Conservative Blogger
Friday, September 25, 2026
Fear of Democratic Socialists Drives November Turnout Plans for Some Trump Voters
 |
Don Jernigan, a retiree in Virginia Beach, is disappointed by most politicians, Democrat and Republican. That includes President Donald Trump, whom he helped elect in 2024. But Jernigan, 76, says he plans to "hold his nose" and vote for Republican candidates in November's midterm elections. In his view, "the Democrats are now being controlled by the democratic socialists," he said, "and we've fought wars to keep that away from us." While many analysts argue that Trump's low approval ratings could dampen Republican turnout in November, conversations with 18 Trump voters, including Jernigan, suggest electoral victories by progressive Democrats have energized some conservatives — even those disappointed by Trump. Conducted with a group of Trump voters who have spoken with Reuters regularly since he returned to office, the interviews do not point to broad enthusiasm for Republican candidates themselves. Dissatisfaction with Republican nominees for national or statewide office was rife among the group, particularly among voters in battleground states with races that could prove pivotal in deciding which party controls Congress. Chief among their concerns were the Iran war and Trump's handling of the economy. Even so, many of those critical of the president said they would do all they can to deny Democrats control of either house of Congress. Nearly all of the 18 voters said they were alarmed by the prospect of far-left candidates winning more seats in Congress; many expressed deep concern that progressives, if elected in meaningful numbers, would attempt to enact what they view as a socialist — or even communist — agenda in which the government tightly restricted citizens' choices about where to spend and earn money. Seven said that concern alone left them more motivated to vote for a conservative candidate in November. Trump and other Republicans have accused Democrats of embracing communist ideology, a charge Democrats reject as a deliberate misrepresentation of their policies. Democratic socialists advocate pursuing progressive policies, such as government-run universal health insurance or wealth taxes, through democratic processes. In contrast, communism seeks to abolish private ownership of property and create a classless society — ideas that the democratic socialists seeking election reject. In Georgia, where voters will elect a governor and U.S. senator in November, David Ferguson said he hasn't found any candidates in either party whom he can "strongly get behind" in the general election. Yet Ferguson, 54, a mechanical engineer and account manager for an industrial supply company, said he fears that if progressive and socialist candidates got more power in Congress, they would try to exert "way too much control over markets and things that the government does not need to be involved in." On the other side of the state, near Savannah, insurance firm employee Amanda Taylor was so disappointed by this year's candidates that she didn't vote in Georgia's primary election. But she said the rise of democratic socialists nationwide would "absolutely" help push her to the polls in November, even though she wasn't aware of any such candidates on her ballot. Like Ferguson, Taylor, 53, worried such movements would pull the U.S. "towards communism, where your government is dictating the groceries that you can get and you're waiting in lines for bread" and that they would require schools, bathrooms and sports teams to recognize the gender identity of transgender individuals. Trump and other Republican leaders have pumped up their attacks on socialism and communism this campaign season after a series of left-wing Democrat primary victories, including a win by Michigan U.S. Senate nominee Abdul El-Sayed, whom the president called a "Communist loser." El-Sayed, who faces former U.S. Rep. Mike Rogers in November, describes himself as a progressive candidate and not a socialist. But Trump's messaging appears to be sticking — even with Republicans unhappy with the party's leadership. In Grand Rapids, Michigan, Terry Alberta said he expects to split his ballot between Democrat and Republican candidates in November, because he leans Republican but mistrusts any candidate with an endorsement from Trump, whom he sees as increasingly volatile and prone to "silly games" with other countries. "I don't like the radicalism on either side," said Alberta, 65, a pilot. He said his vote will also be motivated by concern that El-Sayed secretly supports policies he has publicly disavowed, such as imposing Islamic sharia law on the U.S. Some voters in the group saw opportunity in the rising popularity of progressive candidates on the left. In Wisconsin's August primary election, recent college graduate William Brown, 21, cast a "strategic" vote for Francesca Hong, a democratic socialist candidate, who narrowly lost her bid to become the state's Democrat nominee for governor. Had Hong won, Brown thought the Republican nominee could have defeated her more easily than a moderate Democrat — and her agenda seemed so radical that "not only would she not have been able to pass a lot of it through the legislature, but a lot of it would have been court challenged," Brown said. Others viewed the recent success of left-wing candidates as a warning sign about the increasingly extreme nature of U.S. politics. "My biggest fear is that it will be a constant impeachment of Donald Trump," said Lesa Sandberg of St. George, Utah, who runs an accounting business, rents properties and works for a Republican political action committee. Sandberg, 58, expects the Senate to remain under Republican control, preventing new progressive U.S. representatives from actually pushing through a socialist agenda. But for the sake of national unity, she said, she hopes Democrats "won't elect their extreme left, just like I hope we don't elect our extreme right." Credit: newsmax.com |
Student Who Put El-Sayed on the Spot at Town Hall on IRGC Hits Him Even More in Interview
 |
Democrat U.S. Senate candidate Abdul El-Sayed was put on the spot by a young student during a town hall at the University of Michigan. The student, Iman Dashti, has family in Iran, and he told El-Sayed about some of the horrors they had been through. Dashti asked a couple of simple questions. First, he asked about El-Sayed's statement on holding back on any criticism of the Ayatollah Ali Khamenei because it might make people in Dearborn sad. Then, secondly, Dashti asked if El-Sayed would condemn the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC). El-Sayed didn't do either. Now, Dashti has done an interview with Fox's The Will Cain Show, explaining what he thought of El-Sayed's answer. [He begins speaking at about the one-minute mark.] What I thought was fascinating was that Dashti admitted that, "in the moment," he thought that El-Sayed had responded well. That's a sign of how slick El-Sayed is, how he can deceive people because of that smoothness. That's a dangerous talent, and when you're a young student, you may not see such slickness. But then Dashti realized El-Sayed hadn't actually answered the questions; that it was a "terrible answer." Dashti pointed out to host Will Cain how El-Sayed never condemned the IRGC, didn't answer about Khamenei, and never said he stood with the Persian people, "the one thing I asked him to say." "It's unbelievable. You know, you can be charismatic. You can say the right things. You can weave and duck. But he didn't answer the question. And I think it's a huge mask-off moment for Abdul," Iman said. As Cain noted, El-Sayed said he stood up for democracy-seeking people around the world, and yet he wouldn't address the specific issue Dashti asked him to: condemning the IRGC. Dashti nuked him, "I could not have given him an easier layup. I mean, it's so simple. Just say it. Just say you're against the world's largest sponsor of terror. Just say you're against the government that has killed hundreds of thousands of Persians. And Americans. But he didn't." Dashti said he thought it was because a lot of El-Sayed's supporters were supportive of these institutions and the Iranian regime, and "he doesn't want to alienate them." Cain said that Dashti was perhaps kind in his analysis, that maybe the other possibility was that El-Sayed doesn't denounce the IRGC. In any event, Dashti asked a more revealing question than anything asked by virtually all the media, and El-Sayed's answer should be totally disqualifying for a person who wants to be a United States senator. Editor’s Note: The 2026 Midterms will determine the fate of President Trump’s America First agenda. Republicans must maintain control of both chambers of Congress. Credit: https://redstate.com |
Invisible American Lasers Now Destroying Iranian Weapons and Infrastructure
 |
Technology is a great force multiplier. We learned that, and our Iraqi opponents learned that, in 1991, in Operation Desert Storm, which was one of the first well-publicized mass uses of smart-weapons. We are still seeing that proved true today, with the use of high-tech weapons against Iran in the Strait of Hormuz and in Iran itself. Now, in the latest example of Iran's lessons in "you had no idea who you were messing with," American forces are using powerful infrared lasers to target Iranian weapons and equipment.
The best part is the control system.
That's an interesting tidbit. It makes the lasers more intuitive to use, especially for the younger cohorts who grew up using these kinds of controllers. And, we see from Fox's account, that does indeed seem to be the case. Even the Secretary of War has been trained up on these systems. Here's the thing: Every war, everywhere and every time, has been won or lost by logistics. In the modern battlespace, a big part of that involves ammo and munitions: Producing it, packing it, and shipping it to where it needs to be. We have been burning through munitions at quite the clip in this dust-up. But all a laser requires is a power source. A big power source, but the United States Navy has those. What's more, these systems strike at the speed of light, and have (presumably) a much lower firing signature than a gun or missile launch. That has to be causing what's left of Iran's armed forces even more headaches than they already are suffering. Right now, the Department of War has stated that these lasers are being used effectively against drones and cruise missiles. This is an interesting development. And it's a sure thing Russia and China are watching, and developing counterparts of their own. But right now, the conflict is with Iran, and with what's left of their infrastructure, it seems unlikely they will be able to quickly develop anything to counter our forces' powerful laser systems. Granted, this isn't a brand-new technology. The Pentagon and the military contractors have been experimenting with laser weapons for some time now. But we are now seeing them used in the field against real targets, and the initial indications are that they are working. That's good news by any measure. Editor's Note: Thanks to President Trump and War Secretary Pete Hegseth's leadership, the warrior ethos is coming back to America's military. Credit: https://redstate.com/ |
Watch As Kamala Tries to Explain Algorithms, Then Prepare to Get Inundated With Drunk Wine Mom Reels
 |
Former Vice President Kamala Harris discussed social media algorithms in a newly released interview, and it is everything you'd expect from the woman who gave us grade-school-level rants about yellow buses, Venn diagrams, and coconut trees. The clip comes from a conversation with popular BigBoyTV host Kurt Alexander, which dropped late Thursday night on YouTube. Alexander asked Harris how she felt "AI and social media, TikTok and Instagram and things" might affect the midterms. The host had already explained how algorithms control what consumers see, but Kamala felt the need to expand on it as if she were discussing the matter with a toddler. Bear in mind that Harris previously served as the Biden administration’s point person on artificial intelligence and was often referred to as the White House’s AI czar. "There's a lot on social media that is targeted at specific populations, and within whatever population they will be that there's incredible amount of mis- and disinformation," she said, arguing that independent media is the way to go. "And you got to be able to know right from wrong." That's a quote. From a person who reportedly speaks English. The mind-numbing explanation of algorithms continued. "They're trying to dumb people down with the assumption that people don't have any interest beyond what they've already seen. Think about that," Harris said, unwittingly dumbing the viewer down with her own words. "But the algorithm suggesting — I have no more interest because I'm looking at this yellow flower. I'm only interested in yellow flowers," Harris added. "As though my brain can't handle the fact that there may be a pink flower that I might be interested in looking at, right?"
That latter part on what her brain can handle could be debated, for sure. But she did offer some helpful advice on how to circumvent said algorithms. "Part of it is understanding how the algorithm is manipulating us and figuring out how we're going to psych it out a bit." Just psych it out. So simple. Actually, I might have to take back everything I said. This may be the smartest thing Kamala has ever said. She just accidentally described how social media companies keep left-wing voters sealed inside their own ideological bubble. All in all, this ranks up there with Harris's previous attempt in 2023 to describe AI to the masses. "I think the first part of this issue that should be articulated is AI is kind of a fancy thing," she said. "First of all, it's two letters. It means artificial intelligence, but ultimately what it is is, it's about machine learning." Indeed it is. Human learning, in her case anyway, not so much. She went from 'AI is two letters' to 'the socials blast me with yellow flower memes.' It took her three years to evolve her messaging. And this is what she came up with. Hic ... Hic *buuuurp*. Science isn't exactly Kamala's forte. Anybody remember when she tried to explain the vastness of the cosmos to teenagers we later found out were actually child actors? A skill they needed to pretend they were even vaguely interested in Harris talking to them like preschoolers? “You guys are gonna see, you’re gonna literally see the craters on the moon with your own eyes!” she excitedly told the children, pointing to her own eyes. To be fair, Kamala did recently issue a statement on AI that sounds a little more like an actual human being. "The frontier of artificial intelligence is advancing at an alarming speed," she allegedly said. "Over the weekend, industry leaders voiced support for an idea that the American people and many AI researchers in their own labs have been calling for: We must responsibly slow the pace of frontier AI development." Compare and contrast that statement with the video clips you've seen of the former Veep discussing anything vaguely science-related. There is a zero percent chance she crafted that release. In the meantime, apologies to our readers. After sitting through three videos of Harris discussing AI, social media algorithms, and space, you're about to get inundated with similar drunk wine mom videos in your feeds. Credit: https://redstate.com/ |
New Jersey's Lt. Gov Was Given a Timeline to Resign by Mikie Sherrill. Here's Why.
 |
New Jersey Lt. Gov. Dale Caldwell received a blunt message from Gov. Mikie Sherrill Thursday: resign and never return to Trenton. The message came after an internal investigation found that Mr. Caldwell engaged in sexual harassment and had other inappropriate encounters, including making lewd and crude remarks. The timeline gave him time to do the right thing and tender his resignation today. Caldwell seems determined to fight it, saying race is a factor in these proceedings (via NYT):
Sherrill’s post Thursday night:
“I will always put the interests of the people of New Jersey first” is a funny thing to say, governor, especially when you let Caldwell serve as acting governor for 18 days after an internal probe into his behavior was underway. Credit: https://townhall.com |
Of Course, This Republican Senator Flocked to Mary Peltola's Defense
 |
Alaskan Democrat Mary Peltola is under siege: a damning New York Times piece, quoting dozens of former aides, painted a toxic workplace that was Hell on Earth for any Hill staffer. Peltola won the 2022 special election for the state’s at-large congressional district after Rep. Don Young passed away. Her tenure on the Hill was marked by mayhem and abuse, leading to one of the highest staff turnover rates in Congress. It allegedly got physical, with her shoving an aide, though her campaign has denied the context. Peltola also called her staffers “retards” and “faggots.” She admitted the former and apologized but denied dropping gay slurs. She also trashed Planned Parenthood behind the scenes. It’s a circus, and Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) made sure to give her some cover, for reasons that defy logic
Okay, to start, that’s not a denial from Mary. Second, Lisa, you’re supporting Sen. Dan Sullivan (R-AK). What are you doing? Was this necessary? This is strictly a Democrat problem; you didn’t need to do this unless you wanted to prove to the base yet again that you’re unreliable and, even worse, a squishy traitor to the party. Lisa has run into a Joe Biden-like problem: she doesn’t know when to keep her mouth shut. Credit: https://townhall.com/ |
Democrats Boycott Grassley Hearing, Dodge Women's Sports Questions
The Senate Judiciary Committee convened a GOP-led hearing on protecting women’s sports, and the scene felt more like a political test than a policy debate. Chairman Chuck Grassley ran the hearing. Ranking Member Dick Durbin criticized it, and, according to reporting, Senate Democrats declined to put forward witnesses and treated the hearing as irrelevant. The standoff exposed two things: how polarized this issue has become, and how one side refuses to engage on basic questions about fairness in women’s sports.
What happened in the hearing
Chairman Chuck Grassley moved forward with a panel of witnesses intended to discuss policies for girls’ and women’s athletics. Senate Democrats, led in the committee by Senator Dick Durbin, pushed back hard — calling the hearing a political stunt and warning of harm to transgender youth. Reports say Democrats offered no witnesses of their own and walked out or otherwise declined to participate in the witness portion. That description comes from coverage of the hearing; it is worth noting some mainstream outlets did not echo the exact “boycott” label. Still, the clash was plain: one side wanted a policy debate; the other side treated the debate as illegitimate.
Why the Democrats’ move matters
If Democrats refused to participate, the tactic was telling. You can disagree with the premise of a hearing, but walking away does not make the problem go away. Women’s sports, from high school fields to college stadiums, are about fair competition and safety. The Supreme Court has already shifted much of this decision-making back to states and schools, so federal hearings are a reasonable place to test ideas and facts. Skipping the conversation hands Republicans the narrative that Democrats dodge hard questions about sex-based rules in sports.
The facts Republicans are pressing — and Democrats ignore
Republicans aren’t just waving flags. NCAA President Charlie Baker told a congressional panel he is aware of “fewer than 10” transgender athletes among roughly half a million NCAA competitors. The Supreme Court’s recent rulings have made clear that states may lawfully set eligibility rules for girls’ teams. Those facts don’t negate concerns about discrimination or abuse, but they do show the population in question is very small and that sensible, sex-based guardrails are possible without national chaos. Democrats who refuse to debate those realities are choosing ideology over answers.
Where we go from here
Congressional hearings should be about finding solutions, not scoring points. If Democrats truly believe the best response is to boycott, fine — but voters will remember. Republicans should use the next hearing to press for clear policy proposals that protect fairness for female athletes while respecting the dignity of all students. Democrats should stop calling basic questions “vendettas” and come prepared to make their case. Otherwise, this issue will keep getting decided in statehouses and courts — and the public will get to judge who refused to show up when the discussion mattered most.
Credit: https://patriotpowerednetwork.com/
New York's $12,500 Per-Person Tax Bill Tops Nation, Watchdog Says
 |
Muslims Breaking the Bank,You Get What You Vote For😁 |
The Citizens Budget Commission has a blunt message for New York leaders: taxpayers here are paying more than everyone else. A new watchdog brief shows state and local governments collected roughly $12,500 per person in fiscal 2024 — the highest per‑capita tax haul in the nation. That reality should worry anyone who cares about jobs, families, and whether New York remains a place people want to live.
New report: New York tops the nation in taxes and spending
The Citizens Budget Commission found New York collected about $12,500 per resident in FY2024. That number is about 22% higher than the second‑place state, California, and puts New York at the top of the tax charts. The watchdog also says New York is one of the highest spenders per person, and that if the state had spent like New Jersey it would have saved roughly $99 billion, or about $143 billion compared with Texas. Those figures come straight from the Citizens Budget Commission’s brief, and they are hard to ignore.
Why this matters: outmigration, cost of living, and competitiveness
High taxes are not just a balance‑sheet problem. They feed a vicious cycle. The Commission ties the high tax and spending levels to New York’s population losses, as families and businesses flee to lower‑tax states. When people leave, the tax base shrinks and lawmakers feel pressure to raise taxes or cut services — neither of which helps. New Yorkers already pay more for housing, utilities, and doing business. Adding higher rates on top of that will not suddenly make the state more competitive.
Political choices and the real test for leaders
This watchdog brief lands in a political moment. Governor Kathy Hochul has resisted sweeping broad tax hikes, but the budget did include a new surcharge on pricey second homes in New York City that Mayor Zohran Mamdani will try to implement. Meanwhile, Republican nominee Nassau County Executive Bruce Blakeman is making the high cost of living a campaign issue. The sensible response from any leader should be simple: stop piling on new taxes and start cutting waste. The Citizens Budget Commission says New York should “hold the line on or preferably reduce taxes.” That isn’t ideology — it’s math.
New Yorkers deserve public services that are efficient and affordable, not unlimited spending and the highest tax bills in the country. If Albany’s answer to fiscal strain is to squeeze residents and small businesses harder, expect more exits and shrinking economic clout. Lawmakers who care about keeping people and jobs should take the watchdog’s brief as a warning, not an invitation to push for yet another revenue grab. Hold the line, trim the fat, and make New York a place people want to move to — not move away from.
Credit: https://patriotpowerednetwork.com/
Thursday, September 24, 2026
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
-
We’ll discuss her bizarre press conference later this morning, but New Jersey Gov. Mikie Sherrill wants to shift focus away from the thousa...
-
U.S. President Donald Trump dances after speaking at General Motors’ Milford Proving Grounds on July 27, 2026 in Milford, Michigan. Trump i...
-
There was a horrific shooting at the Bite of Seattle food festival over the weekend. On Sunday, two suspects reportedly engaged in a gun ...
