Category: Conservative Review
Billion-Dollar Snack Companies Suddenly Care About Affordability After Jacking Up Prices for Years
‘Could undermine his goal to lower costs for Americans’
Debate: Can JD Vance become the right’s great unifier — or does his VP role stand in the way?
The young conservative movement is experiencing a notable leadership gap amid ongoing chaos in the online right-wing space. Sure, there are passionate influencers and rising political voices, but no one has fully stepped up to unify and guide the broader coalition with a commanding presence.
One person investigative journalist and BlazeTV host Christopher Rufo thinks might be able to step into the role, however, is Vice President JD Vance. But Rufo’s co-host Jonathan Keeperman isn’t sure Vance is up for the job either.
In this episode of “Rufo & Lomez,” the hosts debate whether JD Vance can step up as the unifying leader the conservative movement needs amid escalating chaos.
“I’ve been so far a bit surprised that the vice president hasn’t tried to step into this role,” says Rufo, arguing that Vance has both the “charisma” and the “authority” to effectively lead the movement.
“I’ve known JD over the years. … It does feel like he has some hesitation or maybe even some fear,” he adds.
While Keeperman agrees that Vance “has all of the tools and charisma and … the right talking points” to be an excellent leader, his role as the vice president would actually be a hindrance.
“I don’t think JD Vance should actually do that in his vice presidential position. Not right now. I think it’d be a bit presumptuous. I think people might kind of see it as him stepping in to sort of correct a situation that I think needs to just happen organically,” he counters.
For one, Vance’s position prohibits him from “[speaking] candidly about the administration.”
“Whoever is going to step into this role has to feel credible to this audience, and part of that credibility is going to come from just speaking honestly about all of these different things happening in this ecosystem — whether it’s the different personalities, the ideas, the sort of ideology that’s animating Trump but also the specific actions that the Trump administration is taking,” Keeperman explains.
In other words, the kind of leader people will follow needs to be an outsider who can speak brutal truths about the current administration, and Vance, as Trump’s right-hand man, can’t be that person.
Secondly, President Trump is still the top dog, Keeperman explains. For his VP to assume the authority of this role as the leader of the conservative movement “might not sit well inside of this coalition.”
“Maybe you’re right,” Rufo concedes. “We need some sort of native figure to step up in the same way that Charlie Kirk did, in the same way that Tucker had done.”
To hear more of the conversation, watch the episode above.
Want more from Rufo & Lomez?
To enjoy more of the news through the anthropological lens of Christopher Rufo and Lomez, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.
DOGE didn’t die — it moved to the states
The media and conservative pundits may have buried the Department of Government Efficiency, but they have yet to carve a date of death on its tombstone. While DOGE in Washington may have appeared to insiders as a vanity project, voters saw it as a mandate — one that Republicans at the federal level have largely set aside in favor of politics as usual.
But activists have not forgotten. In red states across the country, they are still demanding accountability. And in Idaho, that pressure is finally producing results.
If Idaho can succeed and follow Florida’s lead, there is no serious reason other red states cannot do the same — unless they are prepared to admit they never intended to keep their promises.
For what appears to be the first time, state legislators serving on Idaho’s DOGE Task Force concluded their 2025 work with a meeting that departed from months of cautious, procedural discussion. Members asked harder questions, voiced long-simmering frustrations, and issued a recommendation that could reshape the state’s fiscal future: urging the full legislature to consider repealing Medicaid expansion, a costly policy that has drained taxpayers of millions.
Red states can’t stall forever
Idaho may not be Florida, where Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis’ DOGE-style reforms have produced consistent wins for fiscal sanity and limited government. But it is doing more than other red states, such as North Dakota, where a DOGE committee stacked with Democrats predictably ignored the voters’ mandate.
The Idaho meeting exposed growing dissatisfaction with the task force’s approach. Over the summer and fall, the committee — charged with identifying inefficiencies — repeatedly deferred to state agencies for suggestions on cuts. Unsurprisingly those agencies offered little beyond cosmetic changes.
Idaho state Rep. Heather Scott (R-LD2, Blanchard) gave voice to that frustration. “What is the goal of this committee?” she asked, pressing colleagues to offer recommendations that actually matter. “Twenty thousand here, 50,000 there, or removing old code is not meaningful efficiency,” Scott said. Repealing Medicaid expansion, she argued, would be one of the “best decisions” the state could make.
Nibbling at the edges
Scott’s experience on the Idaho task force stands in stark contrast to the early federal DOGE efforts, which moved aggressively to slash U.S. Agency for International Development’s workforce, freeze fraudulent payments, and cancel billions in corrupt contracts. By comparison, Idaho’s task force had mostly nibbled at the edges. This recommendation marked its first serious step toward substantive reform.
Another revealing moment came from co-chairman state Sen. Todd Lakey (R-Nampa), who read a letter from a small-business owner offering health insurance to employees. Workers routinely request schedules capped at 20 to 28 hours per week to preserve Medicaid expansion benefits — even though full-time work would require only a modest contribution toward employer-provided coverage.
The result is a perverse incentive structure: businesses struggle to find full-time workers while taxpayers subsidize underemployment. The government fuels workforce shortages through welfare, then spends more taxpayer dollars trying to fix the shortages it created. This welfare-workforce vortex is the opposite of efficiency, and it is spreading nationwide.
The meeting’s most explosive moment came from state Rep. Josh Tanner (R-Eagle), who described Idaho’s Medicaid reimbursement structure as resembling “money laundering.”
Citing analysis from the Paragon Health Institute, Tanner explained how provider assessment fees allow states to inflate Medicaid spending to draw down larger federal matching funds, cycling the money back through enhanced payments. Paragon has described these arrangements as “legalized money laundering” — schemes that shift costs to federal taxpayers while enriching connected providers or funding unrelated priorities.
Nationally supplemental payments now exceed $110 billion annually, siphoning hundreds of billions from taxpayers over a decade.
RELATED: Turn off the money; they’ll leave: Elon Musk nails the border truth
Photo by Kevin Dietsch/Getty Images
DOGE’s second life
My sources tell me that hospital lobbyists went into panic mode after the meeting, urgently contacting Capitol officials to contain the fallout from Tanner’s remarks.
For the first time, the task force aired real frustrations, documented real harms, and named real abuses. That alone offers reason for cautious optimism.
Idaho now has committed conservatives in positions of influence. With the task force’s recommendation to revisit Medicaid expansion heading to the legislature, the state has an opportunity to govern as it campaigns — preserving liberty, restoring accountability, and expanding opportunity.
If Idaho can succeed and follow Florida’s lead, there is no serious reason other red states cannot do the same — unless they are prepared to admit they never intended to keep their promises in the first place.
‘Terrorist scum’: Trump announces Christmas Day strikes in Nigeria in response to persecution of Christians
Christians in Nigeria have faced increased persecution recently. President Trump has landed a major surprise blow against those responsible.
On Christmas Day, President Donald Trump announced a “powerful and deadly strike against ISIS Terrorist Scum in Northwest Nigeria, who have been targeting and viciously killing, primarily, innocent Christians, at levels not seen for many years, and even Centuries!”
‘The symbolism of doing this on Christmas should not be ignored.’
“I have previously warned these Terrorists that if they did not stop the slaughtering of Christians, there would be hell to pay, and tonight, there was,” Trump wrote on Truth Social. “The Department of War executed numerous perfect strikes, as only the United States is capable of doing. Under my leadership, our Country will not allow Radical Islamic Terrorism to prosper.”
Trump’s post concluded, “May God Bless our Military, and MERRY CHRISTMAS to all, including the dead Terrorists, of which there will be many more if their slaughter of Christians continues.”
On X, War Secretary Pete Hegseth confirmed the attack and the Nigerian government’s cooperation with the United States in facilitating the strike.
“The President was clear last month: the killing of innocent Christians in Nigeria (and elsewhere) must end. The [Department of War] is always ready, so ISIS found out tonight — on Christmas. More to come… Grateful for Nigerian government support & cooperation. Merry Christmas!” Hegseth wrote.
Trump previously threatened to “do things in Nigeria that Nigeria is not going to be happy about” and “go into that now disgraced country guns-a-blazing.”
Responding to the announcement, Fox News’ Peter Doocy said, “The symbolism of doing this on Christmas should not be ignored.”
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
Herod promised moderation — and then he slaughtered the innocent
Everyone loves the three wise men at Christmas. Gold, frankincense, myrrh, the star, the long journey — these are the images we place on mantles and church bulletins. But almost no one pauses to consider the politics happening behind the scenes. Matthew’s Gospel is not merely a nativity story; it is a collision of kingdoms. At the center of that collision is a tyrant who sounds far more familiar to modern ears than we might like to admit.
Herod is remembered for one thing: He murdered infants. That is the brutal fact we cannot ignore. But before he unsheathed the sword, Herod did something else — something more subtle, more political, and more recognizable.
Just as Herod spoke the language of worship to mask his intentions, the Democrats speak the language of ‘common sense’ to mask theirs.
He promised moderation. He promised cooperation. He promised unity.
And he lied.
“Go and search carefully for the Child,” Herod told the wise men, “and when you have found Him, bring back word to me, that I may come and worship Him also.” It was a trap. A manipulative plea for compromise. A tyrant asking the righteous to meet him halfway.
Herod never intended to worship Christ. He planned to kill Him. And that is where the story begins to sound painfully modern.
False moderation
Herod’s modern-day heirs still use the same script. Every election season brings a fresh wave of polished slogans: “Commonsense reproductive health care.” “Protecting basic rights.” “Defending freedom.” “Stopping extremism.”
The tone is moderate. The goal is not.
These same Democratic voices champion abortion through all nine months, fund the industry, defend it in court, and celebrate each victory that preserves the so-called right to end a child’s life. Behind the rhetoric of calm reason lies a fixed reality: Every restriction — no matter how small — is treated as an existential threat.
President Donald Trump proved this. He rejected national restrictions, announced he would not sign a bill banning abortion, and embraced the state-by-state approach, even calling a heartbeat bill too restrictive. And the left still branded him a radical intent on a national ban and criminalizing abortion.
The charge did not depend on his position. It depended on leftists’ strategy. If the destruction of the innocent is nonnegotiable for them, then every effort to restrain it is labeled “extremism.” Herod does not distinguish between cautious men and bold ones.
The illusion of safety
Many have assumed that careful posture protects influence. The evidence says otherwise. No matter how tempered the proposal, no matter how limited the step, no matter how deliberately “reasonable” the tone, the same accusations appear: “Outlawing women.” “Criminalizing health care.” “Taking away rights.” “Extreme.”
The strategy is simple: Anything that restricts the regime’s power is given the same label. If the political cost is identical regardless of the position taken, then the logic of compromise collapses. Because what, precisely, is being purchased?
If moderation brings no peace, if restraint brings no goodwill, if cautious measures earn the same condemnation as courageous ones, then moderation is not a shield. It is simply paying the price for a position you do not hold.
Herod offered cooperation. The wise men showed respect. On the surface, it looked like stability, but when God revealed the truth, the wise men acted decisively: “Being warned in a dream … they departed for their own country another way.”
They did not return to negotiate. They did not report back with updated information. They simply refused to play the tyrant’s game. And that refusal protected the Christ-child. Their greatness was not in their gifts but in their clarity. When a ruler is committed to killing the innocent, cooperation is complicity.
New actors, same script
The modern Democratic regime does not offer moderation. It claims moderation while rejecting every limit placed before it.
RELATED: The hidden hope of Christmas the world needs right now
Photo by: Godong/Universal Images Group via Getty Images
A heartbeat bill? Extreme. An ultrasound requirement? Extreme. Parental notification? Extreme. A 20-week ban? Extreme. Nothing is ever reasonable unless it preserves abortion without limits.
Just as Herod spoke the language of worship to mask his intentions, the Democrats speak the language of “common sense” to mask theirs. The tone is polished, but the aim is unchanged: keep the machinery of death running while demanding that others surrender the moral clarity that might restrain it. Herod promised a partnership he never meant to honor. The Democrats promise moderation they never intend to practice.
The question that returns every year
We have no shortage of latter-day Herods. They still promise moderation, still demand cooperation. They still insist that if only convictions are tempered, peace will come.
But Christmas testifies otherwise. Herod was never going to worship Christ.
The Democrats who champion abortion are never going to tolerate restrictions. The accusations will fall on anyone who lifts a finger for the unborn, no matter how small the effort may be. If the cost is the same either way, then only one path honors God, protects life, and is politically wise: Let us refuse the tyrants by avoiding the negotiation altogether.
If the weight of truly treating abortion as murder is inevitable, then let us play the wise man and embrace our convictions.
The Weekend Spectator Ep. 53: Ranking the Best Christmas Movies of All Time
With Christmas quickly approaching and endless movie choices, it can be difficult to decide which of the greats to watch….
Trump Strikes Anti-Christian Nigerian Terrorists On Christmas
‘There would be hell to pay, and tonight, there was’
Congress Faces Mountain Of Unfinished Business After Christmas Break
‘my Democrat colleagues are not there yet’
