Category: democrats
Meet the Soros-Backed Radical Running Graham Platner’s Campaign (Now That No One Wants To Work for Him)
Graham Platner, the Nazi-adjacent Democrat running for U.S. Senate in Maine, recently hired a new campaign manager. The role was vacant because his old campaign manager suddenly quit last month, along with several other top aides. It would appear that Platner’s ability to attract top talent has been hampered by a series of scandals involving a Nazi tattoo and old Reddit posts disparaging black people, rural Americans, police officers, homosexuals, and rape victims.
The post Meet the Soros-Backed Radical Running Graham Platner’s Campaign (Now That No One Wants To Work for Him) appeared first on .
Far-Left Mamdani Ally Launches Primary Challenge Against Hakeem Jeffries
New York City councilman Chi Ossé (D), a democratic socialist from Brooklyn and ally of Mayor-elect Zohran Mamdani (D.), launched a primary challenge against House minority leader Hakeem Jeffries (D., N.Y.) on Monday, setting up a fight between the highest-ranking Democrat in the House and a left-wing extremist.
The post Far-Left Mamdani Ally Launches Primary Challenge Against Hakeem Jeffries appeared first on .
Democrats’ Latest Epstein Play Falls Apart
WASHINGTON — The 2011 exchange between the late Jeffrey Epstein and longtime gal pal Ghislaine Maxwell, now serving a 20-year…
Nevada AG Aaron Ford Talked ‘Messaging and Narrative Strategy’ at Undisclosed Clinton Foundation Event, Public Records Show
Nevada attorney general Aaron Ford (D.) attended a “messaging and narrative strategy” event for the Clinton Foundation in New York City, according to public records obtained by the Washington Free Beacon—an undisclosed meeting that neither Ford’s office nor the Clinton Foundation seem willing to discuss.
The post Nevada AG Aaron Ford Talked ‘Messaging and Narrative Strategy’ at Undisclosed Clinton Foundation Event, Public Records Show appeared first on .
Graham Platner Calls To Stack the Supreme Court and Impeach ‘At Least Two’ Sitting Justices
SKOWHEGAN, Maine—Senate candidate Graham Platner called to stack the Supreme Court and impeach “at least two” of its sitting justices, moves he said should be top priorities for Democrats should they retake the upper chamber next year.
The post Graham Platner Calls To Stack the Supreme Court and Impeach ‘At Least Two’ Sitting Justices appeared first on .
Democrats reject ‘current policy’ — unless it pays their base
Washington’s latest fights make one thing unmistakable: Democrats shift their arguments as needed, but always in service of higher taxes, higher spending, and a bigger federal footprint. When the question earlier this year was whether to keep current tax policy and avoid a massive tax hike, Democrats fought against keeping current policy.
Now, after forcing a government shutdown, they claim they must preserve current — but temporary — Obamacare subsidies. Two opposite stances, one consistent goal: bigger government.
On taxes, ‘current policy’ doesn’t count. On spending, ‘current policy’ functions like holy writ.
Earlier this year, Congress faced a hard deadline. Lawmakers had to choose between extending the 2017 American Job Creation Act tax rates or letting them snap back to pre-2017 levels — a $4 trillion tax increase across income brackets. Republicans pushed to retain the lower rates. Democrats pushed for the tax hike.
Democrats insisted the looming deadline was Republicans’ fault and said the surge in revenue would help slow growth in deficits and debt. Republicans ultimately prevailed and passed the One Big Beautiful Bill Act. Democrats erupted.
We all know what happened next. Less than three months later, Congress approached the September 30 deadline for annual appropriations. With negotiations still incomplete, Republicans advanced a clean, short-term extension to keep the government open. The House passed it. President Trump signaled he would sign it. Senate Democrats filibustered it.
Republicans tried over a dozen times to reopen the government. Senate Democrats blocked them every time — until this week. Their central demand: extend the temporary “emergency” premium subsidies that Democrats expanded during the pandemic. Those subsidies, scheduled to expire, broadened eligibility beyond 400% of the federal poverty line and boosted benefits for those below it. Democrats already extended them once through 2025.
Now, with the pandemic long over — President Biden signed the resolution ending it on April 10, 2023 — Senate Democrats want the emergency expansions made permanent.
The inconsistency could not be clearer.
When expiring tax law meant taxes would rise, Democrats described preventing that increase as a tax cut — even though extending the law simply kept existing policy in place. The fact that the policy had been the law for eight years meant nothing.
But when expiring pandemic-era subsidies would return Obamacare to its original structure, Democrats suddenly insist that current policy must prevail. They now treat temporary emergency expansions — linked explicitly to COVID, extended once already, disproportionately benefiting upper-income households — as untouchable programs that must become permanent.
On taxes, “current policy” doesn’t count. On spending, “current policy” functions like holy writ.
RELATED: Trump officially ends ‘pathetic’ Democrats’ record-breaking shutdown
Photo by Bonnie Cash/UPI/Bloomberg via Getty Images
The reasoning shifts, but the outcome never does: Democrats always land on whatever argument leads to more government. Their broader shutdown demands confirm it — ending Medicaid reforms and restoring spending levels President Trump and Republicans reduced. Every item points in the same direction: more federal dollars out the door.
Democrats note that Republicans, too, support keeping some expiring policies. True. Which makes the underlying purpose even more important to identify.
Republicans fought to maintain 2017 tax levels so Americans could keep more of what they earn — and keep that income out of Washington’s hands. Democrats want permanent expansion of Obamacare subsidies to preserve and grow benefits for people who were never intended to receive them, locking in a larger federal role.
Future fights will come; today’s climate guarantees them. One more thing is just as guaranteed: Democrats’ arguments will continue to change as needed, and their demands for higher taxes, higher spending, and a larger federal government will not.
Schumer Shutdown: Georgia Swing Voters Blame Record-Breaking Government Closure on Dems
A majority of Georgia swing voters surveyed in focus groups this week are blaming Democrats for the record-breaking 42-day government shutdown that ended Wednesday.
The post Schumer Shutdown: Georgia Swing Voters Blame Record-Breaking Government Closure on Dems appeared first on .
Shutdown Over, Trump Saves Thanksgiving
WASHINGTON — The government shutdown that never should have happened is over. Voters should be furious with most Democrats, and…
Free markets don’t need federal babysitters
At a recent competition law symposium in Washington, the Trump administration’s antitrust chief, Gail Slater, made a welcome promise to keep markets open to new competitors and innovation.
That pledge comes at a critical moment. Too many politicians in both parties still believe government’s job is to engineer economic outcomes rather than let consumers decide. That mindset misunderstands what makes markets dynamic — and often locks in the very problems regulators claim they want to fix.
Republicans and Democrats alike have embraced ‘industrial policy’ when it serves their political interests. They call it leadership, but it’s just another form of central planning.
Cronyism takes many forms: subsidies for favored industries, tax breaks for politically connected firms, or lawsuits targeting companies for being too successful.
Take the Biden Department of Justice’s lawsuit against Visa. The administration said it “feared” Visa’s market share, even though the payments space is crowded with competitors — Mastercard, PayPal, Square, Apple Pay, and a swarm of fintech startups. Instead of protecting consumers, the Justice Department tried to punish one company for competing well and dictate the terms of an already vibrant market.
That’s not protecting competition — it’s manipulating it. When government intervenes this way, it distorts incentives, weakens confidence, and replaces consumer choice with bureaucratic preference.
Consumers always lose
When regulators overreach, consumers pay the price. Every dollar a company spends fending off groundless lawsuits is a dollar not spent on innovation. Every subsidy handed to a politically favored firm skews the playing field against smaller rivals. And every new dictate slows the experimentation that keeps markets alive.
Officials who justify these intrusions claim they’re “protecting competition.” But true competition doesn’t need Washington’s help. It needs Washington to step aside. Entrepreneurs, not regulators, create rivals. Consumers, not bureaucrats, decide who wins. The invisible hand disciplines firms far more effectively than any government lawyer.
Free markets need fewer meddlers
Government’s legitimate role is narrow: preventing fraud, enforcing contracts, and protecting property. That’s a far cry from deciding which companies are “too profitable,” which mergers are “too large,” or which industries deserve “strategic” subsidies. When officials cross that line, they stop refereeing and start playing the game themselves — badly.
This temptation spans parties. Republicans and Democrats alike have embraced “industrial policy” when it serves their political interests. They call it leadership, but it’s just another form of central planning that shackles consumers and businesses alike.
RELATED: Smash the health care cartel, free the market
File photo/Miami Herald/Tribune News Service via Getty Images
The cure is restraint
The best way forward is simple. Washington should stop punishing success and stop handing out favors to friends. It should let consumers and entrepreneurs, not bureaucrats and lobbyists, determine winners and losers.
America’s prosperity was built on open competition and voluntary exchange — not government micromanagement. Crony capitalism is just socialism by another name, and it breeds the same stagnation and corruption.
President Trump’s team understands that prosperity comes from freedom, not favoritism. If policymakers truly care about fairness, they should start by doing the hardest thing in politics: stepping aside.
