment is probably as low as it’s been since the early days of Ronald Reagan’s presidency, but it doesn’t mean they’ve gone away. Or that they’ll give up. Whoever seeks to fill Trump’s shoes at the end of his second presidency must take on his spirit as well as his agenda. The future is uncertain for the establishment. Time will tell who emerges. Joe Biden economy inflation Biden cognitive decline gas prices, Nancy Pelosi Biden senile Kamala Harris candidacy Donald Trump campaign Harris Trump debates J.D. Vance Kamala vice president Speaker Mike Johnson Donald Trump assassination Donald Trump 2024 presidential election Tim Walz

Objectivism is the formal name author Ayn Rand gave to her philosophical system, and it was a whole system, with positions on everything from the validity of the senses to the nature of abstractions to the factual basis for morality to the psychological function of art. Her pro-capitalist politics was only a part of this larger system which stressed the primacy of the individual and individual striving for excellence and achievement as the source of human wellbeing. In Ms. Rand’s celebrated book Atlas Shrugged  she posited a dystopian future in which the welfare state and what we would today call political correctness had become so oppressive that the world’s creators, entrepreneurs, inventors, industrialists and most diligent workers were persuaded by the mysterious John Galt to drop out and disappear from society. In Rand’s vision of the future the country, bereft of their competence and creativity, soon fell into chaos, overcome by the incompetence and self-dealing of those who benefited from a corrupt system which very much resembled our current self-appointed elite’s Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI) schemes. As the Biden-Harris Democrats moved further toward undisguised Marxism the notion that conservatives might want to follow in the footsteps of Ayn Rand’s imaginary John Galt gained currency. Marxist Democrats were clearly on the other side as the authors of DEI and other oppressive policies. However, establishment Republicans were indifferent (even hostile) to those at the base of the economic pyramid who were most likely to suffer from elite politician-made economic disasters and to be oppressed by the abandonment of meritocracy in favor of DEI and political correctness. For an example, see a cover article  in National Review  by Kevin D. Williamson, wherein the foundational publication of the conservative movement sought to explain in Malthusian terms why the “benighted white working class” should just blow away and die. Of course, for the average working family there is no idyllic “Galt’s Gulch” where they can join the world’s creators, innovators and entrepreneurs in a safe retreat. But the idea of the average guy on the street saying, “screw it” and disengaging from society and civic pursuits gained traction through the absence of sympathy for their plight at the highest levels of society, and in both political parties. Then along came Donald Trump to challenge both the idea of dropping out and the notion that our self-appointed elite oppressors could not be defeated. The result became a movement that was the complete inverse of Atlas Shrugged . While many elite creators and entrepreneurs, such as most of Hollywood, Coke, Delta Airlines, Kellog foods, etc. bought into DEI and joined the oppressors, or like Chick-fil-A, simply disengaged from the battle, the equivalent of dropping out, the “little guys” at the grassroots of the MAGA Movement decided to take back their country. Here’s what Newt Gingrich told the Heritage Foundation in a 2017 speech:   I'm arguing he [Donald Trump] is an anti-John Galt. If you look at Atlas Shrugged , John Galt is a billionaire who withdraws from society because he's so sick of the welfare state and so sick of redistribution and so sick of the idea that creative people are being dragged down by noncreative people. It is both defensive and cowardly. All of these people are so incompetent that he's withdrawing from the fight. They are going to go on strike and all the creative people are going to refuse to be creative and society will grind down. This might have seemed plausible if you read The New York Times  coverage of the Soviet Union.   [However] where John Galt retreats, Trump attacks.   Where John Galt goes to a mountain fastness, Trump goes to the American people.   Where John Galt withdraws, Trump says let's have a movement.   John Galt says it's over and all we can do is hold up in the mountain fastness, Trump says why don't we make an American great again?   It's a wonderful civil overlay that says the road to opportunity is to arouse the American people and with them, take back their country and he is living it out. That makes him, I think, an extraordinary figure…   He knew was going to be vicious, nasty and personal because it had always been that way in New York. He said trying to lead America is worth paying the price both financially and personally.   He announced, we can solve our problems, we can make America great again. He went to the American people, aroused their spirit and gave them hope.   Trump is an optimist where Galt was a pessimist…   I think, as is often the case, Newt was on to something and in Tuesday’s election Donald Trump defeated the Democrats and John Galt and the forces of pessimism. 2024 Election 2024 Election Kamala Harris campaign Military Readiness Cultural Marxism Hispanic male voters Male African-American voters Democrat contributions price gouging price controls first-time home buyers 25th Amendment public housing ActBlue donations Donald Trump campaign Kamala Harris campaign Kamala Harris senate record

The 2024 election is over. Many have waited a long time for this moment, and not a lot of us could pinpoint exactly when the campaign even began. Along the way, there’ve been more twists and turns than a mountain road, more ups and downs than a roller coaster and more starts, stops and reversals than a carnival fun house’s hall of mirrors. Or a corn maze at a pumpkin patch. Something like that.   As for what happens after, we won’t have to wait long to find out. The real question on many folks’ mind today is what happens to the MAGA movement from now on with Trump being constitutionally ineligible – or age prevented – from running again.   In a piece titled, “‘I Think We’re in Trouble’: Is There a Future for MAGA After Trump?”, liberal politics editor David Siders wrote at Politico before the election :   “’We need you!’ yelled another, Deb Testa, who was standing behind me and who, when Trump mentioned Harris, said, ‘We do need to bring hanging back.’   “One thing to consider about MAGA, Testa told me, was that it’s hard to tell anymore ‘who the real Trump train, or Vance train, supporters are,’ because MAGA has become so large and diffuse. When Trump is gone, she said, ‘I think the Trump train will dwindle. A lot of people are in it for the hype.’ The result, she said, might be a smaller, more ‘purified’ version of the movement, and one ‘willing to do whatever it takes, those that remain.’   “Too many people, she said, were drawn to Trump’s rallies for the ‘concert-like effect.’”   Alas, now the speculation begins. What will MAGA-nation do when Trump finally hangs up the microphone? Thoughts vary about the movement’s staying power, but anyone who offers an opinion, if they’re being completely honest, concedes that they don’t have a clue.   What if the movement were in its waning days now? Here’s a fun mental exercise: Imagine Donald Trump’s 2024 campaign had never existed .   Yup. What if there were no “Make America Great Again” 2024 campaign? How different would the world be?   What would’ve caused the 2024 Trump effort to disappear? It’s not because of the “usual” reasons Trump haters and establishment media members cite while fantasizing about a Trump-less world. No, Trump didn’t belatedly grow a conscience after the January 6, 2021 “tourism riot” and, instead of amping up his political operation for 2024, opted to retire and cower in the background or remain at the fringes of American politics. And no, senile Joe’s and cackling Kamala Harris’s witch hunt lawfare campaign against the former president didn’t succeed and successfully wear down his resolve to Make America Great Again.   Nothing the Democrats or media could ever engineer would’ve caused Trump not to run this year. To have that effect, it had to be something systematic or existential. And no, there wasn’t a death or health reason or a sudden uprising in the Republican ranks that ultimately discouraged the 45th president from attempting to become the 47th.   Realistically speaking, the only thing that would’ve kept Trump from mounting a campaign in 2024 is if he had won the 2020 election . Yup. In this hypothetical, Trump’s election challenges were successful at the end of 2020, investigations unearthed massive fraud and other irregularities, mail-in ballots were given a thorough recount with millions tossed out and, at long last, Trump was declared the victor.   What would’ve transpired if Trump would’ve stayed in place?   It goes without saying the world would be a very different place today if Trump presided over a second term. January 6 would’ve just been a date when Congress gathered to count the Electoral Votes. Then-Vice President Mike Pence would’ve done his constitutional duty without a hitch and Democrats would’ve more or less accepted the outcome and continued on their COVID-era habit of contesting everything Trump did and laid the groundwork for 2024 by attempting to consolidate behind one presidential contender.   Ashley Babbitt would still be alive. So would all the victims of illegal aliens who were permitted to remain in the country without legal sanction. Millions would’ve never tried to cross the well-patrolled border. The fentanyl problem would’ve been reduced immeasurably. Tens of thousands of Americans would still be alive today and contributing to the economy that Trump would’ve improved.   Mexico’s government, under the threat of tariffs, would be cooperating in patrolling the border. Trade between the countries would be fair and competitive and friendly.   Senile Joe Biden would’ve gathered his legal team to challenge the election and crooked liberal lawyer extraordinaire Mark Elias would’ve received more than his share of establishment media spotlight by claiming that Trump “stole” the election somehow. When his legal avenues closed, senile Joe would’ve attended Trump’s second inauguration, then booked an AMTRAK train north to Delaware, all the while joking with acquaintances about how he intended to run again in 2024.   We would’ve never heard of “Let’s go Brandon!” or “Dark Brandon”.   Biden would’ve been supported in his lavish retirement lifestyle by Hunter, the middle-aged lad’s laptop largely forgotten about. Tony Bobulinski would’ve been suppressed by the establishment media. Then, senile Joe would’ve hired a ghost writer to detail his non-historic 2020 run during COVID and would spend the rest of his days blaming Trump for his political demise.   Cackling Kamala Harris would’ve never become vice president and thereafter be known as the diversity, equity and inclusion candidate that she is, and spent the next few years speaking to whatever groupings she could muster, laying the groundwork for a 2024 presidential candidacy that would never take flight.   COVID 19 would’ve eventually petered out and been treated as a “normal” flu bug. President Trump would’ve opened up the economy quickly, fired Dr. Anthony Fauci and brought in alternative views to guide his COVID policy. The economy wouldn’t have needed a hugely expensive “rescue” plan, people would’ve gone back to work – without masks – and school children would not be as behind as they are now.   After Trump’s second inauguration, Democrats would’ve conducted an “autopsy” to determine what went wrong in 2020. Nancy Pelosi would’ve ruled the warring factions within the party with an iron fist and become the most powerful Democrat still in power. None of the Biden non-cabinet members would’ve stayed in government. Elizabeth “Pocohontas” Warren would’ve given up her seat in the senate instead of winning reelection this week. Senator Joe Manchin would’ve resigned and not run for reelection in 2018, giving Republicans an additional seat.   With Trump still in power, Democrats would’ve gone full-bore socialist instead of pretending they still listen to the middle class. The party would be made up of poor welfare grifters, government employees and educated, entitled elites and do-gooders as well as the “woke” groups inspired by LGBTQIA++ influencers and freaks. Billionaires would keep the Democrats well-funded in perpetuity.   The federal midterm elections would’ve produced an authentic red wave instead of a trickle as it did in November, 2022. New Republican majorities in both chambers would’ve completed the border wall, illegal immigration would’ve been reduced to a fraction of what it turned out to be under Biden-Harris and the southern border would not have been the major issue that it was in 2024.   There would’ve been peace in the Middle East, with the Abraham Accords having been adopted and added to by non-Iran Muslim countries that would’ve figured out that it was more to their benefit to cooperate with Israel than attempt to win a war with the Jewish state. Meanwhile, Iran, bankrupted and desperate after several more years of crushing sanctions, would’ve needed to confront the growing resistance movement within its own borders.   Jewish voters would now be about 50-50 Republicans. Democrats would make up for their numbers by placating the whims of the Rashida Tlaib-led Muslim terrorist factions.   Afghanistan would’ve reverted to Taliban rule, with a number of important differences. Trump would’ve held on to Bagram Air base, where a scaled back American military force would monitor the backwards country for flareups and to stifle terrorist-cell activity. Though hardly friendly, Afghanistan would be stable and not constitute a threat.   China would not have been emboldened to threaten U.S. interests in the region. Taiwan would not feel threatened by Chinese invasion. South Korea and Japan would’ve considered adding nuclear weapons so as to not rely solely on the American nuclear umbrella for protection. Kim Jong Un would’ve continued his belligerent threats but self-neutralize and eventually consider economic reforms encouraged by President Trump.   Vladimir Putin, recognizing that it wasn’t worth it to invade Ukraine, would’ve bided his time until after the 2028 election to see if Democrats won so as to provide a safe window for the Russian dictator to realize his aggressive aims. NATO countries, under pressure from President Trump, would’ve contributed 2 % of their GDP’s to maintain their defenses. NATO would’ve become a real alliance rather than counting on the Americans to shelter them no matter what.   The American economy, under President Trump, would’ve never been plagued by inflation and high interest rates. The national debt would’ve still topped one trillion dollars a year but would show signs of potentially lessening in the near future with increased tax revenues brought on by Trump’s low tax/high growth policies. Congress would’ve remained dysfunctional. Democrats, using scare tactics after the Dobbs  decision, would demagogue the abortion issue to death while making things difficult for Trump.   The establishment media would’ve invented more scandals to try and bring the New Yorker-turned Floridian down if Trump were in the White House. Liz Cheney, never having the chance to stir up a second impeachment, would’ve still been defeated by the people of Wyoming in the 2022 primary for being a worthless RINO. Adam Kinzinger would still be crying. He’d be out, too.   Instead of working on a third presidential campaign, Trump would’ve stayed out of the 2024 presidential primary race. Mike Pence would’ve run for president but still faced stiff competition from both the Republican establishment – he would’ve been seen as too much like Trump – and conservatives, led by Florida Governor Ron DeSantis would assume the leadership of MAGA.   J.D. Vance would’ve adopted Trump as a good president and won election to his senate seat in Ohio. Mitch McConnell would’ve fallen out of favor with Trump and would’ve lost his leadership post, likely to Florida’s Rick Scott, who would’ve become Majority/Minority Leader. The Senate would still be nearly evenly divided, but vice president Pence would’ve only broken a few ties.   President Trump would’ve instructed the RNC to begin its election get out the vote efforts after the 2020 election. Ronna Romney McDaniel would’ve been replaced much earlier, conservatives’ patience with her failures having run out long ago.   The establishment media would’ve redoubled its efforts to get Trump, but lacking an organized lawfare operation – and the power of the federal justice department – would’ve had much less success. Trump’s final year of his second term would’ve been relatively quiet by his standards. With most of his MAGA agenda already having been passed/and or implemented, Trump would’ve contented himself with shoring up his political legacy.   Such is what would’ve happened if Trump had won in 2020. Is there a hint of what will occur in four years when Trump is done? Joe Biden economy inflation Biden cognitive decline gas prices, Nancy Pelosi Biden senile Kamala Harris candidacy Donald Trump campaign Harris Trump debates J.D. Vance Kamala vice president Speaker Mike Johnson Donald Trump assassination Donald Trump 2024 presidential election Tim Walz

BRICS is a consortium of countries led by China that seeks to build alternatives to the dominance of Western institutions such as the World Bank, Group of Seven, and the UN Security Council. BRICS is the acronym of the founding countries: Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa. BRICS met in Kazan, Russia, on October 22 for a three-day conference hosted by Russian President Vladimir Putin. Thirty-six countries, including twenty heads of state, attended. Putin held 20  bilateral  meetings with attendees, including Chinese President Xi, Indian Prime Minister Modi, and South African President Ramaphosa. President Lula of Brazil did not attend due to health issues. BRICS is now BRICS+ as it expanded its membership to include Egypt, Ethiopia, Iran, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates (UAE). Argentina was invited to join but declined because its new president, Javier Milei, proclaimed full alignment with the “ free  nations of the West.” Saudi Arabia has not officially acknowledged membership. In 2023, the ten BRICS+ members invited thirteen nations to join as “ partners ” with no voting rights: Turkey, Indonesia, Algeria, Belarus, Cuba, Bolivia, Malaysia, Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan, Thailand, Vietnam, Nigeria, and Uganda. Venezuela was absent from the new partner list because President Lula of Brazil was upset by Venezuela’s lack of supporting public data verifying President Maduro’s recent election.   The U.S. dollar’s dominance as the world's reserve and trade currency gives America an outsized influence over the global finance system.  Most of the world’s trade is conducted in the U.S. dollar. This allows the United States to impose economic sanctions against countries such as Russia, China, North Korea, and Iran. BRICS+ wants to weaken the dollar to reduce U.S. influence and promote trade in local currencies. China is advocating for the use of its renminbi currency as an alternative to the dollar. African participation in the 2024 BRICS+ demonstrated African interest in the bloc’s economic opportunities, rather than becoming embroiled in geopolitics. Some are wary of China’s influence, representing 60%  of the bloc’s gross national products. Egypt, Ethiopia, and South Africa touted new economic cooperation with Russia and China. BRICS+ annual declaration focused on the threat of climate change, the economic toll on member states of economic sanctions, and controlling misinformation.  Ironically, the report's authors include the world’s worst polluters and media censors (China and India). The report failed to condemn Russia’s war against Ukraine and China's committing genocide against its Muslim Uygher citizens. BRICS+ is seeking changes in the U.N.  Security Council to include India, Japan, Brazil, and Germany as permanent members and to expand non-permanent memberships to more African countries. Summary The  ten  BRICS countries represent more than a quarter of the global economy and almost half of the world’s population. With the addition of ten new partners, BRICS+’s influence in world affairs is growing. African countries are playing a more critical role, with China announcing a “no tariffs” policy for imports from Africa. Many other “Global South” countries are also vying to join BRICS+. The United States and the West should participate in BRICS countries as they develop their economies and improve the lives of their citizens. At the same time, the U.S. needs to follow policies of “reciprocity” and significantly increase “gray zone” actions by promoting capitalism, democracy, and human rights. China’s predatory lending policies in the Belt and Road Initiative should be exploited. Economic sanctions have a role in the U.S. policy mix but should be administered discreetly. Sanctions against Cuba have not worked for sixty years. They have generated anti-American feelings throughout the world with a reputation for bullying. Sanctions on Russian oil and gas have not slowed Russia’s international sales but have changed trade patterns. Sanctions/tariffs against China are in American strategic interests, as China is an existential threat. Putin demonstrated that the war in Ukraine and Western sanctions have not isolated  Russia’s role in the world. If anything, Russia’s relations with China, India, Iran, and North Korea have been strengthened. Though not a cohesive bloc, BRICS+ have common grievances against the West: ●     Western hegemony and hypocrisy ●     Conflicts in the Middle East and Ukraine ●     Weaponization of U.S. sanctions ●     Dollar outsize influence on local currencies Action The United States should: 1. Treat others as they are treating America. If a country is conducting actions that are not friendly, then reciprocate. 2. Increase gray zone actions promoting American values via media outreach, covert actions, and diplomacy. 3. Strengthen existing alliances by eliminating countries not sharing the alliance ethos (e.g., Turkey out of NATO). 4. Promote Judeo-Christian values of an individual’s worth (human rights). 5. Increase the U.S. defense budget and supporting infrastructure. Peace Through Strength! We Win, They Lose. Author Laurence F. Sanford  is a veteran of the United States Navy and the Central Intelligence Agency and now serves as Senior Analyst for the American Security Council Foundation. Please support ASCF’s education efforts by donating to the American Security Council Foundation at www.ascf.us . Gray Zone Tactics ByteDance TikTok Big tech Facebook tracking data collection Treasury Department’s Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS) Biden administration national security Green channel Chinese Communist Party Confucius Institutes Penn Biden Center for Diplomacy and Global Engagement Chinese Students and Scholars Association BRICS, Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa

Arizona a Tight Race as Election Day Closes— Trump Victory Likely, Senate, House Races Hang in the Balance As the Presidential Election of 2024 draws to its conclusion, at this hour likely to favor President Donald Trump with over 270 electoral college votes projected for the Republican by DecisionDeskHQ and Fox News , the state of Arizona has yet to complete counting its votes with Trump leading Vice President Kamala Harris by 0.9%. In the pivotal race for the U.S. Senate seat of retiring Senator Kyrsten Sinema (I-AZ), Republican Kari Lake is trailing Democrat Congressman Ruben Gallego by six points and has narrowed the gap by more than half over the course of the night with additional ballot drops due throughout the early morning. According to the Associated Press , only three of Arizona’s seats in the U.S. House of Representatives have been projected, those being District 3 for Democrat Yassamin Ansari, District 7 for Democrat Rep. Raul Grijalva, and District 9 for Republican Congressman Paul Gosar. The closest races remaining in contention are incumbent Republican Rep. David Schwiekert defending his seat against Democrat Amish Shah, and incumbent Republican Rep. Juan Ciscomani defending his seat from Democrat Kirsten Engel. In both races, the Democrats are leading within margin of error as of this report. However, as previously reported by ConservativeHQ , Arizona Secretary of State Adrian Fontes warned early in the evening that Arizona’s “three buckets” of votes would not be tallied by the end of the night, with only the first of three released at 8 p.m. local time and the second to come at some point after midnight representing the Election day ballots and a third “bucket” coming within the next few days of “late early” ballots or mail-in ballots dropped in lockboxes. With only 51% of precincts reporting as of this article at approximately 1:00 a.m. EST. Montana Called With Less than 10% of the Vote Counted, Democrat Senator John Tester Defeated  In the State of Montana, the election for President of the United States was called with barely a percentage point of the vote accounted for, however, the battle for the U.S. Senate seat of incumbent Democrat Sen. John Tester is still in contention as election day draws to a close with just 20 percent of precincts reporting as of 1 p.m. EST. As of this report Republican Senate nominee, Former Navy SEAL Tim Sheehy is leading Tester by nearly 20,000 votes, however, the more populous metro areas of Bozeman, Billings and Missoula have not yet been counted. As reported by WAVY , The Associated Press declared President Donald Trump the winner at 10:00 p.m. EST, rewarding the state’s 4 Electoral College Votes, increased by one in the 2020 Census to the Republican nominee. The state also gained an additional seat in the U.S. House of Representatives as a result and Republican State Auditor Troy Downing has been declared the winner for the new seat, defeating Democrat John Driscoll with 71.4% of the vote. As of this report, Montana District 1 incumbent Republican Rep. Ryan Zinke is trailing Democrat challenger Monica Tranel by approximately 4,700 votes in a race that is too close to call. Though Downing has not officially announced victory, he was congratulated by Rep. Zinke who wrote via X, “Congratulations to Congressman-elect Troy   Downing ! Looking forward to having you as my wingman brother.” Republican Governor Greg Gianforte handily won re-election against Democratic challenger, Ryan Busse by a margin of over 30 pts. In a post to X, Gianforte thanked the state and appeared to declare victory writing, “Thank you, Montana! Serving as your governor is the greatest honor of my life. I'm grateful and humbled that you've placed your trust in us for another four years.” Nevada's Races in Question with Zero Returns Until Midnight After Election Day As of midnight, the morning after Election Day, the ballots from Nevada are still being counted. With an estimated 80.5% of the ballots in according to The Washington Post, the Silver State reportedly has President Donald Trump leading the Presidential Election against Democrat Vice President Kamala Harris by over 53,000 votes and Republican Sam Brown leading incumbent Democrat Senator Jacky Rosen by approximately 9,000 votes. As reported by WaPo , one race in the U.S. House of Representatives out of the four representing Nevada has been called in favor of Republican incumbent Rep. Mark Amodie defeated independent Greg Kidd by 22 points in the second district. In the other three districts, Democrat incumbent Reps. Dina Titus, Susie Lee and Steven Horsford are leading their Republican opponents. Titus leads Republican mark Robertson by 4.5 points, and Lee leads Republican Drew Johnson by an extremely narrow 1.4 point margin, while Horsford leads his Republican opponent John Lee by 8.6 points. As the races stand at nearly 2 a.m. EST, it appears likely that Brown can reasonably defeat Rosen securing an additional seat in an already established Republican Senate majority. In the presidential race, it appears likely that Nevada will contribute its 6 Electoral College votes to cement the projected victory of President Trump. Matthew Holloway is a contributor for  Conservative HQ .  Follow him on X  for his latest stories, or email tips to  Matthew@theconservativefreelancer.com . 2024 Election Get out the vote Trump campaign American economy jobs created government jobs labor market health insurance cost inflation shrinkflation savings rate

…one last point is that of the Nazi leaders, all of them knew what they’d got into in the East, so there’s a sort of ‘we burnt out bridges behind us.’ It’s like a conspiracy of a gang of criminals in a way, that they knew what they’d done and so there was no future for them once that regime was over. So hence that led to the actions of desperados in this regime in the very last phase, which increased at the same time the terror, and made it impossible for anybody to act against the regime. Sir Ian Kershaw, British Historian As we went to bed early this morning Donald Trump appears to have the upper hand, as Kamala Harris was behind in the Electoral College count, however, several Democrat governed states had refused to release final vote totals. Americans naïve enough to think that even though it appears Republicans have won the 2024 election there will be a return to what was normal life in our country on Monday, November 7, 2016, should consider why Democrats can never allow that to happen. If the norms and laws that were in place the day before the 2016 election were to be reestablished, their crimes would be exposed and being voted out of office would be the least of their problems.   And no, we are not talking about the Biden family crimes. Their corruption and criminality, in matters both large and petty are the least of the Democrats’ worries.   While accepting as much as $30 million in thinly disguised bribes from the Communist Chinese and oligarchs in Ukraine, Romania and elsewhere, and engaging in the trafficking of prostitutes and drugs by Hunter Biden and other members of the Biden crime syndicate seems like a big deal, those crimes pale in comparison to the crimes against the American polity and ordinary Americans the Democrats and their Deep State allies have committed since 2016.   Consider the damage the creation, and hiding, of a huge government censorship apparatus  has done to trust in the federal government, especially the Department of Homeland Security, the Centers for Disease Control and the public health agencies.   Rather than encourage scientific inquiry and debate to support their claims about COVID, the Left simply censored – and in many cases attempted to destroy – ordinary doctors, scientists and researchers who wanted to investigate the origins of the SARS COVID-19 virus and the efficacy and safety of the various vaccines and other potential treatments. That was almost the polar opposite of what the Founders intended when they drafted the First Amendment and incorporated it into the Constitution.   And the government censorship and attempts at personal destruction  didn’t stop at those questioning the Party line on COVID.   The government censorship and persecution of “election deniers” reached a level not seen since Democrat Woodrow Wilson went after opponents of the U.S. entry into World War I.   Across the country any public official who has questioned the integrity of the post-COVID system of electronic voting has been targeted for censorship, Democrat-sponsored lawfare, and in some cases criminal prosecution.   Indeed, the Democrats and their allies in the Leftwing media created a new word and with it a new crime – election “denialism” to demonize those who demanded an inquiry into election irregularities in 2020 and 2022. In Michigan, Georgia, Colorado and Arizona individual citizens and local officials who questioned the security of elections, tried to expose flaws in the system or who participated in challenges to the results have found themselves charged with crimes by Democrat prosecutors, even as proof of the problems with electronic voting and universal mail-in ballots grew. Go here for the Heritage Foundation database on vote fraud.   In support of the demonstrably false claim that there is no fraud in American elections the Democrats deployed a new high-tech agency of the federal government – the Cybersecurity & Infrastructure Security Agency – to gaslight or intimidate American citizens, take your pick, that there’s no problem with our elections . In a mere six-month investigation  House Republicans proved CISA exceeded its mandate and conducted unconstitutional operations to surveil and censor Americans' speech on social media.  The report entitled, " The Weaponization of CISA: How a 'Cybersecurity' Agency Colluded with Big Tech and 'Disinformation' Partners to Censor Americans ," outlines collusion between CISA, Big Tech, and government-funded third parties to conduct censorship by proxy and cover up CISA's unconstitutional activities.   Imagine what would be revealed if a Republican President were to be elected and cooperated with a Republican Congress to expose what else CISA has been up to in the guise of protecting Americans from “misinformation.”   However, the greatest crimes that Democrats cannot allow to be exposed are the crimes committed by the law enforcement and intelligence agencies that were politicized by Barack Obama and the Democrats and have remained under their sway regardless of who occupies the White House. The tell of the magnitude of their crimes is that since Republicans regained the majority in the House of Representatives not one of the agency Directors or Secretaries have answered one question about their agency’s involvement in the January 6, 2021, Capitol riot, even refusing to confirm or deny the self-evident fact that they had agents embedded in the crowd at the Stop the Steal rally.   Indeed, the last really substantive comments offered on the weaponization of the federal government’s law enforcement and intelligence agencies by an Executive Branch official was by former Attorney General William Barr who in 2019 alluded to the political motivation  of the lies and abuse in the fraudulent FISA applications used by the Obama FBI to open investigations into Trump.   At that time FBI Director Wray attempted to differentiate  “surveillance” from “spying” and contradicted his own boss, Attorney General Barr. Since that time Democrats have continued to stonewall any investigation into the domestic political operations of the FBI and other federal agencies and even quietly paid off  one of the miscreants identified in the Trump campaign spying abuses.   The above are just a tip of the iceberg recitation of the crimes Democrats and their Deep State allies have committed against the American people beginning in 2016.   Imagine what would be revealed if the Department of Homeland Security’s books and email were opened to reveal who and how many dollars are involved in the Cyber Threat Intelligence League (CTIL), the Election Integrity Partnership (EIP), and the Virality Project (VP) or opening our southern border? Or how the Democrats use federal voter assistance  to manipulate elections in the 16 or 17 key counties they must win to hold on to the White House. The tell there is that so far, the Biden administration has refused to hand over to Congress  any information about how a Biden Executive Order on voter assistance worked or where the funds to implement it came from. Many of the Nazis’ worst atrocities and most brutal acts of oppression came when they recognized World War II was lost. As public opinion has shifted against Harris, Biden and the Democrats, like the Nazis when they recognized the war was lost, Democrats and their Deep State allies won’t stop using a weaponized federal government to cling to power. On the contrary, Democrats will use every tool of executive power, lawfare, and outright fraud because, like the Nazis, they can’t afford to lose and be held accountable for their crimes. 2024 Election Kamala Harris campaign Military Readiness Cultural Marxism Hispanic male voters Male African-American voters Democrat contributions price gouging price controls first-time home buyers 25th Amendment public housing ActBlue donations Donald Trump campaign Kamala Harris campaign Kamala Harris senate record

Now what? There’s a weird feeling this morning among Trump supporters, not only because the Republican candidate prevailed in the 2024 election after two solid years of fundraising, speaking, courtroom appearances, campaigning, nearly getting assassinated – twice – as well as endless media appearances and questions and accusations and recriminations and enough mudslinging to build entire adobe civilizations (if left baking long enough to dry and stack).   On the whole, it’s a good feeling, like the hubbub wasn’t all for nothing. But the crushing weight of expectations will arguably be harder to lift for the 78-year-old president elect (how many people have ever held the term twice?) now that the “easy” part has concluded. Every politician makes loads of promises during the campaign phase, but the nation is miserably divided with little hope of bringing people together, at least before Inauguration Day in two months.   A president in his “second” term can do much of what he seeks to accomplish without worrying about running for reelection. But keeping an eye on public opinion will be important, now more than ever.   In an opinion piece titled, “If Trump wins … speed will be of the essence,” Michael McKenna wrote at The Washington Times  before the election this week:   “Three final thoughts bear notice. First, when the president is a lame duck, pending elections become the enemy. If the Republicans hold the House and Senate by narrow margins after next week, the Democrats would likely retake control in 2026. That likelihood would alter expectations of both prospective appointees and members of Congress. On the presidential level, the election to replace Mr. Trump would begin about a month after he takes the oath of office.   “Second, it seems reasonable to assume that there will be civil unrest in the wake of the election. That will drain energy and focus from the executive. Third, various associates of the president are virtually guaranteed to say or do things that will draw attention and resources away from the actual agenda.   “To address and compensate for all of this, a crisp transition and a coherent and well-understood order of priorities is essential. Like Ms. Harris, Mr. Trump and his advisers have a lot of things they want and need to accomplish. A quick start, especially with respect to Congress, taxes and personnel, are irreducible requirements. If Mr. Trump wins [this] week, speed will be of the essence.”   What, too early to do a reality check? The proverbial ink isn’t even dry from yesterday’s election and yet Washington veterans are already talking about the obstacles Trump will face once he assumes control of the executive branch a couple months’ hence.   McKenna, as he usually does, presented interesting dilemmas the new/old president will confront from this time forward. Trump has spent the better part of three-plus years assembling a campaign team to do the work of returning him to office, with actual governing plans having taken a backseat to the “just win, baby” attitude necessary and to not put the proverbial cart before the horse.   I can’t say for sure, but here’s thinking Trump didn’t do much measuring of the drapes in the Oval Office prior to this point, though he’s undoubtedly familiar with the dimensions down to the slimmest eighth of an inch. But after a day or so “cooling off” period between the campaign trail and making firm plans to shift everything in his life back to his “old” house on Pennsylvania avenue, reality kicks in.   Some speculate Trump would have a handbook somewhere which he can dust off and start implementing stuff without a hitch. But if you’ve paid attention since he first launched his (latest) campaign two years ago, the former president has made a raft full of original campaign promises, basically making his old MAGA One agenda obsolete. To put it plainly, senile Joe Biden and cackling Kamala Harris have befouled Washington pretty badly, so not only must Trump begin the process of implementing new policies, he’ll need to get the existing ones working again.   And yes, addressing McKenna’s first point above, which is a valid one, Trump must battle the apprehensions of his administration’s appointees that their time in Washington will be cut short by his lame duck status. I’ve argued all along that Trump won’t have trouble finding qualified prospective public servants to fill positions, but the political situation won’t make things easier for them once in place.   The “upcoming” midterm election will already be on the minds of Republican House members and senators who just won reelection or are making plans to come to Washington, themselves uprooting their lives to try and fulfill the ambitious MAGA 2 agenda that has serious opposition, from both Democrats and the bureaucracy.   Realistically speaking, Democrats won’t be in the mood to give Trump anything in his first hundred days. Heck, if it would slow things down, they probably wouldn’t even show up for work. The “no” electronic vote button will get plenty of use under the auspices of a very bitter and angry “Chucky” Schumer and Hakeem Jeffries, who will wield real power for the first time.   Put it this way: I doubt the surviving members of “The Squad” will be lining up to do lunch with the Republican majority.   Further, it’s never too early to talk about Trump’s replacement in Republican party circles, which will basically boil down to what’s left of the party establishment versus a diverse (in terms of ideologies) collection of MAGA adherents, all who are probably, at this very moment, jotting down their arguments for why they’re more Trump-ian than the man himself. Some will likely champion the populist Trump policies they admire, and the other group will approach from a traditionally conservative direction.   Trump also won’t have much time to secure public opinion, Americans having repeatedly been promised that real results would follow a Trump victory. Trump himself has always been serious about keeping his campaign guarantees, but some of them, this time around, will have to wait in line while other priorities are dealt with first.   Trump’s famous “Day One dictator” missives -- closing the border and opening up energy exploration -- can be sent on their way with a couple waves of his executive pen. I’m not an expert in how things work, but here’s guessing it will take longer to accomplish these goals than a mere say-so. Ditto for ending the Ukraine war, though a few conversations with the parties involved, together with dangling the full faith and credit of the United States government would surely get Ukraine president Volodymyr Zelenskyy’s attention.   The new Republican president won’t have to concern himself, necessarily, about who replaces him at the end of term two. But it’s also a sure bet he’ll want input on the matter. I don’t see a repeat of Ronald Reagan’s position in 1988 when he stayed clear of the process until the party voters had spoken before endorsing his vice president, establishmentarian George H.W. Bush, to carry on his successful legacy.   The MAGA mission is different, even from the great Ronald Reagan’s. “Morning in America” was a 1984 movement and was derailed to some extent by losses in the 1986 midterms and the Iran Contra scandal. Democrats will try for a historic repeat, and it will take all of Trump’s political skills to navigate around them. The next four years will not be all that dissimilar to his first four in that respect.   Expect to hear plenty about how Trump is a “convicted felon” and “no one is above the law” and, if, as expected, the president unplugs the special counsel witch hunts against him, that Democrats won’t simply allow the matter to die with Jack Smith’s creeping to the background. Ditto for Fanni Willis in Georgia.   What’s the old song? “We’ve only just begun”? I can hear Karen Carpenter singing it now.   The establishment media likely will fully train its aim on Trump and the new Republican majorities in Congress (in the senate and hopefully in the House as well), if they aren’t substantial. Depending on how cooperative the GOP establishment chooses to be, there could be a number of reforms possible at the beginning of next year, a tax code update probably the most likely. Budget related bills bypass the filibuster requirement, and since no Democrat would be caught dead voting to “cut taxes for billionaires”, it will depend on Republican votes alone for passage.   Though seriously weakened by the dominance of Trump during the past eight years, the Republican ruling elites won’t go away. They’ll view a Trump second term as an opportunity to reassert themselves and take back control of the ideological direction, just like H.W. Bush did in the latter part of Reagan’s final year.   There will be a significant power struggle in both wings of the GOP – the pro-MAGA Trump supporters and the wishy-washy establishment losers who, like pesky mold in a dank basement, never quite go away no matter how much they’re scrubbed. They’re convinced they’re right and will surely argue that 2024’s victory would’ve been greater had Trump not messed it up for “electable candidates” in certain jurisdictions.   In other words, Trump will do battle on a number of political fronts. As McKenna wrote, there will be largescale and visible resistance efforts. Alexandria Ocasio Cortez even talked about it recently, that she wouldn’t look forward to another four years in the “resistance”. The only difference being the Democrats aren’t united by one figure to lead the Trump-hating forces any longer.   It definitely won’t be Kamala Harris. Despite all of their hot air, I believe Democrats, especially their elites, never liked the cackling idiot to begin with. It won’t be senile Joe Biden, either, and even the graying Barack Obama burned a lot of his political capital this year. There probably will be a “new generation of Democrat leaders” alright, but who will it be?   The nice thing about an election is its aftermath provides a simmering down period for people to realize that not everything is about politics and the sun will rise tomorrow regardless. Trump now confronts virtually insurmountable obstacles. He’ll do what he can through executive fiat. The rest will depend on popular support and fate. Anyone have a guess as to what will transpire? Joe Biden economy inflation Biden cognitive decline gas prices, Nancy Pelosi Biden senile Kamala Harris candidacy Donald Trump campaign Harris Trump debates J.D. Vance Kamala vice president Speaker Mike Johnson Donald Trump assassination Donald Trump 2024 presidential election Tim Walz