Horowitz: Understanding DeSantis, shocking election results, and the red-state revolution we need
There are three political parties in America: Republicans, Democrats, and Ron DeSantis. Democrats are extremely unpopular but were somehow, nonetheless, able to defeat Republicans (morally, if not tactically), who are essentially a controlled opposition. Democrats won big given the circumstances, but at the same time, Ron DeSantis, who is the most antithetical to what Democrats stand for, won big as well. What gives?
There is no way to sugarcoat the GOP crap show in this election. Republicans began this election season with first and goal at the Democrat end zone, with a 50-50 Senate and 212 seats in the House. Even a traditional modest midterm gain against the incumbent president – even with a good economy – should have been enough to flip both chambers. Add to it the fact that the economy, crime, tyranny, border invasion, and inflation have never been worse, there was so much malaise in America, and all the polls showed the GOP winning on every major issue, and we had the makings of a wave that should have swamped the GOP waves of 2010 and 1994.
Oh, and back then you had Democrat presidents who were charismatic and personally popular, as opposed to the deeply unpopular Joe Biden. Yet Republicans were essentially beaten by Joe Biden and John Fetterman to a draw, even though, thanks to reapportionment, Republicans might narrowly control the House.
When the historic results came pouring in from Florida quicker than any other state, showing a Democrat bloodbath, we all thought it was a harbinger of what was to come for the rest of the night. But that bloodbath never came, and to the extent it did, it was the other way around, when Republicans lost legislative chambers in Minnesota, New Hampshire, and Michigan. While the polls undersold the Democrat performance in almost every other state, they also undersold DeSantis’ already dominant position headed into Election Day in Florida. DeSantis successfully made himself almost like a new political party. And indeed, if you follow his views on the issues, there is a greater gulf between him and most prominent Republicans than between Republicans and Democrats.
Therein lies the problem. While it is puzzling that voters would choose Democrats given the state of the economy and security, let’s face it: Republicans barely disagree with Democrats on the issues. For most Republicans, it’s as if COVID never happened. Aside from a few throwaway lines, most Republicans never ran on the full extent of the problems with biomedical tyranny. Instead, they allowed Democrats to outflank them on “my body, my choice,” which should have been our message for the taking in a post-COVID world.
On Ukraine and foreign policy in general, there is barely any difference between the parties. Even as they ran strong on crime and illegal immigration, for most of recent history Republicans were for “comprehensive immigration reform” and “criminal justice reform,” only opting to superficially take the other side as an easy election talking point. They have no vision, and they stood for nothing. They produced nothing of the quality of Newt Gingrich’s Contract with America.
Yes, a few candidates here and there did run on something other than the weak GOP-controlled messaging, but they get swept away in the negative perception voters have of the party. Only DeSantis, with four years of internationally recognized, distinctly effective governance – particularly on the issue of our time – did the voters treat as a stand-alone entity. He was able to win the suburbs and even some urban areas.
In other words, Ron DeSantis is the control group that exposes the GOP as a controlled opposition. He demonstrated – not in Wyoming or Idaho but in a former swing state – that you can win over a supermajority governing coalition with sincere America-first policy that speaks to the people’s concerns and even changes their preexisting views by offering them something different from what the two pathetic parties are offering. This is how Republicans were able to lose the legislature in Michigan for the first time since 1983 but pick up supermajorities in Florida.
The problem with the Republican Party is not Trump per se, although it’s hard to see his mix of style, inconsistent messaging, and weak policies and personnel being the winning formula going forward. The conservative movement has a Republican Party and Fox News problem. Conservatives incur all the liabilities of those institutions without any policy or civilization benefit. How much longer are we going to be conservative souls trapped in the contaminated GOP body, servicing Republicans’ WWE-style fake fights with Democrats as they ensure the latter come out victorious on policy – and now even electorally?
So, the answer is to have DeSantis run for president, right?
While it’s hard to stand opposed to that proposition, and there is certainly nobody else on the horizon who sports this mix of policy benefits and electoral appeal, focusing on the presidential election is the wrong takeaway from DeSantis’ stunning victory. It’s the “Fox News mindset” of soap opera politicking as an end to itself. It’s not even clear that anyone can win with the country so brainwashed and the elections designed for Democrat mail-in shenanigans in all the right states. Moreover, the blue states have become like France, and the federal government is irremediably broken. Is it even worth trying to fix it and trying to govern over people who will never accept us in the long run?
The question everyone should be asking, however, is if half the states are as reliably red as the blue ones are blue, how come we don’t have leaders who govern like DeSantis in every one of those states? What would the country look like if the governors of Oklahoma, North Dakota, Alabama, Wyoming, Arkansas, Missouri, and Idaho governed like DeSantis rather than a bunch of WEF-inspired technocrats? What would happen if every supermajority red-state governor used the machinery of state government to change the economies, culture, legal structure, and policies of the states the way Florida has done? What if every red-county government, school board, and health department reflected the values of the locals rather than the elites, as they currently do in most states aside from Florida?
The bad news is that the electorate is confused, angry, aimless, and divided. But that is also the good news. The same way we will never be able to crack the blue states, Democrats can’t crack the reliably red states. But almost all of them aren’t red in its pure sense, because the Republicans are frauds. So, before we ask how to beat the Democrats’ growing juggernaut in the formerly swing states, why are we not asking why we don’t have a DeSantis in every state with GOP supermajorities in the legislatures?
Prather: Tomorrow, let's set the record straight
Let’s discuss the state of the country as we head into tomorrow’s 2022 midterm elections.
America is setting records, folks. We are truly in uncharted territory with the current administration in Washington, D.C. Under Joe Biden’s absent-minded, addle-brained, and dementia-ridden leadership, we are seeing record inflation in every aspect of our lives. From fuel prices to groceries, the value of our dollar is melting faster than the chocolate chocolate-chip ice cream cone Joe is inevitably licking right at this moment. We have a president who won’t face the nation, won’t face real questions, and won’t face the facts.
America is deteriorating before our eyes, and our freedoms are being taken away. These are not records that I want to set. Free speech has been throttled in the name of ideological acceptance and inclusivity. Facts are racist. Jokes are hate speech. Common sense is rationalized away as antiquated. Complex and critical thinking is obsolete, and this generation of Americans has been dumbed down by being spoon-fed fast-food garbage information by mainstream talking heads 24/7 for the last 40 years. The fringe controls the airwaves and the agenda. Unelected bureaucrats and shadowy billionaires run our government and politicians, while said politicians make careers out of getting elected and subsequently make millions of dollars pandering to and pilfering off of the American citizen. They even prove day after day where their misguided priorities lie, as they care more about Ukraine than the United States.
The people in charge right now say that they are the party of science, yet they deny biology, worship at the altar of climate change , and blame every one of America’s ills on some imaginary form of systemic racism. God and guiding principles have been replaced with the exaltation of man and his every whim. Our unborn are treated as an unimportant inconvenience, and the sanctity of human life means nothing. People who have the constitutional right to defend themselves are treated as criminals when they do so. In public schools our children are exposed to sexualization like never before, and many are even encouraged to question their gender identity on a regular basis. They are taught that they are inherently racist and that society is doomed unless they learn early and often to self-condemn and self-flagellate and make apologizing for their ancestral sins their practiced agenda for the remainder of their lives.
These last few years, we have been subjected to medical tyranny, corporate tyranny, big tech tyranny, judicial tyranny, big government tyranny, bureaucratic tyranny, educational tyranny, and mainstream media tyranny, and I’m sitting here trying to figure out at what point we start spilling tea into the harbor.
We’ve lost our sense of national identity and pride, and thus we have also lost our sense of destiny. This generation of Americans will leave behind the destructive and tragic wake of a cultural storm unprecedented in human history. When America falls, who will be there to fill the vacuum where freedom once held sway as the dominant paradigm and pursuit? The evils of communism and Marxism and their glorification of man’s inhumanity to man will rush to fill that empty void, and great will be the death toll that ensues.
While the left in America continues to prop up its puppets like Joe Biden and Kamala Harris and proposes candidates with the oratorical and leadership skills of an orangutan, like John Fetterman in Pennsylvania or Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez in New York, those among us who claim to color with a more reddish hue will unfortunately continue to bow to the lifelong career worthlessness of a Mitch McConnell or a Lindsey Graham and pursue a cult of personality, rather than embrace the principles of small government and true conservatism.
What will tomorrow bring? Will we see a legitimate “red wave” that forces a more honest type of man or woman to hold Big Brother accountable, or will we simply see more of the same pandering to power and political and cultural ideology that glorifies the fringiest and cringiest among us?
While people care more about celebrities leaving Twitter than they do the state of a nation, I can’t say that I’m hopeful regardless. Our Constitution and Bill of Rights have gone largely ignored, to the point of being abused with great regularity by those who claim to represent “we the people.” But how would "we the people" know, since we’ve never read and certainly never learned either one?
I pray that the people of these formerly United States will show up and vote in a margin that far exceeds Big Brother’s threshold of cheating, that genuine accountability can be brought back, and that the guilty parties will ultimately pay for the true sin that lives among us: the sin of destroying the greatest idea and country that have ever graced human history.
While Washington, D.C., and big government tyranny are setting records across the nation, tomorrow we have the opportunity to set the record straight. What will happen? We shall see.
Horowitz: The coming state legislative tsunami: Will Republicans capitalize on it?
If Republicans adhere to their platform, their coming domination of state governments can put an end to nearly every deleterious policy of the Biden administration. Will they use their power, or will they squander it?
Almost all of the election analysis before and after Nov. 8 will be centered on the number of seats Republicans win in the House and Senate, but it’s really their potential gains in state governments that matters most. We already know the script before it’s written. House Republicans will pass some good stand-alone bills, knowing they won’t pass out of the Senate, and will refuse to stand behind those ideas in the budget bills because “we don’t have 60 votes in the Senate and the presidency.” But the dirty little secret is that most of those ideas to protect the liberty, security, and values of the citizens can be done at the state level, where Republicans are poised to assume full control in states that hold well over half the country’s population.
At present, Republicans hold 23 trifectas (governorship and both chambers of the legislature), Democratic hold 14, and in 13 states there is divided government. Here is the graphic presentation from Ballotpedia:
That is already substantial GOP power that has consistently been underutilized. Also, Republicans have 28 governors while Democrats only have 22. They control both chambers of the legislature in 29 states, with supermajorities (veto-proof) in 16 of those states, as compared to Democrats, who only control eight state legislatures with supermajorities. Republicans have 32 state Senate chambers to Democrats’ 18, and they have 30 state Houses to Democrats’ 18 (Nebraska has no lower House, and Alaska’s House is under shared control).
In total, according to Ballotpedia, Republicans control 54.10% of the nation’s 7,383 legislative seats compared to 44.32% controlled by Democrats. Here is the graphic representation of House and Senate chamber controls, courtesy of Ballotpedia:
This is all following the 2020 GOP election “loss” and before the impending election victory that is trending toward a wave. Republicans have the opportunity to pick up governorships and legislatures around the country. In particular, there is the prospect of acquiring trifecta control in critical swing presidential states while making inroads in blue states with governorships and/or legislative chambers that could, at a minimum, break some of the few remaining Democrat trifectas.
Here’s the breakdown. On the negative side, Republicans are poised to lose the governorship in Maryland and Massachusetts. But it won’t be much of a setback, because Democrats already had veto-proof majorities in both of the states’ legislative chambers. Also, the Republicans there were extremely liberal anyway.
On the positive side, if the current trends holds, Republicans are poised to pick up the governorships in Wisconsin, Nevada, Oregon, and Kansas, and they have the momentum in New York, Pennsylvania, Michigan, New Mexico, and Minnesota. Also, if the wave continues to grow and undecided voters continue to break against the incumbents, as the trend is showing, they can still win in Pennsylvania and Maine, where polls currently show the Democrat ahead.
In other words, it’s almost guaranteed they will have more than 30 governorships, with a chance of collecting 35-37 if they run the table. More specifically, by winning the governorships in Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Kansas, they automatically would earn four more trifectas, because they already have strong control of those legislative bodies. Also, most analysists believe that Republicans already had a chance to capture the Minnesota House (they currently control the Senate and are only four shy in the House), so now that Scott Jensen appears to be even with the Democrat for governor (and the Republican running for attorney general is ahead of incumbent Democrat Keith Ellison), there is a shocking chance for a GOP trifecta in Minnesota.
As such, if Republicans win all five governorships in the aforementioned states with majorities in the legislatures, that would bring them to 28 trifectas. Then, it is almost a certainty that in this environment, conservatives will be able to pick up enough seats in the Alaska House to break the RINO sharing agreement and restore the trifecta they always should have had. Finally, it’s important to note that Kentucky doesn’t hold a governor’s election this year, but Republicans already have veto-proof majorities in both houses. Plus, Republicans have a very good chance to grow their majorities in North Carolina to veto-proof status against Democrat Governor Roy Cooper. On paper, that would give them 31 states where they can get legislation enacted into law without Democrat obstacles!
Now let’s examine the Democrat trifectas. Here again is the map of existing trifectas:
Let’s add Massachusetts and Maryland to the blue column, since Dems already have super-majorities and now will officially have trifectas. But Republicans, along with the chance of winning the governorship in New Mexico, also have a chance to flip the state House (the Senate is not in cycle). Together with the unprecedented exodus of Hispanic voters from the Democratic Party, a strong gubernatorial candidate at the top, a competitive congressional race in the northern part of the state, and the fact that Democrats did not aggressively gerrymander the House districts as they did in the Senate, there is a very good chance they could flip the House as they did in 2014.
Following the trend of the great Hispanic realignment, Republicans are poised for a revolution in Nevada. They will almost certainly break the Democrat trifecta in Nevada by winning the governorship and stand a very good chance of flipping the state assembly. If the current trend of generational shift among Hispanic voters holds up and they run the table statewide, as some polls are showing, it is also possible that Republicans can flip the Senate too, which would require them to win every competitive race. That would replace a Democrat trifecta with a GOP trifecta.
Likewise, in Oregon, they are now favored to win the governorship, thereby breaking the Democrat trifecta. Despite Oregon’s reputation as a wacko Antifa state, the leftists are confined to certain parts of the state, with large geographic swaths remaining red. Thus, even now, Democrats only have a four-seat majority in the Senate, which can be in play given their problems at the top of the ticket with an unpopular governor who will likely lose and several vacancies among their incumbents. Control of the House is a much tougher hill to climb, requiring them to net at least seven seats, but it should be noted that they will almost certainly pick up two seats, which is enough to break the Democrat three-fifths majority, which is necessary to pass revenue-raising bills.
Moving to the other coast, in Maine, even if Republican Paul LePage comes up short in unseating Democrat Governor Janet Mills, the legislative chambers, especially the Senate, have historically flipped back and forth during bad midterms for both parties. Since 2008, the president’s party has lost the Maine Senate during each midterm election. This year, Republicans must net five seats. There’s also a slightly less likely but plausible chance they will win the more historically Democrat-controlled lower chamber if LePage does win at the top (or possibly even if he doesn’t, because of the culture of split-ticket voting), because Democrats were not able to gerrymander the districts thanks to an independent redistricting commission. So, there is a decent chance of breaking the Democrat trifecta in one of three ways.
Elsewhere in the deep blue Northeast, if Lee Zeldin wins in New York, that would automatically deny Democrats the trifecta, and at a minimum, Democrats shouldn’t have a veto-proof majority in the upper chamber. While flipping 12 seats to downright control the Senate is tough, if there really is a revolution brewing in the Empire State enough to propel Zeldin into the governor’s mansion, it’s very reasonable that Republicans would reclaim the Senate, which was historically in GOP hands until 2018.
Next door in Connecticut, it’s unlikely that Republicans can win statewide races, but polls show the Republican leading in the northwestern congressional district. The state House is out of reach, but the state Senate is conceivably in play if Republicans overperform and run the table on the competitive seats. Democrats currently control the upper chamber 24-12. In 2016, when Trump overperformed at the top of the ticket, Republicans actually tied the Democrats at 18 seats apiece, but Democrats maintained control because of the Democrat lieutenant governor. Dems are definitely poised to lose a few seats.
In Colorado, it would take another level of a red wave for Republicans to win statewide, but they do appear to be overperforming. Even after the state went blue, the state Senate has flipped to Republicans in good years. They need to pick up three seats in the upper chamber to break the Democrat trifecta, which is very achievable, especially because an independent commission drew the new maps.
Thus, in a wave scenario, Democrats could potentially be reduced to 9 or 10 trifectas, essentially the West Coast, Hawaii, Illinois, and only some of the Northeastern states. And even at that, they are poised to lose seats in nearly all of those states. Republicans could wind up with 31 trifectas, 35 governors, and 34 states with both chambers of the legislature. Next year, Kentucky and Louisiana hold statewide elections, and it’s hard to see how Republicans don’t pick up the governorships along with supermajority legislative control. It’s also conceivable for the GOP to add to its supermajority status among the trifectas Republicans already control, such as in Montana, Florida, South Carolina, New Hampshire, and Texas, which often has ramifications for passing constitutional amendments and ballot referendums.
This, of course, is the wave scenario. If the election is more in line with a more modest midterm win for the party out of the White House, you can add a few governors and trifectas to the D column and take a few away from the GOP column. But either way you slice it, Republicans will likely achieve historic control of state governments. What will they do with that power?Horowitz: Why the GOP vote on House rules is more important than the election
November 8 is no longer the most important date on the calendar for conservatives. It’s the day after Election Day, along with the ensuing weeks, that will determine whether the incoming House majority fails like the previous eras of GOP control or whether it ushers in a new day in Washington.
At present, the outcome of this election is locked and loaded. Republicans will almost certainly win back the House, but even in the likely scenario they also win the Senate, they will not have 60 seats, nor will they have the presidency. Now it’s just a matter of which seats they win and exactly how many. In other words, whether this tyrannical government is stopped in its tracks is going to rest solely on the resolve of the House Republicans to hold the line on the issues that matter, in the way they matter, at the time and points of leverage that matter. This will all be determined in the week following the election, when the House Republicans vote to elect leadership and adopt the rules package governing the House next year. This is where conservatives need to pay attention, because absent any fundamental changes to the way House GOP leaders do business, the Republican House will be no better than during the John Boehner and Paul Ryan eras.
In September, the House Freedom Caucus submitted a list of proposed rules changes to the current conference leadership so that the new conference can vote on them before selecting leadership for the incoming Congress during the freshman member orientation conferences scheduled for the week after the election. Taken as a whole, these rules are designed to decentralize power, empower individual members to push initiatives and leadership positions, and ensure that conservatives don’t get steamrolled by McConnell and McCarthy working together on the most important issues of our time while ignoring conservative priorities. Thus far, Freedom Caucus Chair Rep. Scott Perry (R-Penn.) has not received a response from leadership on the proposals.
Here are some of the most important proposals in my opinion:
- Adopting the rules package before selecting leadership: The first proposal is actually a rule on the rules, which provides the leverage to make all the other rules changes. Under the current conference rules, unless amended, the conference will first conduct leadership elections the week of Nov. 14 and then likely adopt a rules package the next day. This allows leaders to jockey for positions and then betray the conference on the rules package a day later after securing the positions of speaker and majority leader. The Freedom Caucus is proposing that the current conference adopt an amendment that the incoming conference first vote on the rules package before selecting leaders. This will force the front-runners to take a stand on the issues and show the incoming members they intend to change the way the House does business.
- Majority of the majority rule: So, what are some of those changes they seek in the rules package? The most important one is adopting a rule that leadership can only support a bill on the floor that has the support of a majority of the elected Republicans. This is extremely important during the critical budget bill votes. During Trump’s presidency, leadership often screwed over conservatives by passing unpopular bills with majority Democrat support. This allowed most Republicans to “hope yes, vote no,” get the bad bill passed, but rely on Democrats to do the dirty work. Requiring a majority of the majority will either stop these bills in their tracks and provide us with the leverage to fight for our priorities on the budget bills, or expose the undocumented RINOs by forcing them to publicly vote their conscience so they can be tagged for defeat in future elections.
- Selecting chairmen from the committee members: We all know that leadership is very careful about the GOP image and will not conduct hearings on issues leaders believe are untouchable. The way they enforce this discipline is by hand-picking the chairmen directly or through their leadership-dominated steering committee. The Freedom Caucus is proposing a simple way to decentralize leadership by having the members of each standing committee choose their respective chairmen. This way, if the members want to delve into issues that leadership is afraid of, they can select a chairman who will follow the truth, not politics.
- Allowing an open amendment process: Under both parties in recent years, most important bills were brought to the floor under rules that shut off the ability of average members to force votes on amendments. This way, many of our priorities won’t even get a vote and Republicans can continue to pretend they stand with us on important issues while ensuring they never see the light of day. One proposed rules change would force a vote on any amendment that has 10% of the conference signed onto it. That would require roughly 23-24 members to support it. This is the way we can force votes on ideas like a full ban on transgenderism in federal funding, a moratorium on immigration, or terminating immunity for vaccine companies – all ideas leadership would never bring up for a vote.
- Motion to vacate the chair: What is the deterrent against the next speaker following in the path of the previous fraudulent GOP leaders? Well, the new Congress has taken away the potent tool of allowing any member to call a vote to “vacate the chair,” which essentially could lead to deposing the speaker. The Freedom Caucus is calling on the conference to restore that prerogative to empower individual members to hold leadership accountable.
- Read the bill: It is precisely the largest, most consequential bills that both parties have been slamming onto the floor within hours of the scheduled vote. The new rules proposal would require the bills to be posted five full days before any vote, and any waiver of that rule would have to be approved by two-thirds of the House members, not just the Rules Committee.
These proposals and more were laid out in a pamphlet being distributed by the Freedom Caucus to GOP House candidates so that they know what to expect immediately after the election. Unless these members are vigilant and their constituents remain engaged, the entire conservative leverage could be lost within a week after the election.
Taken in totality, these rules would ensure that this time the GOP House actually fulfills its electoral mandate. If Kevin McCarthy is serious about changing the direction of the Congress, he would embrace rather than ignore these proposals.Nancy Pelosi says Democrats 'have to change that subject' when asked about inflation, refuses to say if she will step down from leadership
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) gave an interview on Sunday, but she didn't want to talk about inflation or if she would step down from her leadership position in the new Congress in January.
Pelosi gave an interview during CBS News’ “Face The Nation” on Sunday. She was asked about inflation – the top issue for American voters heading into midterm elections, followed by the economy and jobs.
"And the fact is, is that, when I hear people talk about inflation, we have to change that subject," Pelosi revealed. "Inflation is a global phenomenon."
Inflation is a losing issue for Democrats. A new ABC News poll found that 36% of Americans trust Republican leadership to handle record inflation versus 21% who believe in Democrats.
Pelosi defended the record inflation in the United States that has crippled Americans by saying, "The E.U., the European Union, the U.K., the British, have a higher inflation rate than we do here."
"It's not – the fight is not about inflation. It's about the cost of living," Pelosi told host Margaret Brennan. "And if you look at what we have done to bring down the cost of prescription drugs, to bring down the cost of – of energy and the rest in our legislation, you will see that that has been opposed every step of the way by the Republicans, and they have no plan for lowering the cost of living or helping with inflation."
Bloomberg reported last month, "August electricity bills for US consumers jumped the most since 1981, gaining 15.8% from the same period a year ago, according to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics."
\u201cNANCY PELOSI: "When I hear people talk about inflation...we have to change that subject!"\u201d— RNC Research (@RNC Research) 1666536773
Brennan asked Pelosi if she regrets sending out $1,400 checks and passing huge pandemic relief bills, and if they contributed to inflation.
"No, absolutely not, because this – that was necessary for people to survive. Our purpose," she responded. "But the point is, is that, when you reduce unemployment, it's inflationary. That is a fact."
\u201c"Things like sending those $1,400 checks, putting cash out there \u2014 didn't that end up contributing to inflation? Do you have any regrets?"\n\nNANCY PELOSI: "No, absolutely not."\u201d— RNC Research (@RNC Research) 1666537273
Brennan pointed out a CBS News poll that found abortion ranks as the seventh most important voting issue for Americans, and the top concerns are the economy, inflation, crime, and immigration. She asked Pelosi if Democrats made a "miscalculation" in going all-in on abortion messaging and seemingly neglecting the economy.
"Well, I can just say this. Nobody ever – elections are about the future," Pelosi replied. "They're about the economy. Everybody knows that. Nobody said we're doing abortion, rather than the economy, but it's – it's about both. And I can tell you that that issue is very, very provocative and encouraging people to vote across the country."
Brennan asked Pelosi if she intends to remain in a leadership role when the new Congress happens in January.
Pelosi shot back, "I'm not talking about that. I'm here to talk about how we win the election."
"I'm not here to talk about me," the 82-year-old Democrat continued. "I'm here to talk about the future, America's working families, for the children. It's always about the children."
In December 2018, Pelosi vowed to step down as the top Democrat in the House by 2022.
“Over the summer, I made it clear that I see myself as a bridge to the next generation of leaders, a recognition of my continuing responsibility to mentor and advance new Members into positions of power and responsibility in the House Democratic Caucus," Pelosi said in a statement nearly four years ago.
“For some time, there have been a number of conversations to advance a proposal to institute term limits for senior leadership positions in our Caucus," she added. "This proposal, which was developed by Members who care about the institution of the House of Representatives, would provide that Members in senior leadership positions can serve 3 terms with an additional term with two-thirds support of the Caucus. It would include the two terms of the Democratic Majority from 2007 to 2011."
“It is my understanding that Caucus Chair Hakeem Jeffries and incoming Rules Committee Chair Jim McGovern plan to bring up this proposal for a discussion and a vote by February 15th. I am comfortable with the proposal and it is my intention to abide by it whether it passes or not," Pelosi concluded.
Nancy Pelosi Refuses To Say If She Will Remain In Democrat Leadership In The Next Congress www.youtube.com
ABC host asks expert about Democrats’ midterm chances — regrets it when smacked with HARSH reality
On a recent episode of “The Rubin Report,” BlazeTV host Dave Rubin shared a clip from ABC News' "This Week," in which senior national correspondent Terry Moran delivered some bad news about the Democrats' chances in next month's midterm elections.
"Less than a month to go [to the midterms] ... the Democrats were feeling pretty hopeful about their chances. Do you still get that sense?" ABC host Martha Raddatz asked.
"Nope, I think the air went out of that balloon," Moran answered without hesitation. "Look, the economy is so tough for so many people, food prices, rent spiking, if they've got retirement funds, those are evaporating ... I just think the economic headwinds are tough and Biden is — he just doesn't have the oomph as a candidate any more. People don't really want him around, and he can't really make his case, that I don't think the Democrats are in any better place."
Moran went on to explain why he believes people shouldn’t trust political opinion polls any more.
"In this country, and in other countries, polls are broken, right?" he stated. "It is clear that lots of people on the right just don't answer any more. They were worse in 2020 than they were in 2016. And so you look at those polls ... if it's close, it's a Republican win."
"That's interesting because, you know, you don't get a lot of good analysis obviously out of mainstream media," Dave commented.
"The corporate press always wants to frame everything through, 'How can we sort of save the Democrats?' ... but there's Moran basically being like, 'Look, the economy is so banged up. Biden doesn't have oomph.' Right? Like this thing is so screwed up," he added.
Watch the video clip below to catch more of the conversation. Can't watch? Download the podcast here.
Want more from Dave Rubin?
To enjoy more honest conversations, free speech, and big ideas with Dave Rubin, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.
www.theblaze.com