What Happened To The Democratic Party We Once Knew
What happened to the Democratic Party we once knew? It seems that over the years, the party has shifted, and not in a way that resonates with the people who once felt truly represented by it. In the past, the Democratic Party prided itself on standing up for working-class Americans, fighting for civil rights, and promoting policies that helped the middle class thrive. But today, it feels like the party has moved further away from those core values.
In my view, the modern Democratic Party has become entrenched in elitism. Instead of listening to the concerns of everyday citizens, they seem more focused on maintaining their power. The rhetoric from top-tier Democrats often comes across as dismissive, telling their supporters that they know what’s best. This attitude is most apparent when they push progressive policies without fully considering how they will affect the average American. Whether it’s on issues like healthcare, education, or immigration, it feels like the leadership is more concerned with the agenda of the elite than the voices of those they claim to represent.
What’s worse is the way they now act as though they have all the answers, insisting that their way is the only way. While they demand change, it’s often change that comes from the top down, rather than a true conversation with the grassroots. Instead of uniting people, they’ve fostered division, and instead of empowering citizens, they’ve begun to foster a sense of dependency on government.
For many of us, the Democratic Party used to be the champion of the people, the party that fought for the working class and the marginalized. But now, it feels as though it’s lost its way, more focused on keeping its grip on power than listening to those who feel forgotten. The party needs to remember that true leadership comes from understanding the struggles of everyday Americans, not from telling them what’s best for them. Until that happens, it’s hard to recognize the party it once was.
ThoughtsAt one time, Republicans and democrats would vote, accept the results and get on with their lives.
The democrats have changed things. They now glorify cheating and are quite brazen about it. They see nothing wrong with it if it helps them win.
I think special interest groups have taken over the democrat party. The far left is now in charge of making policy. The moderate democrats are angry and confused. They feel abandoned. Many are coming to the Republican party. Big names.
The shocking thing is how many democrats don't see that they are doing anything wrong. They refuse to realize they've lost touch with the majority of Americans. How we see things, our values, beliefs and more.
In this past election, they didn't seem to get the significance of the landslide victory for President Donald Trump. They lied, cheated, committed horrible things to stop him. It didn't work. The democrats did everything except work to make their party more acceptable to the American people. President Donald Trump emerged as a person willing to sacrifice everything for America. His fortune as well as his life. He endured the type of hell true heroes handle with grace.
The democrat party believes the American people are the problem. Everything would be okay if they would just do what the far left wants done. In the minds of the far left, they know better than the American people on how the American people should live their lives. These are thoughts held by leaders in communist countries.
In the future, the democrat party is going to have to do more than simply call their opponent names, provide platitudes and pat themselves on the back. This last election proves all their accusations fell on deaf ears. They are going to have to provide candidates that will reach out to the average working person. Candidates the average working person finds relatable. They need to stop depending on celebrity endorsements. It doesn't work. The democrat party has become the party of elitist snobs.
To successfully change, the democrat party will have to take a good look at itself and be honest. It will have to embrace the mistakes that have been done and work to change.
This will require a huge reckoning. I think the democrat party no longer has leaders that can do such a thing.
I miss the old democrat party that loved American and Americans. The one now loves its special interests, hates America, Americans and thinks it knows better than all of us.
Unless the democrat party changes, Republicans will be in charge of things for a long time."they didn't seem to get the significance of the landslide victory for president donald trump. "
This is a landslide?? In my book, this is continued division. This is no mandate.
Yes, 312 electoral votes to 226 is a landslide victory. Then there is the trifecta of having the White House, Senate, and the Congress. The only places democrats won is where they usually win. President Donald Trump took ALL of the swing states. He took several states he lost in 2020. No matter how you look at it what President Donald Trump accomplished was incredible and inspiring.
He did this despite having 96% negative in the press. He did this despite the vast number of blatant lies told about him on a daily basis.
Coming back after 2020 and enduring everything from lawfare from the democrats, 2 assassination attempts, being falsely vilified by the press on a daily basis has put him in the status of a living legend.It was a historic landslide for the Republican Party, which raises the question: what happened to the Democratic Party? You shared a thoughtful and detailed comment on this subject, which I truly appreciated. I believe your view aligns closely with my own perspective on the matter.
If the single state of Nevada had gone the way it did in 2020 (to Biden), the results would have been the same as it was in 2020, except reversed.
Yet Biden did not "win by a landslide". Neither did Trump; to declare he did, and with a "mandate" from the people is silly. He won the popular vote, after all, by only 3%.
We (some of us anyway) can all be glad he pulled it off, but to call it a "historic landslide" or a "mandate" is stretching it just a bit far. Political exaggeration and "fluff", and with the same truth that comes from politicians in general, nothing more.Trump made some significant strides in blue states like California and New York, and it's clear that the Republican Party is making inroads in areas where they’ve traditionally struggled. He picked up a larger share of the vote in these states than past Republicans, which is noteworthy and speaks to the changing political landscape. In New York City, for example, Trump's support grew by a substantial margin, and in California, his numbers also saw improvement, challenging the dominance of the Democratic Party in these states.
While Biden did win the popular vote by 3% in Nevada, that’s hardly the kind of overwhelming victory that warrants such claims. The election was close. My point, Trump's gains in traditionally blue areas should be taken very seriously. It shows he has infiltrated the Democratic party. This is in some ways historical, and rarely done.
That's a load of garbage.... subtract CA which has a completely fraudulent election and count, and you might have a vague idea how far apart things really were.
Get real, Ken, how do you subtract California, the nation's most populated state?
Say what you want about California, but your statements about it its choices just appear to be just more partisan bias, in my opinion.
The popular vote was close, so there is no Trump mandate. I and others are going to make sure that he is going to have a rough Row to hoe during his term.That's the spirit! Before you ever find out what might happen, declare it DOA; everything is a "rough Row to hoe" for the President once more.
Never, ever, consider compromise, never consider working with the enemy, never even think that liberals went way too far in their social programs and the people just might not be so happy with their massive changes. Don't even think that liberals just might be "progressing" not toward the utopia they claim is there, but a precipice to run off of like lemmings.Rough Roe to hoe?
And it will be just that way if you assume that Trump policies are ever going to be accepted without conflict or controversy. We will offer the same level of "compromise" that you offered over the last 4 years... Trump's precipice is simply on the other side of the cliff, just as dangerous if not more so. Could it be that your tyrant-elect has not or will not go too far? So, If I were you, I would not expect smooth sailing in the coming years."We will offer the same level of "compromise" that you offered over the last 4 years..."
Me? I offered no compromise at all, but then I am not in a position to compromise with anyone but my wife. But I understand - no one compromises today, so you will not advocate being the first to be reasonable. The first to try and bring America back to a single country instead of 2. The first to try and heal the divide.
You are in good company (or bad, depending on whether you wish the best for the country or for a specific political party) for no one else is offering compromise either.I can agree that right now the only "boss" that I have is my wife. Such is the nature of things.
I can't afford to let my britches down, because the other side shows no desire to lighten up on the "double down". I doubt that we will ever be "one" country, not that we ever really were. No one on my side is going accept that the divide can only be healed under the terms of our opposition. The terms of any such armistice will be considered unacceptable. It is only in these times that that divide has become so toxic that it now has the potential of threatening the very viability of our Union in the way that it hasn't in the past.
Yes, but you know something though, you never did answer my question from the other thread based on your pride of self reliance and such, and after I in fact was not merely on the receiving end of handouts, how I am any different from you?
Trump made a significant impact in both New York and California, as well as in many traditionally blue states. This trend should be a wake-up call for Democratic supporters—how much more should they ignore? I’ll let individuals draw their own conclusions, but the results are hard to overlook. ( for stats visit links I offered here in previous comment)
I’m not sure what the Democrats will do during Trump’s second term, but they are certainly going to be evaluating their current path deeply. They are a smart, calculating party, and they know they face a serious challenge ahead. In my view, they will need to do some soul-searching, reevaluating how they engage with their supporters. They’ll have to move away from the tendency to talk at people or, in some cases, down to them—and instead, show more respect and understanding for where the electorate is.As for the significant impact, I read that. This is true, my thoughts and concerns are so much different from that of other citizens in this regard, I simply don't trust him. I don't care for the MAGA upset apple cart style, as I am the one that going to be hit with whatever falls.
Yes, the party needs to reassess and rearm, but not give up. Perhaps, we just need to let the American people see for themselves the horror that they unwittingly unleashed upon themselves.I believe I understand what you mean when you say you’re not a fan of the MAGA "upset the apple cart" approach—it makes sense, especially if you feel like you’re the one left dealing with the fallout. I also respect that your perspective is shaped by your own life experiences, just as mine is shaped by mine.
While none of us can predict the future, I don’t share the feeling that horrors are on the horizon. In fact, I feel optimistic and even a bit of the excitement I used to feel long ago when a new president took office. I see a leader who’s appointing people whose views align with mine, which is encouraging. I also see some fresh and promising projects being highlighted, and I hope that, in time, you might find something in the new administration that resonates with you, too.
You know what, though? I really appreciate that you took the time to comment on the original post’s subject. That means a lot.
Sometimes you piss me off. LOL Today was not one of those days.Now, what would you do if I wasn’t around to piss you off now again, it would be a pretty boring forum, I’d say? I am going to piss many right leaning people off, but isn’t that half of the fun?
I will always be glad to offer commentary, I just can’t guarantee that it will always be well received.
Your first paragraph was exactly on the mark, I could not have said it better.Yes, I need my blood to circulate now and again—LOL. And as you know, I do pout too... LOL. Hey, we’ve had some great back-and-forths, and isn’t that what political chats are all about? If we all agreed, we might be called automatons! Or worse, boring—heaven forbid
Let it be known Trump did pick up more votes in California during the 2024 election compared to 2020. His vote share showed an increase, especially in traditionally blue areas of the state. Despite California's overall strong Democratic lean. The precise percentage increase has not been confirmed yet, due to slowness in counting in the state.
Trump also saw a notable increase in support in New York in the 2024 election. He garnered more than 44 percent of the vote, which was a significant improvement from his 2020 performance, where he received about 38 percent. This jump marked the closest a Republican candidate had come to narrowing the margin in the state since George H.W. Bush in 1988
THE NEW YORK SUN
POLITICO
Trump's vote share also surged in New York City, with his support increasing by 20 percent in Manhattan and 16 percent in Queens, compared to 2020. These gains represent a shift in New York's traditionally strong Democratic base, and in fact, Harris saw a dip in support within the city THE NEW YORK SUN
https://www.politico.com/live-updates/2 … k-00187703
https://www.nysun.com/article/trump-vot … in-decades
The Democratic party has been breached. If Trump does a good job in the next four, they are toast for a long time to come. It is now obvious even in the media that they are recognizing they have a problem.
.What are the going bets that we even get there?
You know Biden is escalating the war against Russia?
What are the chances of us making it to Jan 20th again?Yes, Biden is clearly betting on Trump struggling to resolve the war in Ukraine, and it seems like an odd and counterproductive move on his part. Biden appears to be unwilling to allow Trump a chance to demonstrate his ability to settle the war, opting instead to escalate the conflict. This speaks volumes to me—it's a cheap, harmful tactic to undermine Trump’s peace efforts.
However, I believe Trump is always a step ahead of Biden—though honestly, that wouldn’t be difficult to accomplish. Reports suggest Trump has been engaging in discussions with Zelensky. I find Zelensky to be a sharp, intelligent leader, and I’m confident he’ll appreciate the support Trump is offering. In fact, Trump could have easily said, "It’s peace, or you’re on your own," which, knowing Trump, would be a practical, common-sense approach to push for peace. And we know dam well if Trump backs away from supporting the bill--- so will NATO.
Trump has always had a somewhat skeptical stance on NATO, seeing it as burdensome for the U.S. and questioning its strategic value. During his presidency, he repeatedly pushed for NATO countries to increase their defense spending, arguing that the U.S. shouldn’t be shouldering the financial burden alone. So, it wouldn't be surprising if, in dealing with the Ukraine war, Trump takes a different approach, possibly aiming to reduce U.S. involvement in NATO-related matters or negotiate peace without considering or relying on the alliance. I very much doubt he would even involve them.
I have faith that Trump, with his deal-making background, could find a way to bring the war to an end. His approach to foreign policy tends to be direct and pragmatic, and he has shown an ability to negotiate and make bold moves, as seen with his past efforts like engaging North Korea and moving the U.S. Embassy to Jerusalem. It's entirely plausible that he could leverage his negotiation skills and tough stance to secure peace, by pressuring Ukraine and Russia for a deal.
One thing I have noted when watching Trump he uses carrot, stick mindset. The difference he offers only a stick first, then the option for a carrot. Strength up front.You presume that they will not escalate the war prior to Trump being sworn in.
That would not be a wise presumption... chances are very good that the people within the Biden Administration and UK/EU that want war with Russia will have forced the Russians to escalate by that time.I think Biden has already proven yesterday he is trying to escalate the war. No doubt. Yes NATO will be all for the escalation. I presume Trump is already in negotiations with at best Zelinsky to settle the war.
Again just my view --- However, I believe Trump is always a step ahead of Biden—though honestly, that wouldn’t be difficult to accomplish. Reports suggest Trump has been engaging in discussions with Zelensky. I find Zelensky to be a sharp, intelligent leader, and I’m confident he’ll appreciate the support Trump is offering. In fact, Trump could have easily said, "It’s peace, or you’re on your own," which, knowing Trump, would be a practical, common-sense approach to push for peace. And we know dam well if Trump backs away from supporting the bill--- so will NATO.
It's hard to get any info on what is going on in the war. Has Ukraine started using long-range weapons that were previously restricted? Biden granted permission for Ukraine to use long-range missiles only yesterday. I would like to know if they have immediately started using them.
"Biden appears to be unwilling to allow Trump a chance to demonstrate his ability to settle the war, opting instead to escalate the conflict. "
Absolutely no one is stopping Trump from doing anything... Demonstrate away! He promised to settle the conflict before he takes office. The clock is ticking.
Biden gave the green light for Ukraine to use long range missiles in response to Putin bringing in North Korean soldiers. All is fair.
Why didn't Trump talk Putin out of using North Koreans??I doubt Trump will "demonstrate away". The last time he had anything at all t do with a demonstration (telling them to "march peacefully") he was suddenly accused of trying to overthrow the US government.
What would be the claim if he demonstrated for peace in Ukraine? That he is trying to destroy the Earth, or maybe the Solar System? Or something smaller - maybe that he hates Russian children and wants to kill them all?
No, I don't think Trump will demonstrate for Ukraine.In terms of demonstration I was responding to Sharlee's post stating ..
"Biden appears to be unwilling to allow Trump a chance to demonstrate his ability to settle the war, opting instead to escalate the conflict. "
And basically my thought is that Biden isn't stopping any action by Trump. Let's not start making excuses for Trump already. He promised to settle the war before he takes office. Lol, Trump followers would have us believe that Biden is such a feeble old man but at the same time wants me to believe that he's stopping Trump's actions? Nah. No excuses.I know. I made a silly post, diverting from the topic.
Just as you did when you tried to take political "fluff" and exaggeration as straight talk, meaning exactly what the words say.Are you saying that Trump's promise to settle the Russian invasion of Ukraine is fluff?
Are YOU saying that politicians, including Trump, never exaggerate and never "fluff" their campaigns?
Or that you are desperately trying to find something to satisfy your TDS?Well he made a promise though.. isn't the motto promises made promises kept?
Do you realize the problems Biden brought upon our nation from the moment he involved us in this war instead of trying to prevent it? Now, his actions are visibly escalating the conflict. NATO never once offered meaningful negotiations with Russia—they rushed headlong into a war in a sovereign nation that isn’t even part of NATO. Ukraine became the battleground, with its people bearing the brunt of the violence, not the citizens of NATO countries.
This war has turned Ukraine into a killing field to shield the EU from the consequences, sacrificing Ukrainian lives instead of their own. It’s a tragic atrocity that should never have happened. Under strong leadership, it likely wouldn’t have.
Your immaturity is showing. It is clear Biden has escalated the war, and this is a vile act. Instead of trying to negotiate he continues to provoke. He is willing to provoke with little care for the citizens of Ukraine.
"Why didn't Trump talk Putin out of using North Koreans??"
What is more important-- why didn't Biden...
As I have shared, I have faith that Trump will generate peace, and if not he will withdraw from the war altogether. He has promised the US peace and no wars, and I think that will be a promise he will keep. I can only feel he is presently working on bringing peace through negotiations. As I shared he has been in contact with Zelinsky. We have no way of knowing what he is presently doing. You may have jumped the gun --- he may well end the war swiftly. he was elected less than two weeks ago.
I have no more time to waste on your comments --- I have been polite, but I don't find people who ruminate add to the conversation.It is not fair...
There are rules to war... to escalation...
Russia stated plainly, detailed, in policy, in statements, what it would do if American (and UK/NATO) missiles rained down on Russia...
Ukraine has no such missiles...
Ukraine does not have the trained soldiers or access to intel required to use such missiles...
Russia would be 100% in the right for striking at American targets within America for openly attacking Russia.
The North Korean soldiers are expelling/killing foreigners from within Russia.
If there were not forces occupying Russian territory, then you might have a point... but there are foreign troops within Russia, so North Korea meeting out its military obligations to Russia, within Russia's borders, is not an issue.
America... supplying and shooting long range missiles in to Russia IS an issue and IS an escalation... one that should be met with nuclear deterrence from Russia... and hitting within America.
And you can thank Biden and that crew of Democrats for WWIII if it happens.
https://youtu.be/Go--8rh8Kx0?t=555"Russia would be 100% in the right for striking at American targets within America for openly attacking Russia."
Now THIS I would not agree with. Russia has exactly the same right to strike America in return for arming Ukraine as it did for invading a sovereign country and trying to annex part of it into Russia.
ie. zero.Ken, could you explain this: Do you believe that because we supplied missiles to Ukraine and have now given them the option to use those missiles to strike targets in Russia, it would justify Russia retaliating by targeting another sovereign nation, like America, with a nuclear weapon?
Sovereignty: The conventions don’t explicitly cover scenarios where a third party (like the U.S.) supplies arms to a belligerent (Ukraine), but attacking a supplier country would raise serious legal and diplomatic issues under the U.N. Charter, which prohibits aggression against a sovereign nation.
This conflict is escalating into something very serious, and we have a man in the White House who clearly isn’t functioning at full capacity. What’s strange is how the media is downplaying the situation. Even here on HP, some seem more focused on criticizing Trump’s plans to solve the crisis rather than acknowledging the fools who got us into this mess in the first place.Paragraph 1 - Yes and the Russians have reiterated that fact.
Paragraph 2 - UN Charter combined with detailed internal policy each nation has as to what qualifies as an escalator.
Russia changed its policy prior to 2022... anticipating America's interest in becoming directly involved in Ukraine.
The Biden Administration will likely agitate for an excuse to directly engage Russia now that the election is over and their chance will soon be gone.
Paragraph 3 - The media has never covered this matter honestly or in full, I wouldn't expect them to now. Nor explain how this conflict ties in to what is occurring in the Middle East.
"The North Korean soldiers are expelling/killing foreigners from within Russia."
North Korean troops have already engaged in combat with Ukrainian soldiers.
Russia chose to escalate. Why do people think that Ukraine should just sit back and be slaughtered?
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cm2796pdm1loPutin is saber rattling. Why would he do a thing when his dream team is coming into office?
"Ukraine does not have the trained soldiers or access to intel required to use such missiles..."
I wish you knew what you were talking about. Ken, you need to study the war more closely than just from American media. Trained soldiers Ukraine has after almost 3 years of war. I think you would be amazed at the intel possessed by the Ukrainian military. It's the reason they've been able to take and hold swaths of russian territory. They've also used these missiles many times before.
As far as the North Korean soldiers go...so far...they are of no consequence. They've not helped russia's situation at all. On the battlefield, they are becoming more of a problem to the russians than anything.Certain missile systems can only be operated by US Soldiers.
US Soldiers are the only ones that would be allowed the COMSEC necessary to coordinate the strikes.Yes, they have been modified. Many missile systems are modified to meet the needs of a mission. This can be done by the defense contractors once given the directive by the pentagon.
Ukraine has already been using HIMARS. Using Army Tactical Missile Systems (ATACMS) is not that big of a change.
The Ukraine army is now better able to attack the bases where North Koreans and their equipment are stationed.
The move only makes sense.Yes, the move makes sense if the goal is all out WWIII...
...getting war rolling before Trump can be sworn in.If I were a Ukrainian, and Russia invaded my country to "annex" it from under me, I wouldn't be very concerned about WWIII. If it happens, it happens; I would not give my country to Russia to keep it from happening for a few more years.
I just don't think Russia has any intent of stopping. If they manage to take Ukraine (and there is zero doubt it can do so if Ukraine has no help) there will be another one on the list. Get by with it once opens the door to do it twice.Yep, and they already did it "once," in Crimea, and got away with it. If they 'get away' with it again there won't be any European doors closed to them (hyperbole?)
GA.Yes, hyperbolic...
You ignore the history of Ukraine, Russia, and the culture and history of those in Crimea and the Donbas.
America is there because of the wealth of oil, gas, resources in Ukraine and Russia... that is our motivation.
Russia is there for the same reason... in addition to protecting the Russian people who live in Crimea, Donbas, and have loyalties and ties to Russia.
Ukraine has its own motivations, that have been fostered in large part by the West, the WB, IMF, NATO, etc.
If America wins the war... China is crushed, the world's largest amount of oil and gas are now under control of the West, not their ally and neighbor Russia.
If Russia wins the war... China, North Korea, Iran, and others win, and the West fades in power and wealth.
The West is fading anyway... because it has gone insane... and is run by corrupt and criminal elements throughout its governments.I don't think I'm ignoring their history, and that's even after sitting through multiple lectures on what their real history is. ;-)
GADid you really 'sit' thru them... or did you peruse and fast forward through them as fit your fancy?
Yeah, I did . . . Google is my friend, too. You provided the bulk of them, then there were the 'no, you're wrong and here's why' counter-lectures, and finally, my friend helped with double-checking some stuff. And here I am, knowing that I don't know enough to think I could have an informed opinion, yet still confident I know enough to be skeptical of whatever is being put forth as the 'real' truth.
GAPrudent and with due diligence it appears...
Unfortunately, such affairs of war are malleable... one moment we have an Administration afraid of doing something for fear of swaying an election... the next moment we have an Administration with no fears... only the knowledge that NOW is the time to go for it... as there is no tomorrow for those making such decisions, it will be someone else's problem to clean up.
Mike --- I see your point, and I’d argue that while this view is popular, it overlooks a crucial reality. If Russia pushes any further into Europe, they’d be directly facing NATO, with the U.S. as a major player. A full-scale war with NATO is not something Russia can win, and they know it. The stakes are much too high for them to risk such an outcome.
The issue is, if we’d acted decisively when Russia first advanced into Crimea under Obama, we might not be in this mess today. The lack of serious consequences back then allowed Russia to push forward, testing the limits of what they could get away with. Had we shown strength and made it clear that there would be repercussions, it might have prevented this escalation. It’s almost miraculous how common sense and real strength have vanished from global leadership in recent decades. Instead of taking firm action, we’ve seen hesitation and compromise, which has only emboldened aggressors like Russia.
Common sense needs to kick in here --- Common sense should tell one that Russia can't even take out Ukraine with a population of 38 million -- do you feel they could take on a combined NATO/USA or would they even attempt? They have had to borrow troops from N. Korea...
Just to put a bit of perspective --- NATO has approximately 3.5 million active-duty military personnel across all its member countries.
The United States has around 1.3 million active-duty military personnel.
If we combine the military personnel from all NATO member countries with the U.S., the total number of soldiers would be around 4.8 million active-duty personnel. Please also imagine the weaponry... And ya think Russia can even have a chance to win? If talking nukes, add those into--- Russia has no chance at all to win a large-scale war against NATO/US. Not sure of the mindset of those who have not considered the above. RUSSIA can't even beat down a small nation.
Maybe it’s time they finally get the strong pushback they should’ve faced when they first marched into Crimea. I have a feeling we're all in for a big shock. A lot of people probably should have been listening to Trump all along—he’s said repeatedly that he’s not going to keep supporting this war. His stance has always been clear: he aims to negotiate peace, or else it’s goodbye.
Ken, I thought the U.S. troops in Ukraine were primarily there to train on missile systems. So, do you think they’re directly involved in launching the strikes?
I see this war becoming worse each day. Do you think Trump will keep his word to work for peace, and on the other hand stop financing the war?
He ran on doing this and being anti-war president.
I do have faith that Trump will not become involved in a large war in Europe. He has a very different mindset than any other president we have ever had. I don't think he will put his fixed American agenda aside to fight a NATO war. Just my view. Yes, if we are attacked he would join the party, but other than that, I don't see him supporting a war. Hopefully, he can pull out a miracle and de-escalate this mess Biden has created.We have US troops... unofficially and via the CIA in Russia right now.
Never mind Ukraine.
Deep Sea Cables are CUT... Biden has authorized deep strike missiles into Russia.
This is WWIII...
It is what I warned about 2 years ago...
It is a war WE are going to fight and WE (all Americans) are going to pay a terrible price for... the arrogance and ignorance of Biden and the warmongering lunatics pushing for it.I remember sitting at my dining table in Mexico, reading your prediction, and realizing what was about to unfold. Watching Russia amass troops on Ukraine's border with no real resistance or effort to deter their aggression—only hearing that NATO would support the Ukrainian people in fighting their own war—made it clear to me that this was heading toward a massacre. It felt like a sacrifice to protect the EU from Russia advancing into their nations.
We’ve watched Biden and NATO make one misstep after another, which seems to only escalate the conflict. I just can’t understand why the U.S. would want such a large-scale war. I don’t see Trump getting entangled in this; it would certainly derail his plan to fix America. I’m hoping Trump surprises them all and pulls the U.S. out of this mess entirely. Pulls up the drawbridge and tells all --- you're on your own.
I also feel Russia is in no way powerful enough in manpower and weaponry to fight a war against NATO/US --- NATO has approximately 3.5 million active-duty military personnel across all its member countries.
The United States has around 1.3 million active-duty military personnel.
If we combine the military personnel from all NATO member countries with the U.S., the total number of soldiers would be around 4.8 million active-duty personnel. I suppose if China stepped up to help Russia they could fight a war, but China i more about wealth than war.
Mike, it’s tough to get accurate information about the war, and I’m skeptical about the media's reliability. This conflict is raging on, and recent developments make it seem like things are escalating fast. Many feel Biden's actions in recent days have worsened the situation. With Trump, a clearly anti-war leader, poised to take office, there’s hope for a shift. Trump has long positioned himself as anti-war and has criticized the $108 billion sent to Ukraine, stating he would leave the financial responsibility to NATO nations to "foot the bill" while prioritizing peace. He ran on not contributing any further financial support for the war itself.
Zelenskyy hasn’t directly addressed Trump’s plans, but he continues to push for strong Western backing and advanced weaponry to secure Ukraine’s defense. His strategy heavily depends on sustained international aid. He recently did have a closed-door meeting with Trump.
I read that Biden recently approved sending landmines equipped with self-destruct mechanisms to Ukraine and has allowed the use of U.S.-supplied ATACMS missiles within Russia—an escalatory move. Do you think NATO would increase its support if the U.S. steps back?
I’m hopeful that Trump will do everything in his power to bring peace, and I believe he’ll give it his best effort. However, Biden has certainly made that task more difficult. I think Zelenskyy is a very smart and capable leader, and he will try his best to handle things on his side. But with the problems Trump has committed to addressing here at home, I’m not sure he’d invest energy in the war if he didn’t feel there was a real chance of bringing it to an end.
It is clear the Ukraine army is a true fighting machine and has done a good job of holding Russia at bay--- But what would happen if financial support is cut? I don't think Americans are on board for a very long war and the cost it would bring. Over the past years, many of us have been anti-war.Too many Americans only know what the media tells them. There is so much more to this war.
Things are not going well for the russian army.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/pu … &ei=14
2. I don't think people in the United States know or realize how degraded the russian military is at this point. They are closing in on having lost 700,000 military personnel in the war. Their army doesn't have enough manpower to have any successful attacks at this point. If you add that to the number of aircraft, tanks, APCs, and other equipment they have lost, the russian army is not too formidable of foe at the moment. Ukraine could take even more russian territory but have chosen not to do such a thing. This is not their goal.
russia is like a terribly wounded wild animal. With Germany and other western European nations now pledging to no longer get their fossil fuels from russia, their economy will take a huge hit. russia is very dangerous because it is trying to avoid the end.
If the United States cut financing for the Ukraine war, Ukraine would get the funds elsewhere. The US is part of NATO and NATO has pledged to support Ukraine.
The fight would continue until freedom is achieved.You are propagating Ukraine/CIA propaganda... nothing more.
Russia is not close to losing the war...
Russia is only gaining in economic and military strength... moving nations away from America and to Russia, China, etc.
As an American... I don't care about Ukraine enough to sacrifice our economy and millions of lives for it... but I could say the same for Syria, Iran, etc.
America voted in people like Trump and Tulsi Gabbard to get out of these endless wars... unfortunately by the time they get into power, it will be too late.
You are in the camp of the NeoCons... Biden... you believe Russia is on the verge of collapse, if you (they) didn't believe that, then these decisions would be clearly insane... escalating a war that has only one direction to go... to include US in it.
OR it ends.... Ukraine never could win this war on its own... and it is further away from that than ever before."it is further away from that than ever before"
I don't agree with you on this one. russia has lost so many men they are depending on, of all places, North Korea to help fill the gap. The North Koreans are not impressing anyone with their behavior on the battlefield, especially the Ukrainians.
I don't think most Americans realize the high level of degradation the russian military has experienced. They must threaten to use nuclear weapons, their conventional weapons have been mostly destroyed.
If all the strings were cut loose from Ukrainians using weapons, the war would be over much sooner than you realize.
Mike, I appreciate the information you've shared. As I mentioned, I didn’t feel like we were getting the full picture here in the U.S. Your report is encouraging, and it sounds like there’s hope for the war to end with Ukraine coming out on top and securing a victory. I do think the funding from the US will be cut. Trump made it clear we have enough problems to solve here, and he made promises to bring solutions. It would be hard to continue to support a war when we need cash here to fix so much. It seems you feel that the Ukraine will win, and soon.
Now we know why Biden was grinning like a Chesire cat when he met with Trump...
Biden knew what he was going to leave in Trump's lap when he exited...Most likely you are right or maybe he was just pleased to see Harris lost. I mean what person wants to "be had"... By thought that he thought had his back until they stab him in his back --- Plus imagine the book Biden will offer. Will it be Trump to expose the swamp people or will it be Joe?
You know, even with all the chaos this week—Biden escalating the war and everything—I still believe Trump will be the one to settle it. I think he'll handle it with the same calm and steady approach he’s shown in tackling other challenges. I think he most likely is already working on it.OK, I'll let someone else tell you, they may express it better than I:
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/uWBaMTB6wRM
"You know Biden is escalating the war against Russia?
But Trump promised to settle that before he even takes office...lol no worries there!This is the essence of what he has shared in interviews and rallies.
"Yes, Trump has repeatedly stated that he would work to end the war in Ukraine quickly if elected. He has suggested that he could negotiate a peace deal between Ukraine and Russia, leveraging his diplomatic skills. Trump has also criticized the Biden administration's handling of the war, asserting that under his leadership, the conflict would not have escalated to its current level.
I have heard several reporters that he has had conversations with Zelinsky. Yes, Ukrainian President Zelenskyy did meet with Trump during his recent visit to the U.S. This meeting took place at Trump Tower in New York in late September 2024. And it's been reported they have had several phone calls with Trump.
Biden took a step to escalate the war yesterday, and Putin has responded by revising his nuclear doctrine, which appears to be a threat. This has led NATO to issue warnings to its citizens, essentially preparing them for potential war. Was it wise for Biden to provoke Putin like this? In my view, no. Biden's series of missteps has left our nation grappling with serious issues, and this latest move only adds to the tension and uncertainty.
With the new problem Biden has caused, it's clear that NATO and the U.S. seem determined to push for a broader conflict. NATO is pushing for a war in Ukraine, aiming for U.S. involvement on the ground. They seem bent on escalating things while they still can. Will it work or backfire? Time will tell, but my instincts say this could have major repercussions, and the consequences could end up being far more severe than they anticipate.
My common sense tells me this could backfire. Yes, they may get their war, but Trump would pull the U.S. out of NATO, leaving them with a massive conflict to handle on their own. Without U.S. support, they’d be stuck footing the bill, sending their own troops, and trying to manage the war without the resources and backup NATO offers. The outcome could end up much worse than they expected.
I have strong faith that Trump will act swiftly to resolve this war regarding the US participation, due to Bidens latest act that has escalated the war. While I can’t predict if he’ll end it for NATO, he’s made it clear that we won’t send our citizens to die overseas. I believe Zelenskyy understands the bigger picture and the manipulation of his country. He’ll likely join forces with Trump and attempt to end the war before Ukraine is lost forever without the support of the US.
I have full confidence that Trump will prevent the U.S. from supporting a war that has devastated Ukraine. He is not responsible for the war or its escalation—that blame lies with Biden, a man whose mental decline should have led to his removal years ago. Biden has put the U.S. and NATO on the brink of a world war. I’m grateful Trump will put America first and won’t engage in conflicts unless we’re directly attacked on our soil.
Do I think Trump will work to bring a peaceful end to the war, especially after Biden’s escalation? Absolutely. I believe he will make ending the conflict a top priority and do everything in his power to resolve it swiftly.
It will be hard due to NATO as well as Biden wanting a full-scale war, as Ken has predicted for a couple of years.
How does one support such an inept president?"but Trump would pull the U.S. out of NATO, leaving them with a massive conflict to handle on their own."
In 2023, Sens. Tim Kaine (D-Va.) and Marco Rubio (Little Marco.) authored legislation requiring that any presidential decision to exit NATO must have either two-thirds Senate approval or be authorized through an act of Congress. Lawmakers passed the measure as part of the fiscal 2024 National Defense Authorization Act, which President Joe Biden signed.
"Yes, Trump has repeatedly stated that he would work to end the war in Ukraine quickly if elected."
"That is a war that's dying to be settled. I will get it settled before I even become president," the Republican said during his debate with Vice President Kamala Harris .. Anxiously awaiting.
"Biden took a step to escalate the war yesterday,"
Putin chose to escalate, not Biden. Putin escalated by sending thousands of North Korean soldiers into Ukraine.
"I believe Zelenskyy understands the bigger picture and the manipulation of his country. He’ll likely join forces with Trump and attempt to end the war
To give away his country after fighting Putin for years? Seems doubtful. And what of Putin? To turn around and retreat with nothing he came for after fighting for years? Neither scenario seems likely for either man.
I’m grateful Trump will put America first and won’t engage in conflicts unless we’re directly attacked on our soil.
In April 2017, Trump authorized the dropping of 59 cruise missiles against Syria. Trump also ordered the killing of Iranian general Soleimani, leading Iran to launch missiles against U.S. forces in Iraq. The retaliatory strikes left dozens of U.S. service members with traumatic brain injuries that he downplayed as "headaches."
It will be hard due to NATO as well as Biden wanting a full-scale war, as Ken has predicted for a couple of years.
When has NATO called for a full scale war? As far as Ken's predictions...? A full scale depression for our country, he predicted Harris would win also!
I don’t find this issue in the least bit humorous. Biden has escalated the war, and this is evident from Putin’s swift nuclear threat and NATO’s warning to its citizens. These actions show just how serious the situation has become, and it’s concerning that such dangerous steps are being taken under his leadership. We currently have a president who is cognitively impaired and should in no respect be in charge at such a time. Yesterday, NATO officials emphasized the importance of being prepared for potential conflict with Russia, underscoring the gravity of the situation as they ramp up military readiness in response to heightened tensions. These warnings from both NATO and Putin highlight how fragile the situation has become.
Trump’s Electoral College victory in 2016 was significant as it showcased his ability to win critical battleground states like Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania, flipping regions that had traditionally leaned Democratic. This win marked a major shift in the Republican Party's strategy, emphasizing working-class and rural voters.
Trump's success in 2024 further cemented his historic position, making him the first Republican since George W. Bush in 2004 to win both the Electoral College and the popular vote, signaling a broader realignment in American political coalitions.
More Importantly ---- Trump’s 2024 victory included breaking through key Democratic strongholds and gaining significant votes in traditionally blue states. While specific numbers detailing his performance in blue states compared to past Republican candidates were not highlighted, his win included flipping every 2020 swing state Biden carried and securing 312 Electoral College votes, one of the most dominant Republican showings in recent history. This sweep demonstrated his appeal across a diverse voter base, including areas previously leaning Democratic.
It is evident that Trump has deeply dented the Democratic party, and if he is successful most likely will keep them out of power for a long period.
Source to substantiate my post rated moderate liberal bias. https://www.independent.co.uk/news/worl … 42784.html"it is evident that Trump has deeply dented the Democratic party,"
Did Biden dent the Republican party when he won by an even more overwhelming 7 million votes?
Trump's "mandate" certainly isn't as robust as Biden's was in 2020.We were constantly told during the election process that the turnout was even greater than in 2020, which was phenomenal. Turnout in 2024 dwarfed that of 2020.
When all was said and done, though, total votes cast in 2024 went down 5 million from 2020. What happened? Were there 5 million+ "mail in" ballots counted that were never sent by voters in 2020? That extra 5 million votes came right at the end, were from mail in's and swung the election to Biden...
I really do begin to ask just how much fraud was in the 2020 election. We all know there was some - illegal voters, illegal ballots being counted, etc. But when the increase in votes resulted in a decrease in total votes one must wonder. If, anyway, one is not a liberal that knows all elections are fair without ever looking."Were there 5 million+ "mail in" ballots counted that were never sent by voters in 2020? That extra 5 million votes came right at the end, were from mail in's and swung the election to Biden..."
And yet absolutely no one, anywhere has been smart enough to come up with one shred of evidence of any sort of large scale fraud...When you make it illegal to check for ID...
Your entire election (CA) is fraudulent and without good merit.
Just another banana republic (CA) made in the mold of Venezuela.
Trump picked up good percentages in Blue states, such as California and New York --- the strongholds of the Dem party, as in many other blue states. in my view, he well dented the party.
Biden picked up popular votes from two states --- NY and Cal the very states Trump dented. This is in my view almost historical.
Good OP Question while 'What Happen' doesn't mean it was for the worse. Frankly, being ignorant of party history of any party, at this time I could only fathom wild guesses. One is not only has the Democrats moved toward the extreme, yet also the Republican Party while some to many question if both traditional parties exist today. Or, at least the emphasized guiding principles and values aren't the same.
I'll put this OP question in my 'Look into' folder in my PC. I say that because a cursory peek I see the question isn't novel. Pew Research has several studies available on the theme dating at least back to 2017. However, that study is more of a snapshot within time giving measurement to change from a starting point. That starting point in the paper is 1994.
The Partisan Divide on Political Values Grows Even Wider (Oct 5, 2017)
https://assets.pewresearch.org/wp-conte … elease.pdf
another I discovered is . . .
The polarization in today’s Congress has roots that go back decades by Pew Research (Mar 10, 2022)
https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads … k-decades/
Its reference point is 1972. One excerpt is . . .
"Between the 92nd Congress of 1971-72 and the current 117th Congress, both parties in both the House and the Senate have shifted further away from the center, but Republicans more so."
I feel like my original post got completely hijacked. While we extended some politeness to the off-topic stuff, it’s obvious this turned into a well-planned diversion. Let’s get back to what I originally wanted to discuss—“What happened to the Democratic Party?”
In some ways, this diversion highlights exactly what’s gone wrong with the Democratic Party. They’ve become masters of sidestepping issues that matter most to Americans. Instead of focusing on bread-and-butter topics like the economy, jobs, or border security, they pivot to distractions that suit their narrative. This party once claimed to champion the working class, yet now they push policies and messages that feel disconnected from middle America.
It’s not just about the issues; it’s also about tactics. The party has conditioned much of society to accept half-truths and one-liners as substitutes for real debate. They’ve trained people to deflect when confronted with uncomfortable facts—dismissing concerns with catchy soundbites instead of providing substance. This behavior, in my view, reflects a broader shift: from a party of solutions to a party of diversions.
So, what do you think? Is the Democratic Party still addressing the real needs of Americans, or have they strayed too far from their roots? Is the party on the way out altogether?For anyone who doubts the ability of the Ukrainian army on the battlefield you can watch this report from Siversk. This report was filed yesterday. I'm sharing the English version of it.
Russia is not doing well. They are not in a good position to negotiate.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K0uPHbBVPjo
Related Discussions
- 45
Pelosi waves off impeachment. She says it would divide country
by Readmikenow 5 years ago
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is setting a high bar for impeachment of President Donald Trump, saying he is “just not worth it” even as some on her left flank clamor to start proceedings. Pelosi said in an interview with The Washington Post that “I’m not for impeachment” of...
- 65
The Left Couldn't Defeat President Donald Trump
by Readmikenow 2 months ago
“However Much You Deny The Truth, The Truth Goes On Existing”George OrwellWhy did President Donald Trump defeat the liberals and the left? He held on to the truth.President Donald Trump has a strong character and courage. Two qualities that may not be understood by the liberals and the...
- 273
Is the Democrat Party dead?
by Brenda Durham 11 years ago
Where is it?and What is it?Is it now the Activist Party?The Homosexual Party?The Vengeance Party?The Obama Worshippers Party?There seems to be little semblance left of what it used to be. Before 2008, it still held to at least SOME core moral values and SOME sense of manners. ...
- 172
Has Donald Trump Killed the So-Called Republican Party?
by Scott Belford 10 months ago
In my opinion, yes - the Republican Party no-longer exists today even though Trump followers incorrectly refer to themselves as Republicans.Let me open this discussion with a short tutorial of the Republican Party (now keep in mind, the Party title has no bearing on the Party philosophy and any...
- 26
Lincoln Freed The Slaves. Why do Blacks generally vote Democrat?
by Charles James 21 months ago
I am not an American, but what goes on in the USA is important to the world.Lincoln was a Republican and freed the slaves. One would expect black Americans to generally vote Republican. But they don't.How did this come about?
- 129
The Hill. Opinion: The 'Scared Majority'.
by Tim Mitchell 3 months ago
The ‘scared majority’ could deliver a landslide victory for Trump by Douglas MacKinnon, opinion contributor published at The...