Joe Biden has destabilized this country and the world. But now it’s all out in the open.

Because the White House was exposed for sending thousands of American troops into this foreign nation.

The Biden administration’s Pentagon just admitted a major blunder — and it’s a bombshell revelation.

On Thursday, the Department of Defense disclosed that the number of U.S. troops in Syria is more than double what the government has been reporting.

Instead of the previously stated 900, the actual count stands at 2,000 troops — a force that has apparently been in place “for a while.”

Pentagon spokesperson Maj. General Patrick Ryder finally addressed the glaring discrepancy during a press conference, confessing:

“We have been briefing you regularly that there are approximately 900 US troops deployed in Syria.”

Then came the stunning admission: “I learned today that in fact there are approximately 2,000 US troops in Syria,” Ryder said, visibly uncomfortable.

This isn’t a trivial error — it’s an alarming oversight. According to Ryder, the additional forces are considered “temporary rotational forces” tasked with addressing “shifting mission requirements.”

But how long has this larger presence been in place? Ryder avoided giving a straight answer, vaguely stating, “My understanding is that it’s been for a while, so clearly before the fall of the Assad regime. So, yeah.”

When pressed further, Ryder admitted the increased deployment has been ongoing “at least a matter of months.”

Yet, no clear timeline or justification was offered for this significant troop surge, leaving the American public once again in the dark.

Adding to the murkiness, Ryder described the troops as primarily U.S. Army forces “focused on the defeat of ISIS mission.”

But even this explanation seemed to lack clarity. “Many of our deployments will fluctuate from time to time,” Ryder said, adding it was “his decision” to share the updated numbers.

The Biden administration’s Pentagon couldn’t even provide a solid reason for the ballooned troop count, with Ryder offering only vague assurances that these weren’t part of normal “relief in place” operations.

Instead, he suggested that these forces had been operating in and out of Syria without proper transparency.

This debacle comes as Syria’s former strongman Bashar al-Assad fled the nation, leaving behind a country in chaos.

While Biden’s team scrambles to control the narrative, the glaring question remains: why has the administration been misleading Americans about the true scale of our involvement in Syria?

This is yet another example of the Biden administration’s failure to provide transparency and accountability in military matters.

Stay tuned to Prudent Politics.

Biden is no where to be found. His absence comes at the worst time possible.

And Joe Biden has gone missing and the Democrats’ response to the news will completely shock you.

President Joe Biden’s decision to remain out of the spotlight while Congress scrambles to finalize a spending bill to keep the government running past Friday seems to have raised few concerns among Democrats, according to a report.

“Biden has remained conspicuously absent outside a brief statement issued by his press secretary — and for now, Democrats said there was little clamor for him to return,” Politico reports.

The article followed a dramatic day in Washington, marked by Elon Musk and President-elect Donald Trump derailing what would have been the first bipartisan spending bill in years.

Despite the urgent need to prevent a government shutdown, Politico noted that “no one seemed to be looking to Biden for answers — and the lame-duck president gave no indication he had any desire to provide them.”

California Democratic Rep. Mark Takano confirmed the sentiment, saying, “I haven’t gotten any message from President Biden, or heard of anything that he’s saying.”

House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries was equally reserved, stating that he’s only been in “close contact with the administration” but refraining from confirming any direct communication with Biden himself.

As Politico observed, “Democrats appeared largely fine with Biden taking a back seat.” Even during a caucus meeting among House Democrats, Biden’s stance on the funding deadlock wasn’t a topic of discussion.

Instead, members reportedly referred to Elon Musk as “President Musk” in a pointed acknowledgment of his outsized influence in the unfolding crisis.

Biden’s allies are arguing that his silence is intentional, part of a “strategic decision” designed to place Trump at the center of the blame for any potential government shutdown.

The strategy, they contend, could weaken Trump politically before he even assumes office.

Nevertheless, the report revealed that Democrats have only communicated with White House staff during this period, with no confirmation of direct input from the president.

On Wednesday, Biden spent the day at his Wilmington, Delaware, residence while the bipartisan spending bill failed.

He stayed there through Thursday, maintaining a low profile with no events on his public schedule.

Politico framed the president’s absence as emblematic of a larger reality: “[T]he president’s absence highlights a jarring reality that officials in both parties said has become clear since the November election: While Biden technically still runs the country, Trump — and increasingly Musk — are the real captains now.”

Democrats, meanwhile, are reportedly pinning their hopes on shifting blame for a potential shutdown onto Trump and “President Musk.”

The Politico report came on the heels of a Wall Street Journal exposé, which revealed that some of Biden’s staff had observed signs of his weakening stamina as early as 2021, during the initial months of his presidency.

This raises questions about how much the media and White House staff covered up Joe Biden’s cognitive decline throughout his term.

Stay tuned to Prudent Politics.

The radical Left isn’t hiding it anymore. They’ve made their true feelings known about Donald Trump.

And the hosts of The View dream about another Trump assassination attempt on live TV.

During a recent episode of The View, host Whoopi Goldberg, with some input from cohost Joy Behar, floated an unusual theory involving Elon Musk and Vice President-elect JD Vance. The duo suggested that the pair might be planning a takeover to seize control of the White House.

On Thursday’s broadcast of the ABC talk show, Goldberg questioned Musk’s growing influence on policy as the inauguration of President-elect Donald Trump draws near.

“I’ve been saying it for a while. I’ve been saying that Elon Musk believes he’s president. I do,” Goldberg remarked, pointing to the broader conversation about “who is in charge.”

Behar chimed in, adding her own take. “Well, you’ve been calling him vice president,” she said, to which Goldberg replied, “I called him vice president, I called him president, because I don’t know what JD is doing. I hardly ever — I don’t — I don’t remember the last time we even talked about JD.”

Behar speculated further: “He’s planning the presidency when they get rid of Trump.”

Goldberg then took it a step further, asking, “So you think it’s Musk — Musk-Vance?”

“It’s possible,” Behar responded.

Goldberg ended the segment with a pointed comment aimed directly at Trump — though she notably avoided using his name, a habit she has maintained. Addressing him as “You-Know-Who,” she quipped, “Hey, You-Know-Who, stay away from the stairways.”

ABC News moderators Whoopi Goldberg and Joy Behar claim Elon Musk and JD Vance are planning to kill Trump and usurp control of the government together as Musk/Vance.
"[Trump] stay away from the stairways." – Whoopi pic.twitter.com/bMRmOSwdrk

— Nicholas Fondacaro (@NickFondacaro) December 19, 2024

When the show returned after a commercial break, Goldberg appeared to walk back her remarks, clarifying that her comment was not meant to suggest any harm toward Trump.

“Okay, I need to clean something up,” she stated. “Because my cat lays in wait for me on my stairs all the time and that’s what I was referring — I was thinking of that, I wasn’t trying to indicate that they were actually standing there with their legs out, hoping he would trip.”

Cohost Sunny Hostin backed up Goldberg’s explanation, adding, “No one wants anything done to the president.”

“It was light-hearted and it’s the holidays, come on,” Goldberg continued. “My goodness!”

Hostin reiterated, “We did not mean that anybody should hurt the president.”

The segment quickly drew criticism online. Some noted that The View falls under ABC’s news division, raising questions about the show’s editorial oversight.

Critics also highlighted a recent $15 million settlement ABC reached over false on-air statements made by This Week anchor George Stephanopoulos. The anchor had erroneously claimed that President-elect Donald Trump had been found “liable for r*pe” in the E. Jean Carroll case.

Commentators didn’t hold back on social media. Chad Gilmartin wrote, “Fresh off a $15 million defamation settlement, ABC allows The View to fantasize about assassination plots against President-elect Trump.”

Stephen L. Miller echoed the sentiment, writing, “The View falls under ABC’s network news division. Will just keep reminding you of that.”

As The View continues to straddle the line between entertainment and political commentary, moments like these remind everyone just how unhinged the the radical Leftist hosts really are.

Stay tuned to Prudent Politics.

The Biden immigration policy has brought this nation to its knees. It runs deeper than you could ever imagine.

And now an alarming report from the southern border is raising eyebrows across the country.

A new study from the Center for Immigration Studies highlights a glaring oversight in the push for more immigration to address workforce shortages: millions of U.S.-born men who have given up on work entirely.

These sidelined Americans, particularly those with lower levels of education, represent a massive untapped labor force that’s being ignored in favor of foreign workers.

The numbers paint a stark picture. One in six U.S.-born men aged 20 to 64 is not part of the labor force—meaning they don’t have a job and aren’t looking for one.

For men without a high school diploma, the situation is even bleaker: nearly 25% are absent from the workforce, a sharp increase from just 18% in 2000 and a dramatic rise from 9% in 1970.

These are the same individuals most likely to compete with low-skilled immigrants for jobs, according to Steven A. Camarota, the study’s author.

“If the argument is that we don’t have enough of those workers, what that ignores is all the people on the economy’s sidelines who themselves are overwhelmingly people who don’t have a college education,” Camarota told The Washington Times.

Generous welfare programs and shifting cultural norms may also be contributing to the crisis, incentivizing men to abandon the workforce. Camarota estimated that if U.S.-born men were working at the same rates as they did in 2000, the labor force would have 4.4 million additional workers.

But their absence isn’t just an economic problem—it’s a social one. Men who are out of the workforce are more likely to struggle with issues like poverty, mental health problems, obesity, drug overdoses, suicides, and reckless alcohol use. These challenges create a vicious cycle that keeps many from returning to work.

“The social problems contribute to what happens to these men,” Camarota explained. “If we could get more of them back into the labor force, especially ones in their 20s, that would help head off a lot of these problems, or mitigate them.”

While the problem of jobless men isn’t new—some historians even link it to the motivations behind the Crusades—Camarota’s suggestion that immigration exacerbates the issue is highly contentious.

Immigration advocates argue that migrants are critical to the economy. Groups like America’s Voice claim immigrants represent one in six workers and play a vital role in sustaining social programs.

The Economic Policy Institute (EPI), a left-leaning think tank, even credits the Biden administration’s surge in migration with preventing higher inflation, asserting that immigration’s impact on wages is “neutral” or “slightly positive.”

But critics, like Tom Homan, President-elect Donald Trump’s incoming border czar, offer a starkly different view. Homan shared an anecdote about a roofing contractor who was forced to lay off 20 U.S. workers because he couldn’t compete with companies paying migrant laborers significantly less.

“That happens every day across this country, a thousand times,” Homan said.

Camarota agreed that meaningful change requires more than just coaxing men back into the labor force. Reforms to welfare and disability systems, job training programs, and higher wages are necessary. Crucially, he argued, reducing immigration must be part of the solution.

“We’re not getting everybody back in the labor force,” Camarota admitted. “The question is can we do better, and I think we can, but we never will as long as we have the immigration.”

Interestingly, women have been stepping up to fill workforce gaps. In the early 1960s, nearly half of women aged 18-64 were out of the labor force. Today, that number has dropped to just over a quarter, reflecting a historic shift in workforce participation.

The debate over immigration and labor is far from settled. But as millions of American men remain on the sidelines, policymakers may need to take a hard look at whether the focus on immigration is ignoring a homegrown solution.

Stay tuned to Prudent Politics.

The U.S. House has done something truly stunning. And the GOP can’t believe it.

As a secret vote out of Congress has Republicans ringing every alarm bell.

The House Ethics Committee secretly voted to release the findings of the investigation they conducted into s*xual misconduct allegations against former Congressman Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.), according to a recent report by CNN.

The vote, reportedly held in December, follows years of controversy surrounding Gaetz, who has been accused of engaging in s*xual misconduct, including allegations of involvement with an underage partner.

Gaetz has consistently denied the claims, characterizing them as politically motivated and noting that the Justice Department chose not to pursue charges after its investigation.

The document from the Ethics Committee is expected to be released later this month, despite earlier attempts by House Republicans to block its publication.

In November, Gaetz resigned from Congress after being named President-elect Donald Trump’s pick for attorney general — a nomination he withdrew just eight days later amid Senate Republican concerns tied to the allegations.

The 42-year-old firebrand addressed the issue on Wednesday following CNN’s report. In a tweet, Gaetz reiterated his denial of the allegations while acknowledging some aspects of his past behavior. “The Biden/Garland DOJ spent years reviewing allegations that I committed various crimes. I was charged with nothing: FULLY EXONERATED,” he wrote.

Gaetz claimed the Ethics Committee relied on “witnesses” that the Justice Department had previously deemed not credible and criticized the lack of opportunity to defend himself.

“I’ve had no chance to ever confront any accusers. I’ve never been charged. I’ve never been sued,” he wrote.

He also addressed rumors about his personal life, admitting to youthful indiscretions but firmly denying any criminal conduct.

“In my single days, I often sent funds to women I dated – even some I never dated but who asked. I dated several of these women for years. I NEVER had s*xual contact with someone under 18,” Gaetz stated.

Reflecting on his past, Gaetz admitted, “My 30’s were an era of working very hard – and playing hard too. It’s embarrassing, though not criminal, that I probably partied, womanized, drank and smoked more than I should have earlier in life. I live a different life now.”

House Republicans previously voted along party lines to block the report’s release, with House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) arguing that Gaetz’s resignation made its publication unnecessary.

However, the Ethics Committee appears to have reversed course, signaling the report will soon become public.

Gaetz, who now works as a host for the conservative network One America News, remains defiant, framing the investigation as a continuation of partisan attacks against him.

Whether the forthcoming report will cast new light on the long-running controversy remains to be seen.

But overall, it’s looking as though Donald Trump dodged a bullet with Gaetz deciding to withdrawal his name from the attorney general nomination.

The release of this report would’ve only caused headaches for Trump during the Senate confirmation process for Matt Gaetz.

Stay tuned to Prudent Politics.

MSNBC is heavily on the side of the Democrats. But after the 2024 elections, the network is starting to change it’s tune.

And MSNBC’s Joy Reid stabs the Democrat Party in the back during a mind blowing betrayal.

Joy Reid Slams Democratic Leadership for Failing to Embrace Younger Voices

MSNBC host Joy Reid didn’t hold back on Tuesday, sharply criticizing the Democratic Party for clinging to its longest-serving leaders while sidelining younger stars like Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y. Reid argued that this resistance to change is emblematic of a deeper problem within the party.

“[The] gerontocracy seems like it’s intractable,” Reid remarked. “I recall when Barack Obama was elected, he kind of pushed aside the DNC and created his own organization because I think there is a frustration with the sort of creaky way the DNC operates.”

The issue of age and leadership has become an increasingly heated topic for Democrats. Multiple party governors have declined to say whether age limits should be imposed on future presidential candidates.

The discussion gained urgency after President Biden stepped aside from the Democratic nomination in July, following internal concerns about his age.

His withdrawal was widely seen as a factor in Vice President Kamala Harris’s eventual defeat as the Democratic nominee in the 2024 election.

Reid further criticized the party’s outdated methods and decision-making structure, describing it as dominated by “donors and consultants and people who are locked in the old ways of doing things.”

She added, “They want to advertise on TV. Look, I am for TV, I love TV, I work on TV, but they don’t want to do the sort of new world media. But then AOC is so good at it.”

Rep. Ocasio-Cortez, often celebrated for her ability to connect with younger voters through social media platforms like Instagram, recently lost out on a leadership role on the influential House Oversight Committee.

The position went to 74-year-old Rep. Gerry Connolly, D-Va., with the decision reportedly influenced by 84-year-old former Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif.

This perceived resistance to generational change has left some Democrats frustrated. “Kamala Harris represented the generational change that base Democratic voters demanded, and yet when you go to the House and Senate, no generational change,” Reid pointed out. “Does that make sense to you?”

The party remains divided on how to address concerns about age. California Gov. Gavin Newsom downplayed the idea of age limits, telling The New York Times, “It’s not a time of life, it’s a state of mind,” and calling the concept of limits “absurd.”

Newsom had previously defended Biden’s age in 2023, saying it was not an issue.

Although many Democrats rallied behind Biden in the early stages of the 2024 campaign, fears over his ability to defeat Donald Trump intensified after a rocky debate performance in June.

Pressure from Pelosi and other party leaders ultimately led Biden to withdraw, but Harris’s elevation to the top of the ticket failed to unite the party, culminating in her loss to Trump in the general election.

As the Democrat Party looks ahead, the tension between maintaining institutional loyalty and embracing fresh leadership continues to weigh heavily on its future.

In fact, many aren’t sure if there really is much of a future for the Democrat Party, especially after it’s begun to implode after Donald Trump’s 2024 election victory.

Stay tuned to Prudent Politics.

The Swamp is in desperate need of draining. This GOP lawmaker may finally have the solution to it.

And the Washington, D.C. Swamp is on fire after this Republican senator announces a new bill to drain it.

Sen. Joni Ernst Proposes Bill to Relocate 30% of Federal Workforce Nationwide

Senator Joni Ernst (R-IA) has introduced a bold new legislative proposal aimed at redistributing federal agency workforces currently centralized in Washington, D.C.

The Decentralizing and Reorganizing Agency Infrastructure Nationwide to Harness Efficient Services, Workforce Administration, and Management Practices Act—or the DRAIN THE SWAMP Act—seeks to relocate at least 30% of federal employees headquartered in the nation’s capital to various locations across the United States.

“Actions speak louder than words, and bureaucrats have sent a resounding message that they don’t want to work in Washington,” Ernst explained. “In the Christmas spirit, I am happy to make their wish reality by relocating them. DOGE has a lot of work to do and draining the swamp is a great place to start.”

Under the proposed legislation, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) would oversee the effort to decentralize federal agency workforces, ensuring the reassignment of a significant portion of employees to regions across the country.

For those employees who remain in Washington, remote work would be eliminated, requiring full in-office attendance. Additionally, the bill mandates the sale of unused or underutilized federal office space, ensuring all office facilities operate at full capacity.

This initiative builds upon Ernst’s earlier legislative efforts, including a bill targeting the relocation of 30% of the Small Business Administration (SBA) workforce.

The rationale behind the SBA bill was rooted in data showing that even with full in-person attendance, only two-thirds of the agency’s Washington, D.C., headquarters capacity would be utilized. Ernst is now applying that framework to the broader federal workforce.

The proposed relocations aim to “promote geographical diversity, including consideration of rural markets,” and to “ensure adequate staffing throughout the regions of the Administration, to promote in-person customer service,” as stated in the bill. Ernst argues that redistributing federal employees would bring them closer to the communities they serve, fostering a stronger connection to the public.

“If mom-and-pop shops had the work ethic of SBA bureaucrats, they would be forced to close immediately,” Ernst said in support of her SBA proposal.

She emphasized the need for federal agencies to emulate the customer-first approach of small businesses, stating, “Connecting with an agency employee should not be a rare occurrence worthy of celebrating. There is no better way to fix the broken culture at the SBA than to bring them closer to the people they serve so that they perform more like a family business and less like a bloated bureaucracy.”

Ernst has long championed initiatives aimed at curbing government waste. Through her work with the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), she has consistently pushed for reforms to streamline federal operations.

Earlier this month, during the first DOGE caucus meeting, Ernst released a detailed report highlighting the financial and operational impacts of telework in federal agencies.

According to the report, telework has surged since the COVID-19 pandemic, with only 6% of federal workers now reporting to the office full-time and one-third working entirely remotely.

The report pointed to concerning trends, including instances of workers engaging in non-work-related activities while on the clock. It also detailed the financial burden of maintaining underused office spaces, estimating that the federal government spends $8 billion annually on leasing and maintaining office buildings and an additional $7.7 billion on energy costs.

Moreover, it noted the existence of nearly 8,000 vacant government buildings and over 2,000 partially empty facilities.

By decentralizing federal workforces and reducing excess office space, Ernst’s DRAIN THE SWAMP Act seeks to address these inefficiencies while fostering a more geographically diverse federal workforce. The proposal reflects her broader mission to make government more efficient, accountable, and connected to the people it serves.

Stay tuned to Prudent Politics.

Leftists across the country continue to take their lumps. It’s been a rough month for them since the 2024 elections.

And a leading Democrat congresswoman suffers a humiliating defeat she may never recover from.

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) has lost her bid to become the leading Democrat on the powerful House Oversight Committee after falling short in two crucial votes to Rep. Gerry Connolly (D-VA).

The outcome marks a setback for progressive Democrats and younger lawmakers who have pushed for generational change within the party after the 2024 election.

Frustrated by losses in key races and dwindling blue-collar support for President-elect Donald Trump, many Democrats hoped Ocasio-Cortez’s leadership would signal a turning point.

Ocasio-Cortez’s defeat began Monday night when the Democratic steering committee selected Connolly, 74, over the New York congresswoman. Connolly enjoyed strong backing from former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), a major force within the party.

Traditionally, the full Democratic caucus follows the steering committee’s recommendation. However, Ocasio-Cortez, 35, rallied hard ahead of Tuesday’s vote, encouraging colleagues to break with tradition.

“We are still in this,” she wrote on social media. “We do not give up.”

Despite her efforts, the full Democratic conference handed Connolly a decisive victory, voting 131-84 to make him the ranking member on the Oversight Committee. One member confirmed the result to the Washington Examiner.

Speaking after the vote, Ocasio-Cortez accepted the outcome. “The party made its choice,” she told the Washington Examiner Tuesday afternoon.

Connolly, who has served on the Oversight Committee for 16 years, explained to reporters that his win came about because his colleagues measured “their votes by who’s got experience, who [is] seasoned, who can be trusted, who’s capable, and who’s got a record of productivity. And I think that prevailed.”

Ocasio-Cortez had garnered significant support from the Congressional Progressive Caucus and the Congressional Hispanic Caucus. Meanwhile, Connolly drew backing from the centrist New Democrat Coalition.

Pelosi, despite recovering from a hip fracture over the weekend, reportedly lobbied on Connolly’s behalf, which likely solidified his win.

This defeat represents a blow to younger Democrats who have been advocating for new leadership within the party.

Recent contests had shown some success in this effort: Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-MD), 62, secured the ranking member role on the House Judiciary Committee, unseating veteran Rep. Jerry Nadler (D-NY). Additionally, Rep. Angie Craig (D-MN), 52, won leadership of the Agriculture Committee over Rep. David Scott (D-GA), while Rep. Jared Huffman (D-CA) is set to replace longtime leader Rep. Raul Grijalva (D-AZ).

However, Connolly’s victory signals resistance within the Democratic caucus to fully embrace the change pushed by younger progressives and “Squad” members.

Rep. Pete Aguilar (D-CA) downplayed the leadership contests’ broader implications, describing the results as “part of our organizational process electing ranking members.”

“We’re in the Democratic caucus,” Aguilar told reporters. “There are different ideas and viewpoints within the caucus, but we’re moving forward, and this is part of our internal process. We will now populate committees and get ready for the 119th Congress.”

As ranking member, Connolly will take on a high-profile role, serving as the chief Democratic counterweight to Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer (R-KY) in the new Congress.

Stay tuned to Prudent Politics.

Harris suffered a brutal defeat to Donald Trump in the presidential election. Her team is just now putting together the pieces as to why that happened.

And the Kamala Harris campaign finally reveals one reason why they lost the 2024 election.

Kamala Harris Campaign Stumbles in Sports Media Landscape as Cultural Shifts Favor Conservatives

Kamala Harris’ digital manager recently opened up about the surprising challenges the Harris campaign faced in trying to engage with sports media—a space that, despite traditionally left-leaning voices, has become increasingly resistant to political messaging.

In an interview with Semafor, Rob Flaherty, a Harris campaign operative, admitted that Donald Trump’s team proved far more skilled at tapping into audiences disillusioned with traditional media outlets.

Trump’s success in reaching these cultural pockets underscored a larger shift in America’s media landscape. Flaherty observed that sports—once a neutral zone—have become increasingly tied to red America, even as left-leaning sports personalities struggle to navigate the preferences of their audiences.

Flaherty revealed that Harris’ campaign outreach was met with unexpected resistance. “Sports and culture have sort of merged together,” Flaherty said. “And as sports and culture became more publicly and sort of natively associated with this Trump-conservative set of values, it got more complicated for athletes to come out in favor of us.”

Hosts of prominent sports shows—spanning TV, radio, and podcasts—reportedly turned down interview requests with Harris, fearing backlash from their audiences. “It got more complicated for sports personalities to take us on their shows because they didn’t want to ‘do politics,’” Flaherty explained.

Although figures like Steph Curry, Steve Kerr, and LeBron James continued to voice their support for Kamala Harris, Flaherty acknowledged that reaching sports fans had become an uphill battle.

“That’s not to say Steph Curry and Steve Kerr and LeBron and all them coming out wasn’t impactful or important,” Flaherty said. “It was more impactful because it had gotten so much harder. But certainly, the culture that has been associated with heavy sports-watching has become associated with right-wing culture in a way that makes it harder for [Democrats] to reach people.”

The campaign’s difficulties highlighted a broader challenge: Democrats are struggling to maintain their grip on culture. Flaherty conceded that high-profile sports commentators—including figures like Colin Cowherd, Bill Simmons, and the Kelce Brothers—chose to steer clear of the Harris campaign, seemingly “afraid of their audience.”

This hesitancy reflects a larger trend. Over the past decade, Democrats have seen their dominance over cultural platforms—news media, entertainment, and sports—steadily erode.

“You don’t get a national eight-point shift to the right without losing hold of culture,” Flaherty admitted.

The issue isn’t confined to politics. Sports personalities themselves have noticed this cultural shift. Colin Cowherd, for example, recently remarked on the decline of NBA television ratings, attributing it to the league’s heavy involvement in left-wing activism.

Drawing a parallel to the political sphere, Cowherd argued that the Democrats suffered a similar fate by alienating “regular people” in recent elections.

For Flaherty, the lesson is clear: Democrats need to adapt to the changing media environment. He emphasized the need to create a progressive equivalent to Joe Rogan—a figure capable of building a robust, left-leaning online ecosystem of shows and podcasts.

Yet history suggests that such efforts often fall flat. Manufactured platforms rarely resonate with audiences in the way organic, authentic voices do, and trust in establishment-friendly media continues to wane.

Flaherty’s assessment, however, rings true: the cultural hill Democrats must now climb is steep.

The days of controlling the media landscape appear to be over, and with the rise of decentralized, personalized internet media, the Democrats’ path to regaining cultural influence has never looked more uncertain.

Stay tuned to Prudent Politics.

The Left is losing their grip on America. They don’t know what to do.

And now Democrats are panicking after a huge ally jumped ship.

Here’s the fresh rewrite, keeping all quotes unchanged and sharpening the tone:

—

A top labor union leader stunned many by lavishing praise on President-elect Donald Trump, admitting Trump proved him wrong and showed that Republicans can, in fact, stand up for the working class.

Dennis Daggett, executive vice president of the International Longshoreman’s Association (ILA) — the union that brought ports to a halt with a strike earlier this year — described his recent meeting with Trump as *“an experience I never imagined in my wildest dreams.”*

“This man truly wants to fight for America and its working class. In over 25 years of working in Washington, I have never seen a Republican take up the mantle for working-class people. President-elect Trump proved me wrong yesterday,” Daggett wrote on Facebook.

“He didn’t just tell us in private that he supports workers — he made it clear to the whole world.”

Daggett, previously hesitant to voice his thoughts on Trump, is part of a union that traditionally aligns with Democrats.

Daggett and his father, ILA President Harold Daggett, met with Trump last Thursday to discuss ongoing negotiations between the union and the U.S. Maritime Alliance, which represents port operators, shipping companies, and other major employers.

“It’s rare to meet a leader who truly listens, and even rarer to find one who is willing to act,” Daggett said.

“[Trump] was not just attentive to our concerns; he was receptive and genuinely engaged in a discussion about the existential threat automation poses — not only to the Longshore sector but to our communities and the very fabric of this great nation.”

True to form, Trump didn’t stop at words; he quickly zeroed in on one of the union’s biggest grievances — automation.

“I’ve studied automation, and know just about everything there is to know about it,” Trump wrote on Truth Social following the meeting.

“The amount of money saved is nowhere near the distress, hurt, and harm it causes for American Workers, in this case, our Longshoremen. Foreign companies have made a fortune in the U.S. by giving them access to our markets.”

The ILA had flexed its muscles in October with a three-day strike before securing a temporary agreement that extends contracts until January 15. Sticking points in negotiations remain wages and automation.

Historically, Republicans have been wary of unions, arguing that aggressive labor demands stifle job creation and harm the broader economy. But Trump’s presidency has rewritten the playbook, shifting the Republican Party closer to the working class and adopting a more protectionist stance on trade.

Trump’s outreach to unions has been unmistakable. He made headlines in July by inviting Teamsters boss Sean O’Brien to speak at the Republican National Convention — a historic first for the union at the GOP’s flagship event.

By September, the Teamsters broke with decades of tradition by refusing to endorse a Democrat for president, a move that sent shockwaves through the political establishment. Internal polling revealed why: a majority of Teamsters’ rank-and-file members backed Trump. While local chapters endorsed Vice President Kamala Harris, furious Democrats lashed out at the national leadership for the snub.

Trump continued earning labor’s respect in November when he nominated Rep. Lori Chavez-DeRemer (R-Ore.) to lead the Department of Labor.

Chavez-DeRemer is a unique figure in the Republican Party — the only House Republican to sponsor the *Protecting the Right to Organize Act,* which expands benefits for union workers and pushes back against state right-to-work laws that prevent mandatory union membership.

Once again, Trump is defying political norms, earning praise where no Republican has before — from union leaders and working Americans alike.

Stay tuned to Prudent Politics.

Mainstream outlets have it out for Trump. And now they’re done for.

Because Trump was handed a major victory that put the left-wing media on its heels.

ABC News and its lead anchor George Stephanopoulos have settled a defamation lawsuit brought by President-elect Donald Trump, agreeing to a $15 million payout.

The settlement, filed on Saturday, avoids a high-profile trial and requires ABC News to make a $15 million charitable contribution toward a “Presidential foundation and museum to be established by or for Plaintiff, as Presidents of the United States of America have established in the past.”

Additionally, the network must pay $1 million to cover Trump’s legal fees.

As part of the deal, Stephanopoulos and ABC News issued statements of “regret” in an editor’s note appended to a March 10, 2024, article. The note states:

“ABC News and George Stephanopoulos regret statements regarding President Donald J. Trump made during an interview by George Stephanopoulos with Rep. Nancy Mace on ABC’s This Week on March 10, 2024.”

ABC News attempted to spin the outcome, with a spokesperson telling Fox News Digital, “We are pleased that the parties have reached an agreement to dismiss the lawsuit on the terms in the court filing.”

The lawsuit stemmed from Stephanopoulos’ false statements during a heated interview with Rep. Nancy Mace, R-S.C., where he claimed that Trump had been found “liable for r*pe” in a civil case brought by E. Jean Carroll.

Stephanopoulos grilled Mace, saying, “Judges and two separate juries have found him liable for r*pe and for defaming the victim of that r*pe.” This assertion was repeated ten times during the interview, despite the jury’s actual finding that Trump was liable for “s*xual abuse,” a legally distinct term under New York law.

In a later ruling, Judge Lewis Kaplan acknowledged the jury’s decision, noting that while Carroll failed to prove r*pe under New York Penal Law, the word “r*pe” might still apply as commonly understood.

Nonetheless, Stephanopoulos’ repeated mischaracterization formed the basis of Trump’s defamation case.

Initially dismissive of the lawsuit, Stephanopoulos doubled down during an interview with Stephen Colbert, stating, “Trump sued me because I used the word ‘r*pe,’ even though a judge said that’s in fact what did happen. We filed a motion to dismiss.”

However, momentum shifted when U.S. Magistrate Judge Lisette M. Reid ordered both parties to sit for depositions, with a Dec. 24 deadline looming for a motion for summary judgment. Facing the prospect of a trial, ABC News ultimately agreed to settle.

Trump was represented by Florida attorneys Alejandro Brito and Richard Klugh. The settlement, filed in the Southern District of Florida Federal Court, is another victory in a growing list of legal wins for the president-elect and his legal team, led by senior adviser Boris Epshteyn.

These successes include Judge Tanya Chutkan dismissing Special Counsel Jack Smith’s case related to the 2020 election and Smith abandoning his appeal in the classified records case after a federal judge ruled his appointment unlawful.

In New York, Judge Juan Merchan granted Trump’s motion to dismiss charges from Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg’s case and removed sentencing from the schedule.

Trump isn’t stopping there. He’s pursuing a $10 billion lawsuit against CBS News, alleging the network engaged in “deceptive conduct” to interfere with the election during an October interview with Vice President Kamala Harris.

The settlement with ABC News underscores Trump’s ability to hold media outlets accountable, turning baseless attacks into decisive victories as he moves closer to his return to the Oval Office.

Stay tuned to Prudent Politics.

Pelosi likes to style herself as a devout Catholic. Nothing could be further from the truth.

And now this Catholic Archbishop eviscerated Nancy Pelosi with an unprecedented announcement.

In an interview with the National Catholic Reporter, Pelosi dismissed the Archbishop’s instruction, saying:

“I received Communion anyway. That’s his problem, not mine. My Catholic faith is, Christ is my savior. It has nothing to do with the bishops.”

Archbishop Salvatore Cordileone addressed Nancy Pelosi’s recent remarks about continuing to receive Communion despite his directive that she abstain until repenting for her pro-abortion stance.

Archbishop Cordileone issued a response on December 10, urging prayers for Pelosi’s change of heart on the sanctity of life.

“First and foremost, I would like to renew my request for prayers for the Speaker’s conversion on the issue of human life in the womb, that it be consistent with the respect for human dignity she displays in so many other contexts.”

He also cited Ezekiel 3:20-21 as guiding his actions as a spiritual leader.

In the passage, the Lord warns Ezekiel that failing to admonish sinners puts their blood on his hands.

“As a pastor of souls, my overriding concern and chief responsibility is the salvation of souls,” Cordileone wrote.

“And as Ezekiel reminds us, for a pastor to fulfill his calling, he has the duty not only to teach, console, heal and forgive, but also, when necessary, to correct, admonish and call to conversion.”

The Archbishop extended an invitation for dialogue, emphasizing its power to foster understanding and reconciliation.

He wrote, “Such dialogue can dispel misperceptions and melt away hostilities, and build new bonds of friendship.”

Cordileone expressed hope for discussions on both their areas of disagreement and alignment, stating:

“I ask this not only to dialogue in areas of disagreement, such as if and when it can ever be morally permissible to kill innocent human life, but also in other critical areas where our views on behalf of human life and dignity are aligned.”

Concluding his message, the Archbishop reiterated a cornerstone of Catholic faith: “This should not be a problem, as Catholics are not afraid of the truth.”

But no one should be surprised by her disregard for her own Church’s directions.

She also supports abortion up until the point of birth and LGBTQ marriage, two things the Catholic Church has spoken vehemently against.

At the end of the day, to her, she is her own authority.

Stay tuned to Prudent Politics.