Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News

Drudge Retort

Menu

Subscriptions

Drudge Retort RSS feed RSS Feed

Links

Recent Comments

Recent comments from all news stories on this site. Users must follow the site's moderation policy. Personal attacks, profanity, abusive conduct and expressions of prejudice are not allowed. If you want to retrieve a comment of yours that was recently deleted, visit your user page and click the Moderation link.

Infowars shuts down after The Onion's licensing deal is tied up in court

Right-wing conspiracist Alex Jones said his infamous Infowars platform has stopped broadcasting and shuttered its Austin headquarters as a licensing bid from the Chicago-based satirical news site The Onion remains tied up in court.

__________
A historic drop in representation by Black members of Congress may be on the way after the U.S. Supreme Court's landmark decision Wednesday to further weaken the Voting Rights Act.

Or it could backfire, and instead of being gerrymandered into one district to give them one seat, they may affect two or more... if a suitable sensible economically literate candidate of whatever skin color is on the ballot, instead of polarizing far-far idiots (BOTH SIDES!)

There are also other "communities" of color - Hispanic, Asians, etc. - that could improve their representation.

The problem for Dems is that recent "progressive" agenda items pushed many "normies" and POC away, and just shouting that "we're the party protecting minorities" no longer works - they're full-fledged "Americans," many are better off than most Whites, and moved on past the "protection" or "community" and need more than lip service from Democrats who've been busy with picking winners through DEI, special "rights" of LGBTQQ++ and trans, and the incredible shrinking labor unions (both in number and influence of their bosses) who still represent a lot of Dems financing and organizing.

Minorities, many of whom are very religious, no longer feel they're represented or advanced by Dems economically, philosophically or culturally. They feel they've been used by "elitist" Dems to empower a narrow agenda - favoring union bosses (not rank-and-file) and gender-divergent.

If the 2024 elections exit polls didn't clearly show it, I don't know what does.

"Big tent" means party's priorities and solutions should reflect and conform to real needs of majority of the party, not the whims of current "elites" requiring conformity of all its constituents - that means actually listening to them, and adapting to changed demographic, not the same small group of "organizers" stuck in the past "civil rights" and "oppression" battles.

spectrumnews1.com - A record 67 Black lawmakers serving in 119th Congress - 2025-01-09

|------- The 119th Congress includes the most Black lawmakers in American history.
The 67 total Black members of Congress in 2025 include 62 Democrats and five Republicans.
The five Republicans serving on Capitol Hill ... represent the most since Reconstruction. ...
-------|

So 12.5% of Congress, 15.2% of the House - quite representative, a record, the most in history...

But...

www.nytimes.com - Every Black Republican Is Leaving the House, Erasing Diversity Gains - NYT, 2026-04-27
All four Black House Republicans are retiring after this year...

But then...

www.aol.com - GOP Chipping Away As The Tide Shifts On Black Voter Loyalty - 2026-05-01

|------- During this same point in his first term, Trump held a 12% approval rating among African Americans.
That figure has now risen to 16%. While Enten noted that the President has lost ground with several other demographics, Black voters represent a specific area of growth for the GOP. ... The data becomes even more stark when looking at party identification margins. In the early stages of Trump's first term, Democrats enjoyed a massive 63-point advantage in party ID among Black voters. That lead has since seen a double-digit shift of 12 points toward the Republican Party...
-------|

This shift is not about Trump - it's Dem "progressives elites" and DEI policies choosing winners pushing "normies" out.

So be careful what you wish for, and adapt to the times, don't live in the past.
__________


The Tuesday 5 Nov 2024 death toll of ~20,000 Palestinians murdered by the IDF with American taxpayer dollars and weapons didn't help the Democratic Party ticket at all. Just like supporting Saigon didn't help the Hubert Humphrey and Ed Muskie ticket on Tuesday 5 Nov 1968.

#194 2016? How about 2024?

Live in the now, Clown.

Now, WTF are you here and not here:

Support for workers marks May Day protests in California

Paris Barraza
Noe Padilla
USA TODAY
May 1, 2026, 5:17 p.m. ET

Or are you one of those "I am holier-than-Thou" liberals?

Aren't you one of those who recommend that Democratic candidates talk to their constituents, not at them?

That's been the success story of Democratic Party candidates forever (can't speak to GOP candidates, however).

You know, Democrats like Zohran Mamdani, Abigail Spanberger, Graham Platner...

... and even some future faces of the Democratic Party

You?

Barney Frank warns Democrats to stay away from that which is "beyond what's politically acceptable."

Apparently, those who seek the demise of the Democratic Party actually damn Barney Frank with the comment, "Poor old man Frank, blindly repeating Republican propaganda."

Casting aside the political reality that that which is "beyond what's politically acceptable" = that which is political poison

Clownshack actually thinks that that which is "beyond what's politically acceptable" = that which is political poison... but let's shove it down the throats of every ... single ... voter in America so we can demonstrate how much we don't care about you.

"What Barney Frank is saying isn't anything new.

"He's advocating for progressives to vote for the Democratic nominee available instead of the candidate the DNC shut out because they're scaring the billionaires. ...This is what's costing democrats voters."

#11 | Posted by ClownShack at 2026-04-30 05:02 PM

But then, curiously, in less than 145 minutes you make a 180 turn...

...and then claim that Barney Frank...

"Poor old man Frank, blindly repeating Republican propaganda."

#14 | Posted by ClownShack at 2026-04-30 06:46 PM

So, which is it, Clown?

Your turn, Clown.

"What Barney Frank is saying isn't anything new.

"He's advocating for progressives to vote for the Democratic nominee available instead of the candidate the DNC shut out because they're scaring the billionaires. ...This is what's costing democrats voters."

#11 | Posted by ClownShack at 2026-04-30 05:02 PM

But then, curiously, in less than 145 minutes you make a 180 turn...

...and then claim that Barney Frank...

"Poor old man Frank, blindly repeating Republican propaganda."

#14 | Posted by ClownShack at 2026-04-30 06:46 PM

So, which is it, Clown?

Your turn, Clown.

#182 Sorry, Clown.

The mental ravings of a liberal ensconced in a liberal paradise hardly has a legitimate or standing to comment on what the authors (plural) have said here:

Five Reasons Harris Lost

Why Kamala Harris lost: A flawed candidate or doomed campaign?

Wrong voters, wrong message: progressives' autopsy lays bare Kamala Harris failures

Why Kamala Harris lost the election

Brookings: Why Donald Trump won and Kamala Harris lost: An early analysis of the results

There is no one reason Harris lost

Politicians and activists are trying to sell disingenuous and nonfactual explanations of why Harris lost to push their ideology. Don't fall for it.
Democrats were united and turned out. Harris lost anyway.
Voters issued a broad repudiation of not only Harris' campaign but the Democratic Party's vision for the country.
A Former Republican Strategist on Why Harris Lost
Inflation, moderation, and candidate effects
What Was the Biggest Factor in Kamala Harris's Defeat?
Respond to the points raised there (with citations) with something that resembles reality for the rest of us who are trying - trying to see that the Democrats take control of the US House and US Senate this November, 2026.

What are you doing for that, Clown?

Damn Clown, do you know how to read?

No.

Barney's point is that there is a very vocal minority in the left, specifically consolidated in the very progressive end of the party.

The Democratic Party without progressives is nothing. It stands for nothing. It accomplishes nothing. It maintains whatever status quo republicans leave behind.

They push for things that are not palatable for most of the party,

Civil rights, national healthcare, no wars, spending tax dollars on Americans, increasing taxes for the wealthiest Americans?

Those concepts aren't palatable?

Which ones specifically?

since they sit in positions of influence

The minority have the position of influence. Could it be because their message is more relatable with the majority of the Americans?

the rest of the party sits silent since they don't support it but don't argue against it in fear of failing the litmus test the minority wields.

What do they have to say? Be content with what you got? We won't do anything about what republican policies are doing to America? Give your money to the wealthy and shut up about it?

Seriously. What appeal do you think moderates have? "Vote for us, nothing will change!" "We won't do anything the rich don't like!"

So ... "But my point is, no, it's not enough ... to be silent. We have to explicitly repudiate it." Speaks to that. The silent majority of the Democratic party has to start pushing back against the overly progressive portion of the party.

The "silent majority" of the Democrats have nothing to offer and are silently collecting paychecks while letting republicans run the country.

"Nothing will fundamentally change!" - Joe Biden, the failure.

Trump and republicans changed everything. Biden promised to keep it exactly the way Trump left it, and he did.

Do nothing democrats aren't the answer.

Progressives are.

If you got anything else from those words, you need to learn to self reflect and realize that your extreme partisanship has truly colored your vision.
#172 | POSTED BY KWRX25

I asked you before to share which extreme policies you believe progressives are advocating for which you're opposed to and you never answered.

Perhaps one of these days you'll actually figure out the reason you're opposed to progressives is because you're the victim of republican propaganda.

Animated GIF

I believe that there's a much simpler explanation for the Harris/Walz loss in 2024:

Throughout the month of October, 2024, the Trump campaign (and associated entities) spent $300,000,000.00 on ads in all 7 swing states during televised NFL and NCAA football games. The topic of all of those ads? Then-CA Attorney General Kamala Harris' 2019 response to a question about a Trump administration dictate on gender-affirming (read: trans) care for federal inmates


click graphic above for actual She's for They/Them ad

And the amount of money the Harris campaign spent countering those She's for They/Them ads in the swing states during NFL and NCAA football games? You know, to point out the truth that she was simply responding to a question about a Trump administration dictate on gender-affirming for federal inmates? To counter the deceptive, the lying-by-omission ads run by Trump & company?

Zero dollars

The efficacy of this strategy was born out election night, 2024, when Steve Kornacki was calling individual counties (starting with Pennsylvania) and highlighting that the Harris/Walz ticket was falling short of votes as opposed to the votes in the 2020 election for the Biden/Harris ticket. His reporting was, in effect, a death by 1,000 cuts for Harris/Walz.

Trump & company knew that all it would take would be the suppression of Biden votes in 2024 by just a point or two for Trump to carry those counties, all 7 swing states and, ultimately, the election. They judged, correctly, that men - men of color and white - would be turned off enough by the "pro-trans" Harris that they voted for Trump, or didn't vote at all.

Either way, mission accomplished.

In reality, the Biden administration has held that Title IX bars discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity " but Education Department rules do not explicitly address transgender athletes. Federal law that Trump ads cited does require people in U.S. government custody to have access to gender-affirming medical treatments. Those policies were in place throughout Trump's 2017-21 term; they are not something Biden's administration instituted specifically.

And it is not legal in any state for a school to determine and carry out surgical treatment for minor students.

"You gotta fight back" with those explanations, Moulton said, adding that the silence compounds the negative effects for transgender people. "What did we show about our willingness to stand up for trans people by just being silent and ignoring the issue and ignoring the attack?"

Still, Moulton said Democratic leaders on Capitol Hill and in statehouses should give individual elected officials and voters the space to take more conservative positions, and he defended his own comments that he doesn't want his daughters competing in athletics against men.

"I don't want them getting run over on a playing field by a male or formerly male athlete, but as a Democrat I'm supposed to be afraid to say that," Moulton told The New York Times last week.

Before he resigned his post as Texas Democratic chairman, Gilberto Hinojosa said supporting transgender rights doesn't necessarily have to include public funding for gender reassignment surgery.

"We can say, 'OK, we respect people's right to say, we don't want my taxpayer money to be used for that,'" Hinojosa told Texas Public Radio. Hinojosa later apologized via social media, saying LGBTQ Americans "deserve to feel seen, valued and safe in our state and our party."

Ellis, the CEO of GLAAD, pointed to Delaware voters choosing to make state Sen. Sarah McBride the first transgender member of Congress as evidence that Americans "don't hate trans people."

For her part, McBride, a Democrat from Delaware, noted that she did not run on her identity " though it was not a secret " and instead talked to voters about "affordable health care, housing and child care" for everyone.

"The party that was focused on culture wars, the party that was focused on trans people was the Republican Party," McBride told reporters on Capitol Hill after her victory. "It was Donald Trump," she added, who "was trying to divide and distract from the fact that he has absolutely no policy solutions for the issues that are actually keeping voters up at night."

#30

Trump hammered Democrats on transgender issues. Now the party is at odds on a response

By Bill Barrow and Marc Levy

NOV. 14, 2024

https://www.ap.org/news-highlights/spotlights/2024/trump-hammered-democrats-on-transgender-issues-
now-the-party-is-at-odds-on-a-response/

-----

ATLANTA (AP) " After losing the White House and both houses of Congress, Democrats are grappling with how to handle transgender politics and policy following a campaign that featured withering and often misleading GOP attacks on the issue.

There is plenty of second-guessing after President-elect Donald Trump anchored his victory over Vice President Kamala Harris with sweeping promises on the economy and immigration. But Democrats also will not soon forget the punchline in anti-transgender Trump ads that became ubiquitous by Election Day: "Kamala is for they/them; President Trump is for you."

"Week by week when that ad hit and stuck and we didn't respond, I think that was the beginning of the end," former Democratic Pennsylvania Gov. Ed Rendell said of the 30-second spot that was part of $215 million in anti-transgender advertising by Trump and Republicans, according to tracking firm AdImpact.

"They painted her as something I don't think she is," Rendell said. "They painted her as a far-left liberal."

The fallout leaves some progressive and moderate Democrats struggling between the party's modern identity as a champion of civil rights and its electoral fortunes across swaths of America with whom those attacks resonated.

"There are just a number of issues where we're out of touch," Rep. Seth Moulton, a moderate Massachusetts Democrat said in an interview, days after he set off recriminations within his party for saying he didn't want his daughters playing in sports against biological males. Critics said Moulton echoed Trump's talking points about liberals allowing "men to compete in women's sports."

"I think that Republicans have a hateful position on trans issues," Moulton told The Associated Press, but insisted that Democrats still lose voters because of the party's "attitude."

"Rather than talk down to you and tell you what to believe," he argued, Democrats should "listen to hard-working Americans."

LGBTQ+ advocates, meanwhile, are arguing that the 2024 election turned more on economic issues than Trump's transgender rhetoric. They're urging political leaders to counter misinformation that they say threatens the health and safety of transgender Americans, who make up less than 1% U.S. population.

"Trans people have been existing and co-existing," receiving health care and participating in society for years, said Sarah Kate Ellis, CEO of GLAAD, a leading LGBTQ+ advocacy group. "Nothing new happened," Ellis said, other than Republicans singling them out in a presidential campaign year.

"It didn't change one vote," Ellis argued. "But it did make the world way more dangerous for trans people."

Another Democratic Massachusetts lawmaker, Rep. Ayanna Pressley, didn't name Moulton, but said some reactions to the election "scapegoated and dehumanized" transgender people. "This Congresswoman sees you and loves you," Pressley wrote on the social media platform X.

Animated GIF


Dummkopf Trumpf and Benjamin Netanyahu are sequence killers, like Jeffrey Dahmer, the Zodiac, John Wayne Gacy, or David Berkowitz (AKA the "Son of Sam").

Americans are sick and tired of foreign interference in US elections, whether it's the Russians, Chinese, or Israelis.

Once the foreigners are out, maybe we can get more than the average 65% voter turnout on election days.


AIPAC headquarters is located at 251 H Street Northwest, Washington, DC 20001.

FBI HQ is a mere 0.7 miles away from AIPAC HQ; roughly a 12 to 15 minute walk or a 4 to 5 minute drive.

Bring the cuffs, collect the reward.

Drudge Retort

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy