Americans sent a resounding message to the Democrat Party on Tuesday evening, rejecting the pronoun-declaring, virtue signalers whose radical ideas include normalizing humans identifying as animals and men competing in women’s sports.
For years Democrats and their allies in the mainstream media have lectured the American people about morality, inclusivity and the all-importance of identity politics. We have been told that not embracing a far-left radical agenda makes us bigots, racists and misogynists.
Clearly, the American people have had enough.
President-elect Donald Trump won all seven battleground states, captured the popular vote (the first Republican to do so in decades) expanded the map in blue states like California, New York and Virginia, and flipped traditional Democrat counties such as Miami Dade in Florida and Hispanic-heavy Starr County in Texas.
Trump’s message on the economy and immigration and closing the campaign with messages like, “It doesn’t have to be this way,” and “Trump will fix it,” given that nearly 75% of Americans believed the nation was on the wrong track, resonated with voters across the board.
Trump won married women by a large margin (so much for the gender gap), along with married men (e.g. parents). He also won suburban voters, Catholics, Protestants, those making $50,000 or less, those with no college degrees, Gen X (between the ages of 45-64), and first-time voters.
Trump also improved with non-traditional Republican voters including urban voters, Latinos and black men.
Simply put: Trump won the majority of America. He won suburban parents who want good schools and safe communities for their children. He won the hardworking folks in rural areas with no college degrees. He improved with young people who want to buy their first home but can’t afford to thanks to inflation.
The effects of Trump and the complete repudiation of the Democrat agenda happened down the ballot as well. Republicans now control the Senate with significant victories by Dave McCormick in Pennsylvania, Tim Sheehy in Montana and Bernie Moreno in Ohio.
The House remains in play, and it is possible that the GOP enters Washington next January with the trifecta: White House, Senate and House of Representatives.
Meanwhile, the Democrat Party, once the party of the working class, has now become the party of out-of-touch elitists.
Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) put it this way: “It should come as no great surprise that a Democratic Party which has abandoned working class people would find that the working class has abandoned them.”
Vice President Kamala Harris’ success was limited to high income voters (those making $100,000 or more and those making $200,000 or more), those with bachelor’s or advanced degrees, and those who have no religious affiliation.
In other words, Harris’ coalition consisted of a bunch of rich snobs or “smarty pants,” to quote longtime Democrat strategist David Axelrod.
Many Democrat strategists will say the loss was because Harris’ $1 billion war chest was unwisely spent. They will blame bad messaging, and a heavy focus on the abortion issue instead of the economy. They will say they had a bad candidate, or there wasn’t enough time to run a full campaign (which would be ironic, given it was the Democrat machine that installed Harris at the last minute).
But the rot runs much deeper. For the betterment of the nation, Democrats would do well to use this time for introspection and re-evaluating their principles.
Republicans had to undergo a restructuring following former President Barack Obama’s back-to-back victories in 2008 and 2012. Now, it’s the Democrats’ turn to do some self-reflecting. Until they do, Republicans will enjoy majorities in Washington and in state governments, winning races up and down the ballot for years to come.
But we live in a two-party system – for now. If one of our major parties continues to cater to radicals while isolating the majority of Americans, yes, it is a recipe for their side to continue to lose elections, but it is also bad news for the country. America is better off when both Republicans and Democrats operate in common sense and challenge each other on the best economic policy or how to solve the immigration crisis.
Doubling down and ignoring the will of the people will extinguish the Democrat Party for good.
Carly Atchison Bird is a contributor to The Daily Caller News Foundation and the former national spokeswoman for the Ron DeSantis presidential campaign. She is the founder and president of Bird’s Eye Consulting and lives in Virginia Beach.
Anyone could have predicted that Christians and pro-lifers would be outvoted on the abortion issue. We all know spiritual leaders are guilty of telling their people to “stay out of politics,” “be spiritual, not political,” “turn off the news,” and “God’s in control.” Okay…
As of publication, just over 1.9 million voted in favor of abortion on demand—potentially up to birth—while 1.2 million voted against Proposition 139. All we needed to do was tell 800,000 people to fill in a circle on their ballot. Wow.
Was it God who dropped the ball?
As I said on my Facebook live and most recent Substack, I believe the passage of Prop 139 is an indictment of the Church (body of Christ) in Arizona. For emphasis, I’ll restate my thoughts here:
“What are the churches doing in Arizona? If you weren’t speaking to your congregations about Proposition 139—but you’re calling yourself a minister or a ministry, you’re taking money, you’re not paying any taxes on tithes and offerings—then, what are you doing? To me, pro-life is the one issue that shows whether or not the church is effective in the state. And we’re not effective.”
I’m glad to hear at least one minister mobilized 700 of his peers in some sort of effort against Prop 139. I’m sure a faithful remnant of church leaders mentioned it in their sermons and asked their congregations to pray about it. But these efforts fell woefully short.
Again, we all know the silent ministers are bewitched by false ideologies like “separation of church and state.” The rest are afraid to offend big donors or they’re unwilling to risk that coveted 501(c)(3) status. This is idolatry. One megachurch is literally buying up all the real estate and branding everyone’s bumper, yet those of us outside the organization have no clue what they’re doing to change Arizona.
For the record, abortion is not a political issue. According to the Sixth Commandment, abortion is a moral issue. Plainly stated: abortion is murder. For those who are quick to say, “What about cases of rape, cases of incest, the life of the mother?” I will defer to this report from the Guttmacher Institute.
Screenshot is sourced from a 2019 article published by USA Today.
I’ve heard many call Arizona a “purple” state, meaning there’s a near even split of conservatives and liberals, Republicans and Democrats, who occupy this territory. Well, we’re slowly slipping into denial with this statement as dark forces are working overtime to flip this state. From a governmental perspective, Arizona is about as blue as they come with our highest-ranking leadership positions currently in the hands of leftists (note: the following is not an exhaustive list).
A call to pastors and ministry leaders:
If you want to save Arizona, please stop telling your congregations to avoid the news and politics.You have 66 Books to preach from that will help everyone discern false narratives and make wise decisions. You simply need to trust God and say what He said.
Intercession and evangelism are not in competition. Both are essential for reformation (see the Four Gospels and Acts 1-28). Prayer is absolutely necessary, but the Great Commission is not fulfilled by sitting in prayer closets and kneeling at the altar. Fellowship is important, but the Great Commission is not fulfilled by perfect church attendance or inviting people to sign membership papers.
Only a small percentage are called to full-time ministry. The rest of us are created to do far more than warm the pews and fund your “vision for the ministry.” Please stop trying to build nonprofit organizations and start building the Kingdom of God. It’s time to leave the four walls, stop over separating “the sacred from the secular,” and teach your people how to contend for righteousness in the marketplace. Persecution is our inheritance in Christ.
Fear God, not man.
Lastly, I want to correct the false ideology that says, “We can’t legislate morality.” On the contrary, politics and government are nothing more than spheres of influence whereby morality is enforced through law and order. Legislation, then, is simply morality applied to a society.
Which set of morals best serves a nation—God’s morality or man’s morality? One brings us closer to life. The other, as we can see, brings us closer to death.
So, to all Christians and pro-lifers (whether you’re a believer or not), what are we going to do about Proposition 139?
A few days before last week’s election, Independent Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders issued a dire warning to voters. If Trump won, “the struggle against climate change will be over.”
He had that right.
Climate change fanaticism was effectively on the ballot last week. That green energy agenda was decisively defeated.
It turns out the tens of millions of middle-class Americans who voted for Trump weren’t much interested in the temperature of the planet 50 years from now. They were too busy trying to pay the bills.
The result shouldn’t be too surprising. Polls have shown climate change ranks near the bottom of voters’ concerns. Jobs, inflation and illegal immigration register much higher on the scale of concerns.
But if you asked the elite of America in the top one percent of income, climate change is seen as an immediate and existential threat to the planet. Our poll at Unleash Prosperity earlier this year found that the cultural elites were so hyper-obsessed with climate issues, they were in favor of banning air conditioning, nonessential air travel and many modern home appliances to stop global warming. Our study showed that not many of the other 99 percent agree.
Wake up, Bernie and Al Gore.
Climate change has become the ultimate luxury good: the richer you are, the more you fret about it.
Among the elite, obsessing about climate change has become a favorite form of virtue-signaling at the country club and in the faculty lounges. There is almost no cross that the green elites — the people who donate six figures or more to groups like the Sierra Club — aren’t willing to make lower income Americans bear to stop global warming.
Herein lies the political curse of the climate issue. A millionaire doesn’t care much if the price of gas rises by $1 a gallon or if they have to pay another $100 a month in utility bills. But the middle class hates paying more.
It wasn’t just economic concerns that turned the voters against climate crusaders like President Joe Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris. Workers weren’t too thrilled with the heavy fist of government commanding them to buy an electric vehicle — whether they wanted one or not.
It hasn’t helped the greens’ cause that the same progressives who are out to save the planet with grandiose transformations and global government, seem to have no problem with the garbage polluting the streets of our major cities or the graffiti or the feces and urine smell on the street corners of San Francisco and New York. That’s real pollution. And it’s affecting us here and now.
The good news is this year’s voter revolts against the radical green agenda are not a vote for dirtier air or water. The air that we breathe and the water we drink is cleaner than ever — a point that President Donald Trump correctly made. We will continue to make progress against pollution.
To try to sell middle America on the climate-change agenda of abolishing fossil fuels, the greens peddled bogus arguments that climate change would hurt poor communities most. In reality the financial costs of the climate policies and the paychecks lost were felt by the non-elite.
Democrats forgot to visit the steel-mill construction sites or the auto plants or the oil patch and ask those workers what they thought.
Well, now we know the reality. Americans think their shrinking paychecks and the higher price of gas they pay at the pump is the real clear-and-present danger. If Democrats don’t start to get that, they too will go to bed worrying about their jobs.
Stephen Moore is a contributor to The Daily Caller News Foundation, a senior fellow at the Heritage Foundation, and a co-founder of Unleash Prosperity. His latest book is titled: “The Trump Economic Miracle.”
Voters are sending newly elected Arizona legislators to office with a clear mandate from the people of Arizona: The people must be the chief stakeholder of their representatives.
The days of woke and swampy lobbyists and consultants overriding our voices have come to an end, unless your legislator votes for the swamp grift to continue with their first vote representing you. The SECRET vote for legislative leadership picks happens tomorrow, Tuesday, November 12th at 9 am.
Leadership votes are the most evident indicator of the policy that will lead each chamber. All policy floats downstream from leadership. The leadership of each chamber of the legislature determines whether the grassroots have a seat at the table or if a quid pro quo, pay-to-play agenda will lead their administration.
The leader of the House is called the Speaker. The leader of the Senate is called the Senate President. While the grassroots worked hard to reform both chambers in 2022, only Senate President Warren Petersen performed with a complete turnover of poor-performing staff and additional efficiencies in how government runs. He also led the efforts to stop the run-amok executive authority by appointing Sen. Jake Hoffman to lead the confirmation committee process of Governor Katie Hobbs’ appointees. These efforts have been wildly successful, with Arizona voters confirming their support at the ballot box by expanding Republican majorities in both chambers.
It’s time for the House to follow suit with a Speaker who will put the mandate from the people first and help ensure that President Trump’s America First agenda takes root in Arizona. The candidates running include:
1.Joe Chaplik, a legislator in LD3 who previously ran for Speaker in 2022. Chaplik was spurred on by the grassroots and only missed it by a single vote. He has served his district since 2022. He’s a successful businessman with “25 years of executive leadership experience building and guiding top-tier companies,” according to his AZ Legislature biography. Chaplik is also a founding member of the Arizona Freedom Caucus. He gained wide popularity in leading the effort to relieve children of the abusive mask mandates in schools. Chaplik’s lifetime Arizona Free Enterprise Club scorecard score is 100%.
2.Leo Biasiucci, a legislator in LD30 currently serving as Majority Leader. Biasiucci has no biography on record. He’s served in his district since 2020. Ballotpedia says he has a background in “owning Mohave Traffic Survival School and working as an actor with SAG-AFTRA, a claims analyst with GEICO, and a financial auditor with GE Capital.” He is known to have led the House Victory PAC effort. And he’s also been a friend to both the grassroots and moderate members of the Caucus. Biasiucci’s lifetime Arizona Free Enterprise Club scorecard score is 84%, with a recent session score of 78%.
3. Steve Montenegro, a legislator in LD29 since 2023. Montenegro also doesn’t have a biography on record. He previously served as a legislator from 2008 to 2017. Montenegro previously ran for Congress against Debbie Lesko and lost mainly due to a myriad of reports of an inappropriate relationship with a young staffer while serving in legislative leadership, even though he was married and a pastor. He also previously worked in former Congressman Trent Franks‘ office for a decade. Franks was also plagued by a scandal involving a young female staffer. Montenegro’s Ballotpedia says he previously worked as a principal consultant of Coronam Consulting. He’s also served as an executive with Patrick Byrne’s The America Project. Montenegro has also previously been a big champion of eliminating the Electoral College with a yes vote on the National Popular Vote initiative in 2016 on HB2456—a popular radical left initiative to upend our Constitutional Republic. It died thanks to then-Senate President Andy Biggs, who blocked it from being voted on in the Senate. Montenegro’s lifetime Arizona Free Enterprise Club scorecard score is 91%, with the most recent session clocking in at 81%.
When looking at the most recent legislative track records, the voters get a clearer picture of the leadership each candidate offers. Montenegro ran 29 bills this session, with only two passing or 6.9%. Chaplik ran seven bills, with one passing or 14%. Biasiucci ran 34 bills, with eight passing or 23.5%. Unfortunately, most passed bills were victim to Governor Hobbs’ veto stamp.
Chaplik’s keen understanding of government efficiency stands out most in this record. Chaplik has long been preaching a message that poor management in the House has led to chaos, an all-powerful lobbyist and consultant class overriding the will of the people, and unsupported legislators with few tools to serve the best interests of their constituents and fulfill the people’s mandate. He’s walked the walk by limiting the number of bills he’s personally run, ensuring staff time isn’t wasted on silly messaging bills.
Chaplik also advocates for sessions to return to 100 days as our state Constitution prescribes to prevent swampy budgets and pay-to-play sweetheart deals benefiting the lobbyist and consulting class.
Finally, Chaplik offers a vision where the legislature prioritizes its only constitutional mandate – the budget – and presents that to the Governor early in the session to avoid gridlock and threats of government shutdowns. Senate President Petersen has supported early budget preparation and was successful in this endeavor in 2023. It changed the power dynamic with the radical left executive branch and restored power to the people’s representatives. The people benefit greatly when efficiency is prioritized by leading with the budget first.
These reforms, coupled with cleaning house of staff leadership who have promoted chaos and undermined the body and Speaker historically on many occasions, are a winning combination for the majority party to fulfill the mandate from the voters.
Legislators who genuinely seek to serve the people should make it known now whether they intend to make the people the chief stakeholders of their government or the political lobbyist consultant class.
The voters should demand transparency in their legislators’ first vote, setting the tone for the next two years. Transparency dies in darkness, and no legislator should keep their leadership votes secret from their constituents.
A quick search on X shows the grassroots favors Chaplik to lead the House. Do you know who your legislators will vote for tomorrow in the House Speaker race? Have they asked you who you want to lead the AZ People’s House?
Merissa Hamilton is the founder and chairwoman of the nonpartisan nonprofit organizations Strong Communities Foundation of Arizona and Strong Communities Action, also known as EZAZ.org, which are focused on making civic education and action as easy as pie. She’s an elected Member at Large of Congressional District 1 for the Arizona Republican Party and previously ran for Mayor in 2020. Merissa is also the Director of Integration and Policy at The R.O.A.R. PAC, which is on a mission to restore our American Republic.
Here are the hard truths of our threatening situation with Social Security and Medicare. We have a looming major fiscal crisis which no one denies. There are solutions but no politically easy ones, and our options get worse with time.
Yet every time a working politician suggests considering even mild changes, the formidable senior lobby and AARP erupt in outrage and beat down the hapless reformer. Former allies of responsible reform flee, and the status quo is again preserved.
Facts, as they say, are stubborn things. Social Security is by design a mandatory government administered defined-benefit retirement trust, funded by payroll taxes. However, the inflows to the trust are insufficient to support the benefits promised and, unlike private pension plans, there is no corpus of funds earning compound interest to make up the difference. Thus, the fund will become insolvent in nine years. As matters stand, benefits across the board will need to be reduced by 23%.
Worse, deficits in Social Security and Medicare comprise the overwhelming majority of future anticipated federal debt accumulation. So, the courageous politicians who assured seniors in this and every election that they will “protect” their Social Security (i.e., do nothing) were not protecting anything except their own political skins.
The problem nobody wants to face is that either benefit levels are too high, payroll taxes are too low, or retirees are retired for too long. Politicians long ago raided the “surplus” and replaced the funds with non-income generating IOUs.
Reducing benefit levels, even for high earners, is politically toxic. The mere suggestion evokes hyperbolic charges of “pushing granny over the cliff” and “giving the middle finger to senior citizens.”
On the other hand, raising taxes would be nearly as unpopular. It would take a 25% hike in the payroll tax to fill the hole once insolvency occurs. Economic growth and consumer spending, the drivers in our economy, would be crowded out as would several federal programs.
Clawing back the Social Security trust funds so that income could be generated would be nice. But that train has left the station. The funds have long since been spent on other priorities
That leaves only shortening the length of retirements that Social Security supports. This option is also massively unpopular, as public demonstrations against it here and around the globe attest.
Yet when Social Security was established in 1935, the average life expectancy was just 63. Today it is nearly 80. We are now down to just three workers paying into the system for every retiree, compared to 16 at the beginning of Social Security.
These workers’ earnings are paid out as current benefits in what amounts to a giant Ponzi game. Like Ponzi schemes before it, this one is also doomed to failure.
The concept of retirement was basically unknown until recently in human history. Everyone worked as long as they could, and the rest were cared for primarily by families. So why is delayed retirement, even modest (two years) and gradually phased in, violently opposed?
Part of the reason is that government subsidies are never “enough.” Free money is always popular, and beneficiaries quickly develop an entitlement mentality.
Since retiree benefits are funded by payroll taxes, the notion of being “owed” is understandable. Unfortunately for proud seniors, the facts now are that the money flows in Social Security are essentially like other government welfare programs.
Fortunately, most jobs today are not as physically demanding as in the past. Medical care for job related injuries is much improved. Disability insurance and retirement accommodations for workers in occupations like law enforcement and the military are already in place. For the rest, many able seniors experience work as manageable and even enriching.
Regardless, the do-nothing option, so wildly popular in this last election, is no longer feasible. The “private account” reform offered by George Bush in 2005, which was demagogued into the ground by the same crowd proudly blocking all reforms this go-around, would have resulted in the average worker having three times more retirement income by now.
This can has been kicked down to near the end of the road. Our options now are to defer retirement or face serious program cuts. Sad.
Dr. Thomas Patterson, former Chairman of the Goldwater Institute, is a retired emergency physician. He served as an Arizona State senator for 10 years in the 1990s, and as Majority Leader from 93-96. He is the author of Arizona’s original charter schools bill.
One recurring theme that no one in Washington seems capable of learning is that the best way to destroy an industry is to have the government subsidize it.
That lesson came shining through in recent days when Intel acknowledged that it suffered a $16.6 billion quarterly loss. That is more than the entire annual budget of some states.
Wait. Isn’t this the same Intel that is in line to be the biggest corporate welfare recipient of federal aid under the CHIPS Act — the Biden bill designed to make sure that microchips are made in the United States, not China? Intel is first in the soup line to receive $8.5 billion in grants and $11 billion in subsidized loans. The checks haven’t been written yet, but this will be one of the biggest welfare checks ever written to an American company.
Maybe President Joe Biden, who had a joyous photo op with Intel officials when the bill was passed, should have second thoughts. Intel’s near broke. They were just replaced by their rival chipmaker Nvidia in the Dow Jones composite. Nvidia gets none of the stash from the CHIPS Act, yet its stock price has soared more than five-fold. It has been on a hiring spree and has made hundreds of billions of dollars for American investors — including pension and 401k plans.
Talk about politicians betting on the wrong horse.
It gets worse. Semafor Technology reports that instead of pulling the plug on this near $20 billion aid package, Biden officials and Sen. Mark Warner of Virginia — one of the lead sponsors of the CHIPS Act — “have discussed whether the company needs more help.” More?
This despite that Bloomberg reported that Intel has failed to provide federal officials with a viable plan to turn its financial woes around. Why do that when you have an umbilical cord to the federal Treasury?
Ironically, Intel made more than $20 billion in profits before the CHIPS Act welfare bill was passed. So far this year it has lost nearly $20 billion.
What is next? A federal takeover of Intel as happened with failing automakers and banks in 2008?
There is an important lesson here. Many Democrats and Republicans have become enamored with the idea of America adopting a Japanese-style “National Industrial Policy” that would direct hundreds of billions of tax dollars to nurture “strategically important industries” — such as manufacturing, tech products and “clean energy.”
The politicians think they can pick winners and losers better than private investors who allocate funds in our highly efficient multi-trillion dollar capital markets. Democratic Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren has effectively declared war on the half-trillion-dollar booming private equity industry, which she calls “vampires,” because sometimes they make bad bets.
But maybe it’s Uncle Sam that sucks the blood out of viable businesses. Look no further than Biden’s EV handouts, which have only corresponded with a massive consumer rejection of an industry that was flourishing before Uncle Sam started passing out tens of billions of dollars to the car manufacturers and strong-armed the U.S. auto industry to produce them. Over the past four years the federal government has authorized more than $300 billion in green energy subsidies including wind and solar power grants and yet the amount of power they produce has barely budged — thanks to low-priced natural gas.
If we want American industries to be number one, the government should stop giving them money and the CEOs should stop taking it.
Stephen Moore is a contributor to The Daily Caller News Foundation, senior fellow at the Heritage Foundation, and co-founder of Unleash Prosperity. His latest book is The Trump Economic Miracle, co-authored with Arthur Laffer.
