The brutal truth: Why women ditched Democrats for Trump



Americans are tired of being told their intellect is limited by race or sex — especially women. Like other groups, women have long been taken for granted by the Democratic Party, as if pro-choice talking points alone are enough to secure their blind loyalty to the rest of the party’s platform.

“The View”co-host Sunny Hostin certainly thinks this is the case, calling Trump’s victory a “a referendum of cultural resentment” merely because Americans overwhelmingly refused the policy platform of “a mixed-race woman married to a Jewish guy.”

No, women didn’t vote for Trump because they are 'so severe upon their own sex.'

The Sunny Hostins of the Democratic establishment refuse to engage in serious self-reflection that could explain the surge of women and other traditionally Democratic groups voting Republican in this election. Are women simply suffering from a mass self-hatred that enticed them to vote for Donald Trump? Or have Democrats made a critical mistake in assuming that abortion is the only issue women care about politically?

Kamala Harris bet on winning the women’s vote by making reproductive rights the center of her campaign. This strategy isn’t new — Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, and other Democrats have used it before. However, this approach has arguably become one of the Democrats’ gravest miscalculations, and Harris paid the price.

Over the past four years, women have faced the same economic pressures as men — buying groceries, filling gas tanks, and dealing with higher interest rates. Men aren’t the only ones who care about the economy, and no matter how often politicians chant, “My body, my choice,” it can’t drown out the financial strain of Bidenomics. Women, like men, wanted economic solutions and found them with Trump. For them, Kamala Harris and “my body, my choice” were not nearly enough.

Women’s bodies seem to matter to Democrats only when it comes to abortion. After the COVID pandemic, women have led the push for greater medical autonomy, nutritional transparency, and broader access to holistic, cycle-based health care. Robert F. Kennedy Jr. promised to address these issues by holding Big Pharma and Big Food accountable, and women rallied around him in droves. But instead of supporting RFK Jr. and the women’s issues he represented, the Democratic Party labeled him an “anti-vax conspiracy theorist,” dismissing both him and the women he galvanized. Is it any wonder they followed Kennedy across the aisle to Trump?

Democrats also seem indifferent to women’s health care standards beyond abortion access. Women are continually overprescribed birth control as a blanket treatment for almost any ailment, wreaking havoc on their bodies. When outlets like Evie magazine highlighted how Big Pharma profits from pumping women full of synthetic estrogens, the Washington Post labeled the writers “conspiracy theorists.” But don’t worry — if birth control fails, Democrats will ensure you still have access to abortion.

Yet the “my body, my choice” mantra doesn’t seem to apply to women’s sports, bathrooms, or sororities. Kamala Harris might have played Beyoncé’s “Girls Run the World” at her rallies, but when her party cheers for an Algerian man beating elite female athletes or celebrates Lia Thomas while dismissing Riley Gaines as a “right-wing extremist,” the pretense of “women’s empowerment” becomes hard to believe.

Women are also tired of being told by the “woke elite” that they’re “fatphobic” if they don’t laud Lizzo as a health and beauty icon while Adele and Rebel Wilson are criticized for promoting “unhealthy” beauty standards through their weight loss. According to MSNBC, fitness is a sign of “right-wing extremism,” so it’s supposedly better to sit on the couch and pop birth control.

When Democrats celebrate being an overweight, unhealthy, androgynous “menstruating person” over a mom who works out, wears dresses, and drinks raw milk, they risk alienating a significant portion of their base.

The Democrats assume women have an obligatory, blind allegiance requiring them to support any woman running for office regardless of her policies. Such an assumption that a woman’s political capacities are limited to a candidate’s sex is not only an insult to women’s intelligence — it’s frankly anti-feminist.

In response to Sunny Hostin: No, women didn’t vote for Trump because they are “so severe upon their own sex.” Like birth control, your party prescribed “my body, my choice” as a cure-all for any political ailment afflicting women over the past four years of Biden and Harris’ policy failures. Trump’s platform actually listened to women. You took them for granted.

ABC News in ‘panic mode’ to balance ‘The View’ after anti-Trump panel misses voter sentiment: Report



ABC News is reportedly in "panic mode" trying to find more conservative voices to balance "The View" after the show's entire panel threw their support behind Vice President Kamala Harris' failed presidential bid.

Sources told the New York Post that the network is scrambling to rectify the voter disconnect on the talk show. According to the unidentified sources, ABC News has been hosting "intense," "high-level meetings" since last week.

'The current panel is clearly resonating with audiences given that the series just had its highest rated episode in more than a decade.'

Reportedly, the first order of business for the network's executives is to find a panelist to join the show who is a supporter of President-elect Donald Trump. Even the show's two current so-called Republican co-hosts, Ana Navarro and Alyssa Farah Griffin, have repeatedly bashed Trump and his policies.

A source told the Post that the show is "facing pressure from higher-ups."

"Viewers can expect some major changes including bringing in new panelists that can bring in a pro-Trump perspective," the source continued. "Everyone on 'The View' endorsed Kamala Harris. They lost. They are out of touch with America."

"For a show about different perspectives, 'The View' doesn't seem to have any when it comes to Trump. ABC bosses don't want to alienate the pro-Trump demographic," the source added.

The source speculated that bringing on a pro-Trump host could cause a stir with the other panelists.

"The question is what will happen to the Whoopis and the Joys if they bring on a Trumpster?" the source questioned, referring to Whoopi Goldberg and Joy Behar.

Whether the network plans to replace any current hosts or simply add another panelist is unclear.

A second source told the Post, "We are trying to sort out how we cover the next 4 years when everyone inside ABC News is on one side."

An ABC spokesperson denied the sources' claims, stating that it is an "opinion-based show featuring a diverse panel of women with different points of view."

The spokesperson then remarked that the show had just seen its highest ratings, seemingly oblivious to the likely reason behind the surge in viewership. It is plausible that many Americans, especially those with conservative views who typically avoid the program, flocked to see the far-left panelists' dramatic reactions to Trump's landslide election win.

The ABC News spokesperson told the Post, "The current panel is clearly resonating with audiences given that the series just had its highest rated episode in more than a decade and hit a 4-year high in total viewers."

After Trump's win, Behar accused his supporters of being racist and misogynistic.

Co-host Sunny Hostin questioned what was "wrong" with the Americans who voted for him, blaming "uneducated white women" and "Latino men" for Harris' loss.

Meghan McCain, a former co-host on "The View," criticized her former colleagues for being out of touch with American voters.

"Respectfully, please stop sending me clips from The View," she told her followers on X. "It's a radical progressive insane asylum and that is why I left years ago."

In an earlier post, McCain wrote, "It is actual malfeasance on the part of ABC news that there isn't one single conservative woman on The View this morning who voted for Trump or simply isn't repulsed by his supporters to explain to America why he is still so popular."

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Democrats use ‘Negro nagging’ to keep disobedient black men in line



Vice President Kamala Harris recently held a town hall in Detroit, and the best part about it was how she avoided speaking to black men in the familiar SIGN language — shame, insults, guilt, and nagging — that the left favors.

The event, hosted by “The Breakfast Club” host Charlamagne tha God, didn’t reveal much new about the Democrats’ presidential nominee. It did, however, highlight Charlamagne’s role as more of a campaign surrogate than an objective journalist or political commentator. He framed Harris' campaign as a battle against two foes: Donald Trump and “misinformation.” He also asserted that the choice for voters in November is between Harris and “fascism.”

The professional 'Negro naggers' on the left will only intensify their attacks if Trump wins the election due to increased black male support.

Harris reiterated her recent policies aimed at black men, including marijuana legalization, but avoided the tongue-lashing her surrogates have grown accustomed to delivering. This approach benefits her campaign, yet it remains the exception on the left, not the rule.

Democrats and their media surrogates often engage in what some call “Negro nagging” to pressure uncooperative black men back into the fold. Barack Obama caused a stir with a public rebuke during a campaign stop in Pittsburgh, chastising “the brothers” for considering sitting out the election or even voting for Donald Trump because they don’t want to support a female candidate.

Obama appears to believe that since more than 80% of black men voted for Hillary Clinton in 2016, they should now automatically support Kamala Harris. This disregard for political independence also aligns with Joy Reid’s recent comment that black men who support Trump are fueling a “fascist groundswell.” Similarly, Sunny Hostin, co-host of “The View,” labeled black Trump voters as “ridiculous” and “crazy” with nary an objection from her co-hosts.

This is not how you speak to people you hope to persuade. This is how you speak to people you believe you own.

I wouldn’t criticize a man for calling out his brother for cheating on his wife or abandoning his family. Being a husband and father comes with God-given responsibilities. However, no American has a moral obligation to vote for any particular party or candidate, and that holds true for black people and Democrats just as much as it does for white evangelicals and Republicans. One of the biggest problems in American politics today is that politicians have become far too comfortable with reversing roles. They act as if our job is to vote for them, when in reality, it’s their job to work for us.

This attitude is why progressive voices have been berating black men since the last presidential election. In 2020, Rutgers University professor Brittney Cooper called black men voting for Trump “traitorous MFs.” One Democratic congressional candidate claimed that one in five black men voted for Trump because “they hate black women.” In 2022, former MSNBC host Tiffany Cross even said black men in Georgia should “get in line” behind black women and vote for Stacey Abrams.

The Democrats clearly struggle with how they communicate with men, a problem that’s worsened by their obsession with race and identity. This is why they speak to disobedient black men with such disdain. My hope for this election cycle is that millions of black men will wake up to this reality. I also hope they embrace their role as political homewreckers.

The unholy alliance between black feminists and white liberals, formed in the 1960s, has wreaked havoc on both the black family and African-American political engagement for decades. In this political triangle, the government takes the role of the new patriarch, black women serve as the loyal spouse, and black men are treated like children under the care of their mother and her new boyfriend.

The professional “Negro naggers” on the left will only intensify their attacks if Trump wins the election due to increased black male support. That’s certainly one approach Democrats can take to address their problems, but it won’t work with black men who reject being treated like boys by women who didn’t birth them.

Hospitalized Or Not, Democrats Have A Plan For Fetterman

The same political partisans who pushed Fetterman over the election finish line are now doing their part to squeeze the most out of his feeble Senate seat.

Sunny Hostin falsely claims 'good Samaritan' Elisjsha Dicken 'broke the law' by carrying a gun into Indiana mall, where he stopped a mass shooting



The co-hosts of "The View" attacked the "good Samaritan" who stopped an active shooter at an Indiana mall and got basic facts about the story wrong while dismissing the man's heroic actions as "lucky."

On Tuesday's show on ABC, Sunny Hostin falsely stated that 22-year-old gun owner Elisjsha Dicken "broke the law" by carrying his firearm at the Greenwood Park Mall, where he used it to stop an active shooter who killed three people and wounded two others with a rifle.

City of Greenwood officials called Dickens a "hero" and emphasized that he was "lawfully carrying a firearm" when he stopped the shooter.

But the ladies of "The View" criticized the argument that a good guy with a gun is the only way to stop a bad guy with a gun.

"They say that a good guy with a gun can control a bad guy with a gun. Well, we saw in Uvalde that that’s not true,” Joy Behar said, referring to a recent report that nearly 400 law enforcement personnel were at Robb Elementary School during the mass shooting in Uvalde, Texas but had failed to stop the shooter. Whoopi Goldberg added that the same was true for the mass shooting at a supermarket in Buffalo, New York.

But Republican co-host Lindsey Granger pushed back on their narrative, mentioning that "we saw that it is true in Indiana."

"It was true in Indiana. That was a lucky moment," Behar said dismissively. "And you know what? I feel like this: if you're a good guy with a gun you should not object to background checks or licensing or, you know, limitation on military-style weapons that kill thousands at once. Or hundreds at once. So, why can't they just pull that off?"

Later on in the discussion, Hostin criticized Dickens for taking action to stop the mall shooter, bringing up her own experience with firearms training.

"But with this good Samaritan thing. Listen, I was trained when I was at the justice department in firearms. And I was trained in defensive firearm training. It is very hard to hit a moving target," she said. "It is hard for people that are trained to hit a moving target. It is very lucky that that good Samaritan hit that moving target in that way."

She went on to falsely state that Dickens was carrying his firearm illegally.

"He had a gun permit but he wasn’t supposed in the mall with a gun,” she said. "So he broke the law even though he was a good Samaritan."

Indiana became what is known as a "Constitutional carry" state in March when Gov. Eric Holcomb (R) signed a law eliminating the license requirement to carry a handgun. Anyone who previously could obtain a permit to carry a handgun is legally permitted to do so without a permit in Indiana.

The Indianapolis Star reported that the Greenwood Park Mall had a no-gun policy, but attorney and firearms instructor Guy Relford told the paper Indiana's Constitutional Carry and Stand Your Ground laws protected Dickens' actions because he acted to save the people targeted by the shooter.

He compared the mall's policy to a "no shoes, no shirt, no service" sign, explaining that while a business could ask a customer that violates the policy to leave, no crime is committed unless the customer refuses to do so. In a case where the customer ignores the business' demand, he would be trespassing, which is a crime in Indiana.

"So the fact that (Greenwood Park Mall) had a no-gun policy creates no legal issue whatsoever for [Dickens]," Relford said. "And it certainly has no effect whatsoever on his ability to use force to defend himself or to defend the other people in the mall."

This was a point Granger made to defend Dickens from Hostin's smear.

“The law of Indiana is different than the law of the mall, of Simon malls. And I would say that takes precedence when you save a life,” she said.

Watch:


(h/t: Newsbusters)