Young men are facing a collective crisis of masculinity, but they are too isolated from each other to address it together.

The number of men who report having zero close friends has increased from 3% in 1990 to 15% in 2021, while the size of social circles in general has decreased dramatically. Men feel more lonely than ever before, and they turn to their vices to deal with it.

Addiction to pornography is widespread among young men, and roughly two-thirds watch pornography weekly or more. Men make up the majority of “deaths of despair,” such as alcohol poisoning, while male drug overdose deaths are more than twice as common as female overdose deaths. Moreover, the suicide rate among men is four times higher than among women. 

Academically, things are similarly bad. Men earn less than half of bachelor’s degrees and less than half of graduate degrees. 41% of young women have college degrees, compared to only 32% of young men. Most of the top 10% of high school students are girls, while most of the bottom 10% are boys. Females are more likely to graduate high school than males, but the achievement gap starts as early as elementary school, where girls outperform boys in standardized tests by more than 40% of a grade level. Even after completing school, millions of men are not participating in the workforce.

Romantic prospects for men are low as well. While two-thirds of single men say they are looking for a relationship, only one-third of single women say the same, leaving a large number of men completely excluded from the dating market.

Men have largely been left behind by a culture that talks more about “toxic masculinity” than the positive aspects of having strong male figures. Guys-only spaces, such as the Boy Scouts, are being destroyed, and entertainment franchises, such as Star Wars, are openly hostile to their mostly male audiences. While men are struggling, they are also villainized constantly.

Unfortunately, this marginalization has resulted in many men turning to poor role models, such as pornographer Andrew Tate or antisemitic troll Nick Fuentes. These cranks promote degeneracy and debauchery, appealing to the worst tendencies of men. However, they are the natural result of decades of propaganda against actually healthy masculine behavior.

Immoral influencers do not provide a real solution, but how can this crisis of masculinity be solved?

Firstly, and most importantly, men need to find a real community. Twitter group chats or Discord servers are not real life, and people who meet online rarely become real friends. In high school or college, it is a lot easier to tell men to join student organizations or find friends through classes, but this is much more difficult post-graduation. The easiest way, and best place, to find a community is at church. Many churches even have men’s support groups, but just going to church on Sundays and talking with someone for a few minutes afterward could be enough.

Secondly, despite the aforementioned difficulty with finding meaningful romantic relationships, men do need to pursue women who want to get married. This starts with behaving in a respectable manner. That is, they cannot engage in a hookup culture that is detrimental to their mental health and future relationships. While not a hard and fast rule, dating apps should also probably be avoided. Again, church is one of the best possible places to find a future spouse. More importantly than that, however, men need to actually ask women out instead of waiting around indefinitely. This may seem like a no-brainer, but nearly half of men aged 18-25 have never asked out a woman in person.

Going to the gym instead of watching pornography, reading a book instead of doom scrolling through Instagram, having breakfast with friends instead of sleeping in, going to bed instead of watching YouTube until midnight, eating an apple instead of eating Skittles, or simply finding something to do after work instead of going home right away are all simple cures to simple problems, but are still often overlooked.

While these are all things that can be accomplished at the individual level, we also need to promote a culture that embraces the positive aspects of masculinity — most importantly, being a good husband and a good father. This is particularly difficult because one-third of children are raised in a home with an absent father, so many men never had a positive male role model to look up to.

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER

Above all else, men feel as if they have no sense of purpose. This is a natural result of a secular, cynical, and sleazy culture. Men need each other, women, religion, and to feel like they belong. While encouraging men to do what they can for themselves is a critical first step, rebuilding institutions such as religion and the nuclear family are necessary societal efforts.

There is probably no other demographic group facing an intersection of crises to such an extraordinary degree. Young men need to be heard, and they need our help.

2024-08-01 21:12:00, http://s.wordpress.com/mshots/v1/https%3A%2F%2Fwww.washingtonexaminer.com%2Fopinion%2F3108033%2Fyoung-men-falling-behind%2F?w=600&h=450, Young men are facing a collective crisis of masculinity, but they are too isolated from each other to address it together. The number of men who report having zero close friends has increased from 3% in 1990 to 15% in 2021, while the size of social circles in general has decreased dramatically. Men feel more,

Young men are facing a collective crisis of masculinity, but they are too isolated from each other to address it together.

The number of men who report having zero close friends has increased from 3% in 1990 to 15% in 2021, while the size of social circles in general has decreased dramatically. Men feel more lonely than ever before, and they turn to their vices to deal with it.

Addiction to pornography is widespread among young men, and roughly two-thirds watch pornography weekly or more. Men make up the majority of “deaths of despair,” such as alcohol poisoning, while male drug overdose deaths are more than twice as common as female overdose deaths. Moreover, the suicide rate among men is four times higher than among women. 

Academically, things are similarly bad. Men earn less than half of bachelor’s degrees and less than half of graduate degrees. 41% of young women have college degrees, compared to only 32% of young men. Most of the top 10% of high school students are girls, while most of the bottom 10% are boys. Females are more likely to graduate high school than males, but the achievement gap starts as early as elementary school, where girls outperform boys in standardized tests by more than 40% of a grade level. Even after completing school, millions of men are not participating in the workforce.

Romantic prospects for men are low as well. While two-thirds of single men say they are looking for a relationship, only one-third of single women say the same, leaving a large number of men completely excluded from the dating market.

Men have largely been left behind by a culture that talks more about “toxic masculinity” than the positive aspects of having strong male figures. Guys-only spaces, such as the Boy Scouts, are being destroyed, and entertainment franchises, such as Star Wars, are openly hostile to their mostly male audiences. While men are struggling, they are also villainized constantly.

Unfortunately, this marginalization has resulted in many men turning to poor role models, such as pornographer Andrew Tate or antisemitic troll Nick Fuentes. These cranks promote degeneracy and debauchery, appealing to the worst tendencies of men. However, they are the natural result of decades of propaganda against actually healthy masculine behavior.

Immoral influencers do not provide a real solution, but how can this crisis of masculinity be solved?

Firstly, and most importantly, men need to find a real community. Twitter group chats or Discord servers are not real life, and people who meet online rarely become real friends. In high school or college, it is a lot easier to tell men to join student organizations or find friends through classes, but this is much more difficult post-graduation. The easiest way, and best place, to find a community is at church. Many churches even have men’s support groups, but just going to church on Sundays and talking with someone for a few minutes afterward could be enough.

Secondly, despite the aforementioned difficulty with finding meaningful romantic relationships, men do need to pursue women who want to get married. This starts with behaving in a respectable manner. That is, they cannot engage in a hookup culture that is detrimental to their mental health and future relationships. While not a hard and fast rule, dating apps should also probably be avoided. Again, church is one of the best possible places to find a future spouse. More importantly than that, however, men need to actually ask women out instead of waiting around indefinitely. This may seem like a no-brainer, but nearly half of men aged 18-25 have never asked out a woman in person.

Going to the gym instead of watching pornography, reading a book instead of doom scrolling through Instagram, having breakfast with friends instead of sleeping in, going to bed instead of watching YouTube until midnight, eating an apple instead of eating Skittles, or simply finding something to do after work instead of going home right away are all simple cures to simple problems, but are still often overlooked.

While these are all things that can be accomplished at the individual level, we also need to promote a culture that embraces the positive aspects of masculinity — most importantly, being a good husband and a good father. This is particularly difficult because one-third of children are raised in a home with an absent father, so many men never had a positive male role model to look up to.

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER

Above all else, men feel as if they have no sense of purpose. This is a natural result of a secular, cynical, and sleazy culture. Men need each other, women, religion, and to feel like they belong. While encouraging men to do what they can for themselves is a critical first step, rebuilding institutions such as religion and the nuclear family are necessary societal efforts.

There is probably no other demographic group facing an intersection of crises to such an extraordinary degree. Young men need to be heard, and they need our help.

, Young men are facing a collective crisis of masculinity, but they are too isolated from each other to address it together. The number of men who report having zero close friends has increased from 3% in 1990 to 15% in 2021, while the size of social circles in general has decreased dramatically. Men feel more lonely than ever before, and they turn to their vices to deal with it. Addiction to pornography is widespread among young men, and roughly two-thirds watch pornography weekly or more. Men make up the majority of “deaths of despair,” such as alcohol poisoning, while male drug overdose deaths are more than twice as common as female overdose deaths. Moreover, the suicide rate among men is four times higher than among women.  Academically, things are similarly bad. Men earn less than half of bachelor’s degrees and less than half of graduate degrees. 41% of young women have college degrees, compared to only 32% of young men. Most of the top 10% of high school students are girls, while most of the bottom 10% are boys. Females are more likely to graduate high school than males, but the achievement gap starts as early as elementary school, where girls outperform boys in standardized tests by more than 40% of a grade level. Even after completing school, millions of men are not participating in the workforce. Romantic prospects for men are low as well. While two-thirds of single men say they are looking for a relationship, only one-third of single women say the same, leaving a large number of men completely excluded from the dating market. Men have largely been left behind by a culture that talks more about “toxic masculinity” than the positive aspects of having strong male figures. Guys-only spaces, such as the Boy Scouts, are being destroyed, and entertainment franchises, such as Star Wars, are openly hostile to their mostly male audiences. While men are struggling, they are also villainized constantly. Unfortunately, this marginalization has resulted in many men turning to poor role models, such as pornographer Andrew Tate or antisemitic troll Nick Fuentes. These cranks promote degeneracy and debauchery, appealing to the worst tendencies of men. However, they are the natural result of decades of propaganda against actually healthy masculine behavior. Immoral influencers do not provide a real solution, but how can this crisis of masculinity be solved? Firstly, and most importantly, men need to find a real community. Twitter group chats or Discord servers are not real life, and people who meet online rarely become real friends. In high school or college, it is a lot easier to tell men to join student organizations or find friends through classes, but this is much more difficult post-graduation. The easiest way, and best place, to find a community is at church. Many churches even have men’s support groups, but just going to church on Sundays and talking with someone for a few minutes afterward could be enough. Secondly, despite the aforementioned difficulty with finding meaningful romantic relationships, men do need to pursue women who want to get married. This starts with behaving in a respectable manner. That is, they cannot engage in a hookup culture that is detrimental to their mental health and future relationships. While not a hard and fast rule, dating apps should also probably be avoided. Again, church is one of the best possible places to find a future spouse. More importantly than that, however, men need to actually ask women out instead of waiting around indefinitely. This may seem like a no-brainer, but nearly half of men aged 18-25 have never asked out a woman in person. Going to the gym instead of watching pornography, reading a book instead of doom scrolling through Instagram, having breakfast with friends instead of sleeping in, going to bed instead of watching YouTube until midnight, eating an apple instead of eating Skittles, or simply finding something to do after work instead of going home right away are all simple cures to simple problems, but are still often overlooked. While these are all things that can be accomplished at the individual level, we also need to promote a culture that embraces the positive aspects of masculinity — most importantly, being a good husband and a good father. This is particularly difficult because one-third of children are raised in a home with an absent father, so many men never had a positive male role model to look up to. CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER Above all else, men feel as if they have no sense of purpose. This is a natural result of a secular, cynical, and sleazy culture. Men need each other, women, religion, and to feel like they belong. While encouraging men to do what they can for themselves is a critical first step, rebuilding institutions such as religion and the nuclear family are necessary societal efforts. There is probably no other demographic group facing an intersection of crises to such an extraordinary degree. Young men need to be heard, and they need our help., , , https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/06/iStock-525409809-1024×683.jpg, Washington Examiner, Political News and Conservative Analysis About Congress, the President, and the Federal Government, https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/cropped-favicon-32×32.png, https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/feed/, Ben Rothove,

The presidential campaign of Vice President Kamala Harris has seized on Sen. J.D. Vance’s (R-OH) comments regarding childless women, and it makes perfect sense, demographically speaking: Single women are now the most important voter bloc for the Democratic Party.

While married men, married women, and unmarried men all trend at least narrowly Republican, unmarried women overwhelmingly vote for Democratic candidates. Moreover, the proportion of women who have never married has grown from 20% in 1950 to 30% today, while the percentage of women who are currently married has decreased from 70% to less than 50% in the same period. The number of married households with children has similarly declined.

There are about 42 million single women in the United States, making them one of the largest voting blocs in the country. As marriage and birth rates have fallen, so has the desire among women to enter serious relationships. While nearly two-thirds of single men say they are on the dating market, only one-third of single women say they are currently looking for a relationship. This has also resulted in more isolation for a considerable number of young men, but that is a whole other problem.

The rise of single women as a voting group was accompanied by the rise of identity politics. Married men and married women largely believe that women are treated fairly, while unmarried women still hold on to older feminist ideas about gender gaps. Furthermore, single women identify with each other as a group, while married women identify more with their families, husbands, and children. Again, this is in contrast to single men, who are increasingly isolated from each other.

Women now make up about 59% of all college graduates and earn more than half of all advanced degrees. As women trend to the left, they increasingly embrace radical left-wing ideas, such as Black Lives Matter’s explicit rejection of the nuclear family. The number of women’s and gender studies degrees has increased 300% since 1990, while diversity, equity, and inclusion offices have strengthened their institutional power across the country.

The saddest part about this trend is that the policies, ideas, and behavior promoted by the Left actively harm single women.

The economic programs embraced by the Democratic Party since at least former President Lyndon B. Johnson’s “Great Society” have promoted dependence on the state, sometimes explicitly so. However, Democrats have been unable to counter the fact that married women actually do far better economically and professionally than their single counterparts. They are much more likely to earn promotions or be homeowners, for example.

Modern “hookup culture,” which is especially prevalent on college campuses, has a devastating effect on the individuals involved and society more generally. Most people who engage in casual sexual encounters have reported “negative mental and emotional consequences,” and a larger number of hookup partners is correlated with more instances of depression and anxiety. Casual sex harms future relationships, as having multiple sexual partners before marriage drastically increases the likelihood of divorce.

Social liberalism and economic progressivism trap young men and women in a cycle of despair. In contrast, getting married and having children makes them more conservative. Even in extremely liberal (usually urban) areas, married people trend to the right. Married women are much happier than unmarried women, and mothers are much happier than non-mothers.

The collapse of the nuclear family as the fundamental building block of society has been the second most damaging trend of the last century, second only to the closely related decline of religion and church attendance.

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER

Conservatives need to do a better job of articulating the importance of family life. The greatest mistake social conservatives made in the last few decades was hyper-focusing on specific problems, such as abortion or gay marriage, instead of a broader defense of the nuclear family and traditional values as a unified front. This has resulted in accumulating numerous small losses and few successes.

Right-wing public policy needs to foster the development and prosperity of nuclear families above all else, and it needs to be framed in a manner that rewards family life. This is necessary for men, women, and the nation as a whole.

2024-08-01 15:33:00, http://s.wordpress.com/mshots/v1/https%3A%2F%2Fwww.washingtonexaminer.com%2Fopinion%2F3107216%2Fleft-needs-single-women-more-than-single-women-need-left%2F?w=600&h=450, The presidential campaign of Vice President Kamala Harris has seized on Sen. J.D. Vance’s (R-OH) comments regarding childless women, and it makes perfect sense, demographically speaking: Single women are now the most important voter bloc for the Democratic Party. While married men, married women, and unmarried men all trend at least narrowly Republican, unmarried women,

The presidential campaign of Vice President Kamala Harris has seized on Sen. J.D. Vance’s (R-OH) comments regarding childless women, and it makes perfect sense, demographically speaking: Single women are now the most important voter bloc for the Democratic Party.

While married men, married women, and unmarried men all trend at least narrowly Republican, unmarried women overwhelmingly vote for Democratic candidates. Moreover, the proportion of women who have never married has grown from 20% in 1950 to 30% today, while the percentage of women who are currently married has decreased from 70% to less than 50% in the same period. The number of married households with children has similarly declined.

There are about 42 million single women in the United States, making them one of the largest voting blocs in the country. As marriage and birth rates have fallen, so has the desire among women to enter serious relationships. While nearly two-thirds of single men say they are on the dating market, only one-third of single women say they are currently looking for a relationship. This has also resulted in more isolation for a considerable number of young men, but that is a whole other problem.

The rise of single women as a voting group was accompanied by the rise of identity politics. Married men and married women largely believe that women are treated fairly, while unmarried women still hold on to older feminist ideas about gender gaps. Furthermore, single women identify with each other as a group, while married women identify more with their families, husbands, and children. Again, this is in contrast to single men, who are increasingly isolated from each other.

Women now make up about 59% of all college graduates and earn more than half of all advanced degrees. As women trend to the left, they increasingly embrace radical left-wing ideas, such as Black Lives Matter’s explicit rejection of the nuclear family. The number of women’s and gender studies degrees has increased 300% since 1990, while diversity, equity, and inclusion offices have strengthened their institutional power across the country.

The saddest part about this trend is that the policies, ideas, and behavior promoted by the Left actively harm single women.

The economic programs embraced by the Democratic Party since at least former President Lyndon B. Johnson’s “Great Society” have promoted dependence on the state, sometimes explicitly so. However, Democrats have been unable to counter the fact that married women actually do far better economically and professionally than their single counterparts. They are much more likely to earn promotions or be homeowners, for example.

Modern “hookup culture,” which is especially prevalent on college campuses, has a devastating effect on the individuals involved and society more generally. Most people who engage in casual sexual encounters have reported “negative mental and emotional consequences,” and a larger number of hookup partners is correlated with more instances of depression and anxiety. Casual sex harms future relationships, as having multiple sexual partners before marriage drastically increases the likelihood of divorce.

Social liberalism and economic progressivism trap young men and women in a cycle of despair. In contrast, getting married and having children makes them more conservative. Even in extremely liberal (usually urban) areas, married people trend to the right. Married women are much happier than unmarried women, and mothers are much happier than non-mothers.

The collapse of the nuclear family as the fundamental building block of society has been the second most damaging trend of the last century, second only to the closely related decline of religion and church attendance.

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER

Conservatives need to do a better job of articulating the importance of family life. The greatest mistake social conservatives made in the last few decades was hyper-focusing on specific problems, such as abortion or gay marriage, instead of a broader defense of the nuclear family and traditional values as a unified front. This has resulted in accumulating numerous small losses and few successes.

Right-wing public policy needs to foster the development and prosperity of nuclear families above all else, and it needs to be framed in a manner that rewards family life. This is necessary for men, women, and the nation as a whole.

, The presidential campaign of Vice President Kamala Harris has seized on Sen. J.D. Vance’s (R-OH) comments regarding childless women, and it makes perfect sense, demographically speaking: Single women are now the most important voter bloc for the Democratic Party. While married men, married women, and unmarried men all trend at least narrowly Republican, unmarried women overwhelmingly vote for Democratic candidates. Moreover, the proportion of women who have never married has grown from 20% in 1950 to 30% today, while the percentage of women who are currently married has decreased from 70% to less than 50% in the same period. The number of married households with children has similarly declined. There are about 42 million single women in the United States, making them one of the largest voting blocs in the country. As marriage and birth rates have fallen, so has the desire among women to enter serious relationships. While nearly two-thirds of single men say they are on the dating market, only one-third of single women say they are currently looking for a relationship. This has also resulted in more isolation for a considerable number of young men, but that is a whole other problem. The rise of single women as a voting group was accompanied by the rise of identity politics. Married men and married women largely believe that women are treated fairly, while unmarried women still hold on to older feminist ideas about gender gaps. Furthermore, single women identify with each other as a group, while married women identify more with their families, husbands, and children. Again, this is in contrast to single men, who are increasingly isolated from each other. Women now make up about 59% of all college graduates and earn more than half of all advanced degrees. As women trend to the left, they increasingly embrace radical left-wing ideas, such as Black Lives Matter’s explicit rejection of the nuclear family. The number of women’s and gender studies degrees has increased 300% since 1990, while diversity, equity, and inclusion offices have strengthened their institutional power across the country. The saddest part about this trend is that the policies, ideas, and behavior promoted by the Left actively harm single women. The economic programs embraced by the Democratic Party since at least former President Lyndon B. Johnson’s “Great Society” have promoted dependence on the state, sometimes explicitly so. However, Democrats have been unable to counter the fact that married women actually do far better economically and professionally than their single counterparts. They are much more likely to earn promotions or be homeowners, for example. Modern “hookup culture,” which is especially prevalent on college campuses, has a devastating effect on the individuals involved and society more generally. Most people who engage in casual sexual encounters have reported “negative mental and emotional consequences,” and a larger number of hookup partners is correlated with more instances of depression and anxiety. Casual sex harms future relationships, as having multiple sexual partners before marriage drastically increases the likelihood of divorce. Social liberalism and economic progressivism trap young men and women in a cycle of despair. In contrast, getting married and having children makes them more conservative. Even in extremely liberal (usually urban) areas, married people trend to the right. Married women are much happier than unmarried women, and mothers are much happier than non-mothers. The collapse of the nuclear family as the fundamental building block of society has been the second most damaging trend of the last century, second only to the closely related decline of religion and church attendance. CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER Conservatives need to do a better job of articulating the importance of family life. The greatest mistake social conservatives made in the last few decades was hyper-focusing on specific problems, such as abortion or gay marriage, instead of a broader defense of the nuclear family and traditional values as a unified front. This has resulted in accumulating numerous small losses and few successes. Right-wing public policy needs to foster the development and prosperity of nuclear families above all else, and it needs to be framed in a manner that rewards family life. This is necessary for men, women, and the nation as a whole., , , https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/AP24135719056616.webp, Washington Examiner, Political News and Conservative Analysis About Congress, the President, and the Federal Government, https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/cropped-favicon-32×32.png, https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/feed/, Ben Rothove,

Vice President Kamala Harris’s presidential campaign held a “White Dudes for Harris” fundraising call on Monday, continuing the Democratic Party’s strategy of segregating voters into groups based on demographics.

White men are one of former President Donald Trump’s strongest voting blocs, so the call was focused on explaining ways that Republican policies supposedly harm them.

Secretary of Transportation Pete Buttigieg, who could become Harris’s running mate, said men are “more free” when they live in a country where abortion is legal, saying the quiet part out loud. That is, he admitted abortion is merely viewed as a form of birth control by Democrats, a far cry from the days of “safe, legal, and rare.”

Other running mate contenders who spoke on the call include Gov. J.B. Pritzker (D-IL), who said a second Trump term “would go after IVF and contraception,” and Gov. Tim Walz (D-MN), who said Democrats should never “shy away from our progressive values” because “one person’s socialism is another person’s neighborliness.”

Mark Hamill, who played Luke Skywalker, said Project 2025, which Trump has condemned, is “more terrifying than anything Edgar Allan Poe or Stephen King ever wrote.” He said Republicans want to “remake what we know as democracy into an autocracy.”

Actor Joseph Gordon-Levitt criticized those who support Trump because he is a “businessman,” arguing that Trump is not a “self-made man,” “successful,” or “honest.” Instead, he is a “con man” whose signature program as president was “cutting taxes for rich people.”

Actor Josh Gad said, “I stood over my kids’ bed and I wept” after the 2016 election, and “I felt like I let them down” because “we had the chance to have a female president for the first time.” He said he felt dread, fear, and shame after Trump entered the White House.

Gad also expressed his excitement about the caliber of the celebrities endorsing Harris instead of Trump, saying, “They have Kid Rock, Kevin Sorbo, and a dolphin aficionado. And we have the Hulk, Samwise Gamgee, Luke Skywalker, and Mayor Pete just on this Zoom. That’s pretty damn cool!”

Some of the other names on the three-hour call included director J.J. Abrams, Broadway star Rory O’Malley, actor Jeff Bridges, singer Lance Bass, anti-gun activist David Hogg, and comedian Paul Scheer.

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER

Both Republicans and Democrats have gotten into the habit of using celebrities as key campaign messengers, and it is annoying. No one really cares who Hulk Hogan or Mark Ruffalo is voting for. Moreover, the call showed the hypocrisy of the media because if a “White Dudes for Trump” fundraiser had been held, it would certainly dominate the news cycle for weeks and be held up as proof of racism on the Right.

Nevertheless, the fundraiser generated over $4 million for the Harris campaign and attracted almost 200,000 people.

2024-07-31 14:17:00, http://s.wordpress.com/mshots/v1/https%3A%2F%2Fwww.washingtonexaminer.com%2Fopinion%2Fbeltway-confidential%2F3105638%2Fwhite-dudes-for-harris-was-an-embarrassment%2F?w=600&h=450, Vice President Kamala Harris’s presidential campaign held a “White Dudes for Harris” fundraising call on Monday, continuing the Democratic Party’s strategy of segregating voters into groups based on demographics. White men are one of former President Donald Trump’s strongest voting blocs, so the call was focused on explaining ways that Republican policies supposedly harm them.,

Vice President Kamala Harris’s presidential campaign held a “White Dudes for Harris” fundraising call on Monday, continuing the Democratic Party’s strategy of segregating voters into groups based on demographics.

White men are one of former President Donald Trump’s strongest voting blocs, so the call was focused on explaining ways that Republican policies supposedly harm them.

Secretary of Transportation Pete Buttigieg, who could become Harris’s running mate, said men are “more free” when they live in a country where abortion is legal, saying the quiet part out loud. That is, he admitted abortion is merely viewed as a form of birth control by Democrats, a far cry from the days of “safe, legal, and rare.”

Other running mate contenders who spoke on the call include Gov. J.B. Pritzker (D-IL), who said a second Trump term “would go after IVF and contraception,” and Gov. Tim Walz (D-MN), who said Democrats should never “shy away from our progressive values” because “one person’s socialism is another person’s neighborliness.”

Mark Hamill, who played Luke Skywalker, said Project 2025, which Trump has condemned, is “more terrifying than anything Edgar Allan Poe or Stephen King ever wrote.” He said Republicans want to “remake what we know as democracy into an autocracy.”

Actor Joseph Gordon-Levitt criticized those who support Trump because he is a “businessman,” arguing that Trump is not a “self-made man,” “successful,” or “honest.” Instead, he is a “con man” whose signature program as president was “cutting taxes for rich people.”

Actor Josh Gad said, “I stood over my kids’ bed and I wept” after the 2016 election, and “I felt like I let them down” because “we had the chance to have a female president for the first time.” He said he felt dread, fear, and shame after Trump entered the White House.

Gad also expressed his excitement about the caliber of the celebrities endorsing Harris instead of Trump, saying, “They have Kid Rock, Kevin Sorbo, and a dolphin aficionado. And we have the Hulk, Samwise Gamgee, Luke Skywalker, and Mayor Pete just on this Zoom. That’s pretty damn cool!”

Some of the other names on the three-hour call included director J.J. Abrams, Broadway star Rory O’Malley, actor Jeff Bridges, singer Lance Bass, anti-gun activist David Hogg, and comedian Paul Scheer.

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER

Both Republicans and Democrats have gotten into the habit of using celebrities as key campaign messengers, and it is annoying. No one really cares who Hulk Hogan or Mark Ruffalo is voting for. Moreover, the call showed the hypocrisy of the media because if a “White Dudes for Trump” fundraiser had been held, it would certainly dominate the news cycle for weeks and be held up as proof of racism on the Right.

Nevertheless, the fundraiser generated over $4 million for the Harris campaign and attracted almost 200,000 people.

, Vice President Kamala Harris’s presidential campaign held a “White Dudes for Harris” fundraising call on Monday, continuing the Democratic Party’s strategy of segregating voters into groups based on demographics. White men are one of former President Donald Trump’s strongest voting blocs, so the call was focused on explaining ways that Republican policies supposedly harm them. Secretary of Transportation Pete Buttigieg, who could become Harris’s running mate, said men are “more free” when they live in a country where abortion is legal, saying the quiet part out loud. That is, he admitted abortion is merely viewed as a form of birth control by Democrats, a far cry from the days of “safe, legal, and rare.” Other running mate contenders who spoke on the call include Gov. J.B. Pritzker (D-IL), who said a second Trump term “would go after IVF and contraception,” and Gov. Tim Walz (D-MN), who said Democrats should never “shy away from our progressive values” because “one person’s socialism is another person’s neighborliness.” Mark Hamill, who played Luke Skywalker, said Project 2025, which Trump has condemned, is “more terrifying than anything Edgar Allan Poe or Stephen King ever wrote.” He said Republicans want to “remake what we know as democracy into an autocracy.” Actor Joseph Gordon-Levitt criticized those who support Trump because he is a “businessman,” arguing that Trump is not a “self-made man,” “successful,” or “honest.” Instead, he is a “con man” whose signature program as president was “cutting taxes for rich people.” Actor Josh Gad said, “I stood over my kids’ bed and I wept” after the 2016 election, and “I felt like I let them down” because “we had the chance to have a female president for the first time.” He said he felt dread, fear, and shame after Trump entered the White House. Gad also expressed his excitement about the caliber of the celebrities endorsing Harris instead of Trump, saying, “They have Kid Rock, Kevin Sorbo, and a dolphin aficionado. And we have the Hulk, Samwise Gamgee, Luke Skywalker, and Mayor Pete just on this Zoom. That’s pretty damn cool!” Some of the other names on the three-hour call included director J.J. Abrams, Broadway star Rory O’Malley, actor Jeff Bridges, singer Lance Bass, anti-gun activist David Hogg, and comedian Paul Scheer. CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER Both Republicans and Democrats have gotten into the habit of using celebrities as key campaign messengers, and it is annoying. No one really cares who Hulk Hogan or Mark Ruffalo is voting for. Moreover, the call showed the hypocrisy of the media because if a “White Dudes for Trump” fundraiser had been held, it would certainly dominate the news cycle for weeks and be held up as proof of racism on the Right. Nevertheless, the fundraiser generated over $4 million for the Harris campaign and attracted almost 200,000 people., , , https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/AP23124673573613.jpg.optimal.jpg, Washington Examiner, Political News and Conservative Analysis About Congress, the President, and the Federal Government, https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/cropped-favicon-32×32.png, https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/feed/, Ben Rothove,

Nikki Haley, former United Nations ambassador and presidential candidate, was interviewed Thursday for the first time since speaking at the Republican National Convention. She defended her decision to endorse former President Donald Trump and spoke about President Joe Biden dropping out of the 2024 election.

Haley told CNN’s Jake Tapper she “wasn’t surprised” that Biden stepped aside and that “there is an issue that we have in D.C. where people will go into office and they won’t let go, and then their staffers and their family keep propping them up.”

“I never thought he would make it to the election. I always said a vote for Joe Biden is a vote for Kamala Harris.”

The former South Carolina governor argued that while “the Democrats are very smart to put in a younger candidate,” they also selected “the weakest candidate.”

“She had one job that was to deal with illegal immigration and the border. She didn’t do it,” Haley said.

Haley pointed out that Vice President Kamala Harris had an extremely liberal voting record in the Senate, did not show up to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s address to Congress, and is against fracking.

She said Republicans need to attack Harris on merit instead of her race or sex because “the American people are smarter than that.”

“Talk about the fact that consumer prices have gone up 19.5% since Joe and Kamala were in office. Talk about the fact that she’s always sided with the Palestinian protests instead of our friend Israel. There are so many issues we can talk about when it comes to Kamala Harris that it doesn’t matter what she looks like,” Haley said.

She defended her endorsement of Trump, saying, “I know when it comes to energy dominance, I know when it comes to national security, I know when it comes to keeping our enemies at bay, I know he’s strong, and I know he’ll continue to do that.”

“I know he’ll deal with the border. You put that against Harris. I don’t know that I agree with even 10% of her,” Haley continued.

This comes after Haley sent a cease-and-desist letter to a group called “Haley Voters for Harris” requesting that it stop using her name to support the presumptive Democratic nominee.

The interview then shifted to foreign policy, particularly on disagreements within the Republican Party. Haley argued that Trump “was actually very hard on Russia” and pointed out that he “ordered arms and equipment to go to Ukraine even before he left office.”

“You look at Biden. A lot happened. Not only did Afghanistan fall, but you saw Russia become much more aggressive, and we’ve seen China become more aggressive,” Haley said. “I know that Trump kept dictators at bay, and that’s what I hope he will continue to do.”

Haley said she does not believe the United States needs to give Ukraine cash, but that it should try to supply the “equipment and ammunition they need to win.”

She said that while there is a division in the Republican Party on Ukraine, the Democratic Party’s lack of support for Israel is far worse, specifically mentioning Harris.

“Everybody ran to Israel’s defense on Oct. 7,” Haley said. “But now that Israel’s fighting back, you’re going to condemn them?”

Haley made clear she “was not looking for a job” in the Trump administration and declined to definitively say whether or not she would run for president again.

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER 

Haley has struck the appropriate tone to remain politically relevant in the GOP without sacrificing her principles. Unlike the aforementioned “Haley Voters for Harris,” who have allowed their hatred of Trump to blind themselves to Harris’s extremism, Haley sees a path forward within the Republican Party.

If Trump loses in November, it will be time to reassess the direction of the conservative movement. Haley may not be the right leader for this realignment, but rather than giving up, she has demonstrated faith in her party.

2024-07-26 21:42:00, http://s.wordpress.com/mshots/v1/https%3A%2F%2Fwww.washingtonexaminer.com%2Fopinion%2F3100871%2Fnikki-haley-defends-endorsement-trump%2F?w=600&h=450, Nikki Haley, former United Nations ambassador and presidential candidate, was interviewed Thursday for the first time since speaking at the Republican National Convention. She defended her decision to endorse former President Donald Trump and spoke about President Joe Biden dropping out of the 2024 election. Haley told CNN’s Jake Tapper she “wasn’t surprised” that Biden,

Nikki Haley, former United Nations ambassador and presidential candidate, was interviewed Thursday for the first time since speaking at the Republican National Convention. She defended her decision to endorse former President Donald Trump and spoke about President Joe Biden dropping out of the 2024 election.

Haley told CNN’s Jake Tapper she “wasn’t surprised” that Biden stepped aside and that “there is an issue that we have in D.C. where people will go into office and they won’t let go, and then their staffers and their family keep propping them up.”

“I never thought he would make it to the election. I always said a vote for Joe Biden is a vote for Kamala Harris.”

The former South Carolina governor argued that while “the Democrats are very smart to put in a younger candidate,” they also selected “the weakest candidate.”

“She had one job that was to deal with illegal immigration and the border. She didn’t do it,” Haley said.

Haley pointed out that Vice President Kamala Harris had an extremely liberal voting record in the Senate, did not show up to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s address to Congress, and is against fracking.

She said Republicans need to attack Harris on merit instead of her race or sex because “the American people are smarter than that.”

“Talk about the fact that consumer prices have gone up 19.5% since Joe and Kamala were in office. Talk about the fact that she’s always sided with the Palestinian protests instead of our friend Israel. There are so many issues we can talk about when it comes to Kamala Harris that it doesn’t matter what she looks like,” Haley said.

She defended her endorsement of Trump, saying, “I know when it comes to energy dominance, I know when it comes to national security, I know when it comes to keeping our enemies at bay, I know he’s strong, and I know he’ll continue to do that.”

“I know he’ll deal with the border. You put that against Harris. I don’t know that I agree with even 10% of her,” Haley continued.

This comes after Haley sent a cease-and-desist letter to a group called “Haley Voters for Harris” requesting that it stop using her name to support the presumptive Democratic nominee.

The interview then shifted to foreign policy, particularly on disagreements within the Republican Party. Haley argued that Trump “was actually very hard on Russia” and pointed out that he “ordered arms and equipment to go to Ukraine even before he left office.”

“You look at Biden. A lot happened. Not only did Afghanistan fall, but you saw Russia become much more aggressive, and we’ve seen China become more aggressive,” Haley said. “I know that Trump kept dictators at bay, and that’s what I hope he will continue to do.”

Haley said she does not believe the United States needs to give Ukraine cash, but that it should try to supply the “equipment and ammunition they need to win.”

She said that while there is a division in the Republican Party on Ukraine, the Democratic Party’s lack of support for Israel is far worse, specifically mentioning Harris.

“Everybody ran to Israel’s defense on Oct. 7,” Haley said. “But now that Israel’s fighting back, you’re going to condemn them?”

Haley made clear she “was not looking for a job” in the Trump administration and declined to definitively say whether or not she would run for president again.

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER 

Haley has struck the appropriate tone to remain politically relevant in the GOP without sacrificing her principles. Unlike the aforementioned “Haley Voters for Harris,” who have allowed their hatred of Trump to blind themselves to Harris’s extremism, Haley sees a path forward within the Republican Party.

If Trump loses in November, it will be time to reassess the direction of the conservative movement. Haley may not be the right leader for this realignment, but rather than giving up, she has demonstrated faith in her party.

, Nikki Haley, former United Nations ambassador and presidential candidate, was interviewed Thursday for the first time since speaking at the Republican National Convention. She defended her decision to endorse former President Donald Trump and spoke about President Joe Biden dropping out of the 2024 election. Haley told CNN’s Jake Tapper she “wasn’t surprised” that Biden stepped aside and that “there is an issue that we have in D.C. where people will go into office and they won’t let go, and then their staffers and their family keep propping them up.” “I never thought he would make it to the election. I always said a vote for Joe Biden is a vote for Kamala Harris.” The former South Carolina governor argued that while “the Democrats are very smart to put in a younger candidate,” they also selected “the weakest candidate.” “She had one job that was to deal with illegal immigration and the border. She didn’t do it,” Haley said. Haley pointed out that Vice President Kamala Harris had an extremely liberal voting record in the Senate, did not show up to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s address to Congress, and is against fracking. She said Republicans need to attack Harris on merit instead of her race or sex because “the American people are smarter than that.” “Talk about the fact that consumer prices have gone up 19.5% since Joe and Kamala were in office. Talk about the fact that she’s always sided with the Palestinian protests instead of our friend Israel. There are so many issues we can talk about when it comes to Kamala Harris that it doesn’t matter what she looks like,” Haley said. She defended her endorsement of Trump, saying, “I know when it comes to energy dominance, I know when it comes to national security, I know when it comes to keeping our enemies at bay, I know he’s strong, and I know he’ll continue to do that.” “I know he’ll deal with the border. You put that against Harris. I don’t know that I agree with even 10% of her,” Haley continued. This comes after Haley sent a cease-and-desist letter to a group called “Haley Voters for Harris” requesting that it stop using her name to support the presumptive Democratic nominee. The interview then shifted to foreign policy, particularly on disagreements within the Republican Party. Haley argued that Trump “was actually very hard on Russia” and pointed out that he “ordered arms and equipment to go to Ukraine even before he left office.” “You look at Biden. A lot happened. Not only did Afghanistan fall, but you saw Russia become much more aggressive, and we’ve seen China become more aggressive,” Haley said. “I know that Trump kept dictators at bay, and that’s what I hope he will continue to do.” Haley said she does not believe the United States needs to give Ukraine cash, but that it should try to supply the “equipment and ammunition they need to win.” She said that while there is a division in the Republican Party on Ukraine, the Democratic Party’s lack of support for Israel is far worse, specifically mentioning Harris. “Everybody ran to Israel’s defense on Oct. 7,” Haley said. “But now that Israel’s fighting back, you’re going to condemn them?” Haley made clear she “was not looking for a job” in the Trump administration and declined to definitively say whether or not she would run for president again. CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER   Haley has struck the appropriate tone to remain politically relevant in the GOP without sacrificing her principles. Unlike the aforementioned “Haley Voters for Harris,” who have allowed their hatred of Trump to blind themselves to Harris’s extremism, Haley sees a path forward within the Republican Party. If Trump loses in November, it will be time to reassess the direction of the conservative movement. Haley may not be the right leader for this realignment, but rather than giving up, she has demonstrated faith in her party., , , https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/AP24199062367202.webp, Washington Examiner, Political News and Conservative Analysis About Congress, the President, and the Federal Government, https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/cropped-favicon-32×32.png, https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/feed/, Ben Rothove,

Former President Richard Nixon resigned in disgrace 50 years ago this August. He lost the support of his country, his party, and his friends. Just two years earlier, he won in a historic landslide, but he soon became one of the most hated men in America. In 2024, however, something is changing: Many young conservatives regard Nixon as a hero.

At the Republican National Convention, college students said they were fans of Nixon, while one even said he was a “top-10” president. Nixon pins were handed out by the Nixon Foundation, which was celebrated by a group of young people trying to advance environmentalist policies within the Republican Party. TikTokers and X users are regularly producing meme homages to the 37th president, and Politico has labeled the trend a “Nixon renaissance.”

The simplest explanation for this phenomenon is the existence of numerous parallels between Nixon and former President Donald Trump. Both had scandal-plagued presidencies and blamed the political establishment for many of their troubles. Nixon famously said, “Never forget: The press is the enemy. The establishment is the enemy. The professors are the enemy.” If someone did not know any better, that line could just have easily been attributed to Trump. Moreover, Trump was impeached, and Nixon certainly would have been impeached if he had not resigned from office.

Nixon won the presidency in 1968 after previously losing in 1960, and Trump is attempting a similar political comeback in 2024. Trump’s running mate, Sen. J.D. Vance (R-OH), has also been compared to Nixon, as both were selected to be vice presidential nominees at the age of 39 after only two years in the Senate.

However, the Nixon revival is deeper than just some superficial similarities to contemporary figures. Right-wing journalist Christopher Rufo produced a video last year titled “Nixon Forever” that argued conservatives need to look at Nixon’s “counter-revolution” and appeal to the silent majority to reclaim the culture. He said Nixon was able to bring back law and order after the 1960s and put together the blueprint for combating the administrative state.

Voices on the “New Right,” such as Sohrab Ahmari, have praised Nixon’s policies that “made peace with the New Deal and pursued realism and restraint abroad.” Former presidential candidate Vivek Ramaswamy even said that he considered Nixon to be the “most under-appreciated president” because he was “deeply pragmatic” and “a realist.”

The Nixon Foundation has also played a part in promoting Nixon’s legacy to young people. Its social media accounts regularly go viral with “hard edits” designed to make Nixon look cool or clips from his speeches and interviews. It has dabbled in contemporary politics, particularly when Nixon’s legacy is in question, such as criticizing Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson for blaming violence in his city on Nixon.

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER

The strangest part of this trend is that Nixon was not seen as being particularly conservative during his presidency. A prominent right-wing group criticized him at the time for “inflation and unemployment, excessive taxation and inordinate welfarism,” as well as for “his overtures to Red China, done in the absence of any public concession by Red China to American and Western causes.” Furthermore, the Watergate scandal discredited Nixon in the eyes of the vast majority of people.

Nixon’s presidency did have more accomplishments than it is given credit for, such as passing the National Cancer Act of 1971, but it is still better relegated to the ash heap of history.

2024-07-25 21:11:00, http://s.wordpress.com/mshots/v1/https%3A%2F%2Fwww.washingtonexaminer.com%2Fopinion%2Fbeltway-confidential%2F3099476%2Fis-richard-nixon-cool-now%2F?w=600&h=450, Former President Richard Nixon resigned in disgrace 50 years ago this August. He lost the support of his country, his party, and his friends. Just two years earlier, he won in a historic landslide, but he soon became one of the most hated men in America. In 2024, however, something is changing: Many young conservatives,

Former President Richard Nixon resigned in disgrace 50 years ago this August. He lost the support of his country, his party, and his friends. Just two years earlier, he won in a historic landslide, but he soon became one of the most hated men in America. In 2024, however, something is changing: Many young conservatives regard Nixon as a hero.

At the Republican National Convention, college students said they were fans of Nixon, while one even said he was a “top-10” president. Nixon pins were handed out by the Nixon Foundation, which was celebrated by a group of young people trying to advance environmentalist policies within the Republican Party. TikTokers and X users are regularly producing meme homages to the 37th president, and Politico has labeled the trend a “Nixon renaissance.”

The simplest explanation for this phenomenon is the existence of numerous parallels between Nixon and former President Donald Trump. Both had scandal-plagued presidencies and blamed the political establishment for many of their troubles. Nixon famously said, “Never forget: The press is the enemy. The establishment is the enemy. The professors are the enemy.” If someone did not know any better, that line could just have easily been attributed to Trump. Moreover, Trump was impeached, and Nixon certainly would have been impeached if he had not resigned from office.

Nixon won the presidency in 1968 after previously losing in 1960, and Trump is attempting a similar political comeback in 2024. Trump’s running mate, Sen. J.D. Vance (R-OH), has also been compared to Nixon, as both were selected to be vice presidential nominees at the age of 39 after only two years in the Senate.

However, the Nixon revival is deeper than just some superficial similarities to contemporary figures. Right-wing journalist Christopher Rufo produced a video last year titled “Nixon Forever” that argued conservatives need to look at Nixon’s “counter-revolution” and appeal to the silent majority to reclaim the culture. He said Nixon was able to bring back law and order after the 1960s and put together the blueprint for combating the administrative state.

Voices on the “New Right,” such as Sohrab Ahmari, have praised Nixon’s policies that “made peace with the New Deal and pursued realism and restraint abroad.” Former presidential candidate Vivek Ramaswamy even said that he considered Nixon to be the “most under-appreciated president” because he was “deeply pragmatic” and “a realist.”

The Nixon Foundation has also played a part in promoting Nixon’s legacy to young people. Its social media accounts regularly go viral with “hard edits” designed to make Nixon look cool or clips from his speeches and interviews. It has dabbled in contemporary politics, particularly when Nixon’s legacy is in question, such as criticizing Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson for blaming violence in his city on Nixon.

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER

The strangest part of this trend is that Nixon was not seen as being particularly conservative during his presidency. A prominent right-wing group criticized him at the time for “inflation and unemployment, excessive taxation and inordinate welfarism,” as well as for “his overtures to Red China, done in the absence of any public concession by Red China to American and Western causes.” Furthermore, the Watergate scandal discredited Nixon in the eyes of the vast majority of people.

Nixon’s presidency did have more accomplishments than it is given credit for, such as passing the National Cancer Act of 1971, but it is still better relegated to the ash heap of history.

, Former President Richard Nixon resigned in disgrace 50 years ago this August. He lost the support of his country, his party, and his friends. Just two years earlier, he won in a historic landslide, but he soon became one of the most hated men in America. In 2024, however, something is changing: Many young conservatives regard Nixon as a hero. At the Republican National Convention, college students said they were fans of Nixon, while one even said he was a “top-10” president. Nixon pins were handed out by the Nixon Foundation, which was celebrated by a group of young people trying to advance environmentalist policies within the Republican Party. TikTokers and X users are regularly producing meme homages to the 37th president, and Politico has labeled the trend a “Nixon renaissance.” The simplest explanation for this phenomenon is the existence of numerous parallels between Nixon and former President Donald Trump. Both had scandal-plagued presidencies and blamed the political establishment for many of their troubles. Nixon famously said, “Never forget: The press is the enemy. The establishment is the enemy. The professors are the enemy.” If someone did not know any better, that line could just have easily been attributed to Trump. Moreover, Trump was impeached, and Nixon certainly would have been impeached if he had not resigned from office. Nixon won the presidency in 1968 after previously losing in 1960, and Trump is attempting a similar political comeback in 2024. Trump’s running mate, Sen. J.D. Vance (R-OH), has also been compared to Nixon, as both were selected to be vice presidential nominees at the age of 39 after only two years in the Senate. However, the Nixon revival is deeper than just some superficial similarities to contemporary figures. Right-wing journalist Christopher Rufo produced a video last year titled “Nixon Forever” that argued conservatives need to look at Nixon’s “counter-revolution” and appeal to the silent majority to reclaim the culture. He said Nixon was able to bring back law and order after the 1960s and put together the blueprint for combating the administrative state. Voices on the “New Right,” such as Sohrab Ahmari, have praised Nixon’s policies that “made peace with the New Deal and pursued realism and restraint abroad.” Former presidential candidate Vivek Ramaswamy even said that he considered Nixon to be the “most under-appreciated president” because he was “deeply pragmatic” and “a realist.” The Nixon Foundation has also played a part in promoting Nixon’s legacy to young people. Its social media accounts regularly go viral with “hard edits” designed to make Nixon look cool or clips from his speeches and interviews. It has dabbled in contemporary politics, particularly when Nixon’s legacy is in question, such as criticizing Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson for blaming violence in his city on Nixon. CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER The strangest part of this trend is that Nixon was not seen as being particularly conservative during his presidency. A prominent right-wing group criticized him at the time for “inflation and unemployment, excessive taxation and inordinate welfarism,” as well as for “his overtures to Red China, done in the absence of any public concession by Red China to American and Western causes.” Furthermore, the Watergate scandal discredited Nixon in the eyes of the vast majority of people. Nixon’s presidency did have more accomplishments than it is given credit for, such as passing the National Cancer Act of 1971, but it is still better relegated to the ash heap of history., , , https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/FEA.Nixon1_-1024×591.jpg, Washington Examiner, Political News and Conservative Analysis About Congress, the President, and the Federal Government, https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/cropped-favicon-32×32.png, https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/feed/, Ben Rothove,

After former President Donald Trump selected market skeptic Sen. J.D. Vance (R-OH) to be his running mate, many are asking if Republicans still believe in free markets. However, it is just as important to ask if they ever did.

When Trump ran in 2016, he bucked the Republican consensus around free trade and was more willing to embrace populist ideas on economic issues. However, with a few exceptions, he governed as a fairly traditional economic conservative. 

Vance, on the other hand, has a fundamentally different vision. He praised the work of Federal Trade Commission Chairwoman Lina Khan, despite her “anti-innovation, anti-tech, anti-big business, and anti-consumer agenda,” as Reason put it. He has supported raising the minimum wage to as high as $20 per hour, worked on a populist banking bill with Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), and expressed interest in partnering with “the Bernie Bros.”

To be fair to Vance, he is simply more direct about his disdain for markets than many others on the Right.

No Republican has ever had a perfect record on supporting pro-market solutions to economic problems. The “Old Right” of President Calvin Coolidge and Sen. Robert Taft (R-OH) was often in favor of high tariffs. Presidents Dwight Eisenhower and Richard Nixon were friendly to New Deal and Great Society programs, while President Herbert Hoover laid the groundwork for the New Deal in the first place. 

President Ronald Reagan arguably had the best performance, but even his administration had a poor record on the national debt. More recently, during the 2008 financial crisis, President George W. Bush said he “abandoned free-market principles to save the free-market system.” The list goes on, but the point is that Republicans have a tendency to talk about capitalism a lot more than they govern like capitalists.

The way in which anti-market policies have found their way into GOP politics has changed throughout the decades, but that does not mean they should be celebrated. The fact remains that free-market capitalism has been the most effective economic system in history and one of the greatest forces for good in the world. While Republicans may have historically failed in the specifics, they have recognized that at least getting close to true capitalism is the goal.

Moving forward, pro-market Republicans need to distinguish themselves from the “crony capitalists” who have supported subsidies, tariffs, and corporate welfare to favor businesses at the expense of consumers. Being “pro-business” is distinct from being “pro-market,” but many Republicans have conflated the two.

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER

Voters are often swayed by rhetoric that promises handouts instead of promoting personal responsibility, so it is inherently difficult to make free markets a popular pitch. Republicans need to focus their efforts on explaining the problems with government interference in the economy instead of simply ceding that issue to the Left.

Advocating progressive economic policies should be viewed as a violation of conservative principles, whether it comes from the “establishment” or not.

2024-07-24 20:06:00, http://s.wordpress.com/mshots/v1/https%3A%2F%2Fwww.washingtonexaminer.com%2Fopinion%2F3097847%2Fhas-the-republican-party-abandoned-free-enterprise%2F?w=600&h=450, After former President Donald Trump selected market skeptic Sen. J.D. Vance (R-OH) to be his running mate, many are asking if Republicans still believe in free markets. However, it is just as important to ask if they ever did. When Trump ran in 2016, he bucked the Republican consensus around free trade and was more,

After former President Donald Trump selected market skeptic Sen. J.D. Vance (R-OH) to be his running mate, many are asking if Republicans still believe in free markets. However, it is just as important to ask if they ever did.

When Trump ran in 2016, he bucked the Republican consensus around free trade and was more willing to embrace populist ideas on economic issues. However, with a few exceptions, he governed as a fairly traditional economic conservative. 

Vance, on the other hand, has a fundamentally different vision. He praised the work of Federal Trade Commission Chairwoman Lina Khan, despite her “anti-innovation, anti-tech, anti-big business, and anti-consumer agenda,” as Reason put it. He has supported raising the minimum wage to as high as $20 per hour, worked on a populist banking bill with Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), and expressed interest in partnering with “the Bernie Bros.”

To be fair to Vance, he is simply more direct about his disdain for markets than many others on the Right.

No Republican has ever had a perfect record on supporting pro-market solutions to economic problems. The “Old Right” of President Calvin Coolidge and Sen. Robert Taft (R-OH) was often in favor of high tariffs. Presidents Dwight Eisenhower and Richard Nixon were friendly to New Deal and Great Society programs, while President Herbert Hoover laid the groundwork for the New Deal in the first place. 

President Ronald Reagan arguably had the best performance, but even his administration had a poor record on the national debt. More recently, during the 2008 financial crisis, President George W. Bush said he “abandoned free-market principles to save the free-market system.” The list goes on, but the point is that Republicans have a tendency to talk about capitalism a lot more than they govern like capitalists.

The way in which anti-market policies have found their way into GOP politics has changed throughout the decades, but that does not mean they should be celebrated. The fact remains that free-market capitalism has been the most effective economic system in history and one of the greatest forces for good in the world. While Republicans may have historically failed in the specifics, they have recognized that at least getting close to true capitalism is the goal.

Moving forward, pro-market Republicans need to distinguish themselves from the “crony capitalists” who have supported subsidies, tariffs, and corporate welfare to favor businesses at the expense of consumers. Being “pro-business” is distinct from being “pro-market,” but many Republicans have conflated the two.

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER

Voters are often swayed by rhetoric that promises handouts instead of promoting personal responsibility, so it is inherently difficult to make free markets a popular pitch. Republicans need to focus their efforts on explaining the problems with government interference in the economy instead of simply ceding that issue to the Left.

Advocating progressive economic policies should be viewed as a violation of conservative principles, whether it comes from the “establishment” or not.

, After former President Donald Trump selected market skeptic Sen. J.D. Vance (R-OH) to be his running mate, many are asking if Republicans still believe in free markets. However, it is just as important to ask if they ever did. When Trump ran in 2016, he bucked the Republican consensus around free trade and was more willing to embrace populist ideas on economic issues. However, with a few exceptions, he governed as a fairly traditional economic conservative.  Vance, on the other hand, has a fundamentally different vision. He praised the work of Federal Trade Commission Chairwoman Lina Khan, despite her “anti-innovation, anti-tech, anti-big business, and anti-consumer agenda,” as Reason put it. He has supported raising the minimum wage to as high as $20 per hour, worked on a populist banking bill with Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), and expressed interest in partnering with “the Bernie Bros.” To be fair to Vance, he is simply more direct about his disdain for markets than many others on the Right. No Republican has ever had a perfect record on supporting pro-market solutions to economic problems. The “Old Right” of President Calvin Coolidge and Sen. Robert Taft (R-OH) was often in favor of high tariffs. Presidents Dwight Eisenhower and Richard Nixon were friendly to New Deal and Great Society programs, while President Herbert Hoover laid the groundwork for the New Deal in the first place.  President Ronald Reagan arguably had the best performance, but even his administration had a poor record on the national debt. More recently, during the 2008 financial crisis, President George W. Bush said he “abandoned free-market principles to save the free-market system.” The list goes on, but the point is that Republicans have a tendency to talk about capitalism a lot more than they govern like capitalists. The way in which anti-market policies have found their way into GOP politics has changed throughout the decades, but that does not mean they should be celebrated. The fact remains that free-market capitalism has been the most effective economic system in history and one of the greatest forces for good in the world. While Republicans may have historically failed in the specifics, they have recognized that at least getting close to true capitalism is the goal. Moving forward, pro-market Republicans need to distinguish themselves from the “crony capitalists” who have supported subsidies, tariffs, and corporate welfare to favor businesses at the expense of consumers. Being “pro-business” is distinct from being “pro-market,” but many Republicans have conflated the two. CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER Voters are often swayed by rhetoric that promises handouts instead of promoting personal responsibility, so it is inherently difficult to make free markets a popular pitch. Republicans need to focus their efforts on explaining the problems with government interference in the economy instead of simply ceding that issue to the Left. Advocating progressive economic policies should be viewed as a violation of conservative principles, whether it comes from the “establishment” or not., , , https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/AP24205033710645-scaled-1024×683.webp, Washington Examiner, Political News and Conservative Analysis About Congress, the President, and the Federal Government, https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/cropped-favicon-32×32.png, https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/feed/, Ben Rothove,

MSNBC decided to pull Morning Joe from the air on Monday morning after the assassination attempt on former President Donald Trump Saturday due to fears that a panelist might make an offensive remark about the shooting.

According to CNN, “the decision was made to avoid a scenario in which one of the show’s stable of two dozen-plus guests might make an inappropriate comment on live television that could be used to assail the program and network as a whole.” MSNBC decided to air continued breaking news coverage instead.

This is a stunning implicit admission that Morning Joe has become one of the worst platforms for apocalyptic political rhetoric amid calls for unity on both the Left and the Right. For example, a guest on the show recently compared Republicans to “Confederate traitors,” while host Joe Scarborough has said that Trump is an “immediate threat” who could end the United States.

MSNBC’s troubles go far beyond just one show, however. One MSNBC writer wrote that “Donald Trump has truly earned comparisons to Adolf Hitler,” host Joy Reid has argued that Republicans are “pro-rape” and “pro-child marriage,” and Rachel Maddow has attacked NBC for hiring former RNC Chairwoman Ronna McDaniel as a contributor, comparing her to a “mobster” and a “pickpocket.”

MSNBC previously had to make a similar decision when it canceled terrorist sympathizer Mehdi Hasan’s show after he repeatedly defended Hamas and antisemites such as far-left Reps. Ilhan Omar (D-MN) and Rashida Tlaib (D-MI). Before working at the network, Hasan had worked for Al Jazeera, which is a Qatari-backed propaganda outlet.

In the aftermath of Trump’s near-murder, there has been introspection across the spectrum about the use of divisive language in politics. The decision to keep ‘Morning Joe’ off the air is a recognition that MSNBC has been a major part of the problem, but it is not enough. The show is expected to return on Tuesday morning and will likely revert to its typical mindless discourse in a matter of days.

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER

One network changing its schedule for one day will do little to reverse the years of calling Trump a fascist, comparing him to Adolf Hitler, saying that Republicans are a “basket of deplorables,” and arguing that the 2024 election could decide the fate of democracy itself. No one besides the unhinged gunman himself is responsible for his actions, but the political climate that has been created by the media and politicians has certainly raised the temperature.

Depolarization starts with recognizing its roots, such as providing toxic voices with large platforms.

Vivek Ramaswamy addressed the National Conservatism Conference in Washington D.C. earlier this week and criticized those in the Republican Party who are advocating irresponsible economic policies, bucking many in the audience.

Ramaswamy’s speech centered on the “intellectual rift” in the “America First-National Conservative movement” between “the national protectionist direction of the future and a national libertarian direction for the future.”

“Both of them reject the historical neoliberal consensus on foreign policy, on trade, and on immigration, but for different reasons, and with very different implications.”

Ramaswamy argued that the “neoliberal” belief in absolute free trade resulted in a dangerous dependence on China. He invoked Friedrich Hayek, who Ramaswamy insisted “believed that it was perfectly appropriate for a nation, even committed to free trade, to not depend on an adversary to provide its own military equipment.”

He said that dependence on China has created a false moral equivalency between it and the United States, pointing out that corporations will criticize social issues in the U.S. but ignore human rights abuses in China.

Ramaswamy argued that, while the national protectionist view recognizes the danger of this, “it commingles those concerns with a totally separate concern about protecting American manufacturers from the effects of price erosion from foreign competition” and “imagines an industrial policy that allows us to use taxpayer resources to purposefully subsidize certain critical areas for American production.”

In contrast, the national libertarian view “is focused exclusively on eliminating U.S. dependence on China in those critical sectors for U.S. security.” 

“If we’re really serious about decoupling from China,” Ramaswamy said, “that actually means more, not less, trade with allies like Japan, South Korea, India, the Philippines, Vietnam, Mexico, and other countries around the world.”

“If your top objective is to protect American manufacturers from the effects of foreign competition, then you’re necessarily extending the time period it’s going to take to actually decouple from China.“

Ramaswamy made clear that the national libertarian opposition to free trade with China is primarily a question of national defense, not economic policy.

However, Ramaswamy believes that the “most important difference of all between the national protectionist wing and the national libertarian wing” is their “attitudes to the regulatory state itself.”

While the national protectionists believe “in reshaping and redirecting the regulatory state to achieve objectives that advance the interests of American workers,” Ramaswamy says national libertarians advocate for “dismantling the regulatory state altogether, not because we don’t care about American workers or manufacturers, but because we believe this is the way to best advance the interests of American workers and manufacturers.”

Ramaswamy criticized national protectionists such as Sen. J.D. Vance (R-OH), who “believe in expanding the scope of certain agencies like the FTC” and “believe that Lina Khan is doing a good job” as commissioner of the Federal Trade Commission.

“National protectionists believe that the failure of poorly-run companies in regulated industries like aviation and railroads means that we need more regulations to protect workers and passengers in those industries,” while Ramaswamy argues that “the regulatory state was the root cause of those failures in the first place.”

“I don’t think we’re going to beat the Left by adopting the methods of the Left. I don’t care to replace a left-wing nanny state with a right-wing nanny state.”

“Every national conservative is against the weaponization of administrative power” to advance “social progressivism,” so Ramaswamy, rightfully, argues that it is intellectually incoherent to try and strengthen bureaucratic agencies in the name of conservatism.

Ramaswamy’s decision to buck the national protectionists was surprisingly bold and worthy of praise. The reckless collectivist economics advocated by individuals like Oren Cass, whose organization is bankrolled by left-wing groups to advance left-wing talking points, Sohrab Ahmari, a self-described New Dealer, and Vance are an attempt to fold progressive ideas into the Republican Party, which poses a danger to the conservative movement long-term.

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER

Ramaswamy’s “national libertarian” vision fits well within the American conservative tradition and closely resembles the policies of “Old Right” figures like President Calvin Coolidge. This is in stark contrast to the self-identified conservatives who do not believe in limiting the power of government and, in many ways, take after the Democrats they claim to be against.

In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king. While Ramaswamy’s “national libertarianism” does not always effectively answer questions about foreign policy or immigration, it is actually conservative.

Marriage rates are collapsing in the United States, according to polling data, but a wide partisan gap suggests that a reduction in marriage is a symptom of a broader rejection of traditional institutions.

“For 40 years during the middle of the 20th century, Gallup recorded little difference in the marriage rates of middle-aged Republicans and Democrats,” but “a gap emerged in the 1980s as the rate fell rapidly for Democrats but much less so for Republicans,” according to the poll.

The marriage rate for middle-aged Democrats “fell from as high as 90% at points in the 1950s and 1970s to below 60% after 1990 and just under 50% in 2021.” In 2024, only 49% of Democrats aged 30-50 are married. These numbers are closely mirrored by independents.

Republicans have seen declining marriage rates as well, but the drop is much less pronounced. According to Gallup, “Republicans’ marriage rate fell from a peak of 90% in 1965 to less than 80% since 1990 and stands at 67% in 2024.”

“From 2000 to the present, the Republican marriage rate has averaged 18 percentage points above the Democratic marriage rate,” according to Gallup.

Moreover, while “party identification is strongly correlated with a number of demographic characteristics,” the “gap between Republicans’ and Democrats’ marriage rates persists even after adjusting for age, gender, education, and race or ethnicity,” the poll continued.

In fact, “the gap in marriage rates between Republicans and Democrats actually increases after education is taken into account,” the poll said.

While Republicans are far more likely to be religious than Democrats, and religious people are more likely to be married than non-religious ones, there is still a 14 point partisan difference after adjusting for religiosity.

Moreover, Democrats are more likely to reject marriage altogether, as “the share of 30- to 50-year-olds who report having never married more than tripled between 1979 and 2024, from 8% to 26%.” Among Republicans, that number has only increased from 6% to 12%.

One of the biggest reasons behind the partisan gap is that Republicans tend to give more “moral weight to marriage when it comes to things like sex, child rearing and plans for a lifelong partnership.” For example, Democrats are considerably more likely to say that it is morally acceptable to have a child out of wedlock.

While “marriage is associated with well-being” and married people are more likely to say they are living close “to the best possible life,” only 21% of Democrats say that married people are generally happier than unmarried people. Additionally, less than one-third of Democrats believe “marriage improves partnerships by strengthening the commitment to one another.” This means that many on the left perceive marriage as simply less desirable.

Democrats are increasingly likely to say marriage is an outdated institution, and Democratic parents are less likely to say they hope their children will get married in the future.

This still does not answer why Democrats’ attitudes toward marriage have changed so drastically, however.

One part could be that the fundamental dividing line between the left and right in the U.S. is no longer a question of who has better economic policies or who can better deal with national security threats but rather a question of moral purpose. Conservatives believe that institutions such as church and marriage serve the public good, that there is wisdom in the Judeo-Christian tradition, and that the nuclear family rather than the individual is the unit around which civilization is built. 

In contrast, modern left-wing orthodoxy worships the individual above all else. This is why leftists believe in abortion because they view children as an inconvenience and why they reject the objective gender binary because it restricts individual expression. Marriage is the giving of one to another and, thus, is unselfish. Therefore, the Left thinks it is an institution that needs to be burned down. Another reason behind left-wing opposition to marriage is that it provides inherent stability to society, standing in the way of revolution. That is why Karl Marx opposed it: If people are happy, they do not want communism.

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER

Another reason behind the marriage disparity could be that getting married and having children moves people to the right. This would make sense, as the Democratic Party’s social and economic policies are not family-friendly. Furthermore, as someone takes on the responsibilities that come with family life, they recognize the wisdom in conservatism.

The nuclear family is at the root of almost every political disagreement today, and the marriage gap is one of the most obvious manifestations of this. Better understanding how public policy can promote marriage and family life would do conservatives well in the long-term.

The House of Representatives’s far-left “Squad” is likely to lose another member after last month’s embarrassing defeat of Rep. Jamaal Bowman (D-NY).

Socialist Rep. Cori Bush (D-MO) is polling narrowly behind her primary opponent Wesley Bell, who had polled below Bush by double digits earlier this year. Bell is St. Louis County’s prosecuting attorney, and he also leads Bush in favorability and job performance ratings.

Bush has faced numerous controversies during her time in elected office, the most recent of which included falling for a parody social media account called “Rabbi Linda Goldstein” that pretends to be the chief rabbi of Gaza and make cartoonishly antisemitic posts in an attempt to trick progressives into sharing them.

“Goldstein” reached out to Bush’s campaign in June with a proposal to hold a fundraiser. “I’ve been bouncing around different cities since my congregation was displaced from Gaza after Israel’s invasion on October 7,” the prankster wrote in an email to Ronika Moody, the campaign’s finance and engagement director.

“Also — would [Bush] travel to the Gaza border for the fundraiser? The optics could be incredible!”

Completely oblivious to the con, Moody wrote back: “Cori is interested in hosting in Gaza and it’s something she has been trying to plan. Unfortunately, we have not been successful with that opportunity as of yet.”

“Goldstein” then said the topics for the fundraiser could be organized around “finding a final solution to the problem of Zionism” and “the morality” of the intifada.

The person who runs the parody account told the New York Post that Bush is “completely clueless about how the Israel-Palestine conflict works, but eager to speak up, because it gives her cover to publicly hate Jews.”

Bush, who rose to prominence as a Black Lives Matter activist during the riots in Ferguson, Missouri, has been one of the most prominent critics of Israel in Congress and called for an end to Israel’s supposed “ethnic cleansing campaign.”

She also claimed to have performed numerous miracles as a faith healer in her autobiography. For example, she said that after telling a disabled 3-year girl “you will walk,” the girl was able to take her first steps. In another instance, she wrote about curing a woman’s tumors, saying: “I laid hands on her and prayed, and I felt that my hand was no longer touching a tumor. It shrank along with the others on her body.”

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER

Bush and the rest of the “Squad” are continuing to reel from Bowman’s political demise, which was the first real consequence the group has faced for its rabid antisemitism and far-left positions that are well outside the political mainstream. While Democratic leadership mostly stood by Bowman in the primary, they weren’t exactly disappointed to say goodbye to their fire alarm-polling colleague. The same will be true of Bush.

Bush and the other members of the “Squad” are cancerous tumors on our political system, so her defeat is the first step in the healing process.