Skip to content
We’ve pointed fingers. We’ve said, “This isn’t what I voted for.”
Public Opinion (2023–2024 polls):
Partisan Divide:
Why People Support Popular Vote:
Why People Defend the Electoral College:
Compromise in the Works?
Summary:
The Radical Left:
The Radical Right:
The Moderate Middle:
Is the country we live in today the same one your father or grandfather built their values on?
Public Perception: Posts on X reflect mixed views, with some praising its rejection of partisanship () while others criticize it as a “failed” or “vapid” stunt lacking substance.
But is violence the answer? I hope not.
They need to be stopped—and they need to be stopped now.
He needs the chaos. His playbook is short—and this is the play:
These are dangerous times. We must resist—but not fall into his hands.
Go back to peaceful demonstrations. Go back to community rallies.
Make your signs personal. Speak from the heart.
We stand for a country that still belongs to all of us.
All of you. That’s who.
You’re to blame.
You knew Biden was slipping. Everyone knew. And you picked him anyway, assuming Trump didn’t have a chance.
And Kamala Harris?
Democrats, seriously—get your act together.
Yep. You too.
I’m all for third parties. I’m a moderate.
“My granddaddy was Republican, my daddy was Republican, so I vote Republican.”
He said it. You heard him.
Next time—if there is a next time—pay attention.
You’re the worst of all.
Better yet, put them on, and come help us fix this.
Posts in Category: purple
MAGA – Is it too Late Getting Back on Track
“The Middle Way Forward”
So where do we go from here?
We don’t need to abandon what we believed — we need to reclaim it. Not with rage, but with resolve. Not by burning everything down, but by rebuilding what’s worth saving.
Border security still matters. So does fair trade. But we can defend our borders without losing our soul. We can prioritize American jobs without picking scapegoats.
We need leaders who speak to working people — and actually know what work is. Leaders who serve, not perform. Who understand that compromise is not weakness — it’s how democracy breathes.
We need to stop mistaking cruelty for strength. And start valuing competence over charisma.
It’s time to turn off the noise machines — the talk show politics, the endless culture wars, the rage-for-ratings economy. And get serious again.
The path forward isn’t extreme. It’s steady. Practical. Real. It’s the road where decency isn’t mocked, facts still matter, and being wrong isn’t a sin if you’re willing to learn.
You don’t have to abandon your values to escape the chaos. You just have to decide: What kind of country are we trying to save?
Because if it’s one worth saving — it won’t be saved by a circus. It’ll be saved by grown-ups who show up, think clearly, and still believe in something bigger than themselves.
Share this:
MAGA – What Trump Turned It Into
“Hijacked by the Showman”
We started with ideas — real concerns. We wanted jobs brought back, borders respected, and a government that actually worked for its people. But somewhere along the way, it stopped being about the country… And became entirely about one man.
Trump didn’t build on the core of MAGA — he hijacked it. He turned a movement meant to restore dignity into one that demands loyalty over honesty, anger over results, and spectacle over service.
He didn’t drain the swamp. He waded in and brought his own gators — using the presidency to enrich himself, reward allies, and punish anyone who dared tell the truth. It became less about what we believed, and more about who we hated.
Concerns about immigration turned into cruelty at the border. Valid skepticism of government turned into unhinged conspiracies. Criticism of media turned into an all-out war on reality.
The promise of “America First” became “Trump First, Always.” Every institution that didn’t bow — the courts, the military, elections themselves — became the enemy.
MAGA was supposed to be a wake-up call. Instead, it became a cult of grievance, a reality show powered by rage and reruns.
We didn’t get better jobs or stronger families — we got hats, hashtags, and a heap of broken trust.
If you ever felt disillusioned, it’s not because you were wrong to care. It’s because the man who claimed to represent you used your hope as a prop. And he’s still doing it — running again, not for your future, but for his freedom.
Share this:
MAGA, What is MAGA? Before Trump Turned it into a Cult
/
RSS Feed
When we look at the original core beliefs of MAGA — before they were distorted by authoritarianism, disinformation, and grievance theatrics — there were some genuinely resonant themes that connected with millions of Americans. Here’s a breakdown of those core ideas, framed without the Trump spectacle:
1. Economic Nationalism
Belief: American jobs should come first — especially in manufacturing and industry.
Motivation: Decades of globalization and free trade deals like NAFTA were seen as hurting U.S. workers while benefiting multinational corporations.
Goal: Bring jobs back to American soil, reduce outsourcing, and protect domestic industries with fair trade policies.
2. Border Security and Immigration Reform
Belief: A sovereign nation must control its borders.
Motivation: Concerns over illegal immigration, wage suppression, and national security — mixed with cultural anxiety about changing demographics.
Goal: Enforce immigration laws, secure the border, and reform the system so it serves U.S. interests while maintaining lawful pathways.
3. Government Accountability & Drain the Swamp
Belief: Washington is corrupt, elitist, and out of touch.
Motivation: Anger at career politicians, lobbyists, and bureaucrats who seemed to serve donors and corporations instead of the people.
Goal: Shake up the system, reduce special interests, and return power to voters.
4. America-First Foreign Policy
Belief: The U.S. should stop being the world’s policeman.
Motivation: Frustration with costly wars (Iraq, Afghanistan) and foreign aid while domestic problems were ignored.
Goal: Focus on national interests, avoid entangling alliances, and use diplomacy and economic leverage over military force.
5. Respect for Working-Class and Rural Americans
Belief: The voices of rural and working-class people have been ignored or mocked.
Motivation: Cultural resentment toward urban elites, media, academia, and Hollywood.
Goal: Reassert the dignity and importance of everyday Americans — especially those in smaller towns and traditional industries.
6. Skepticism of Global Institutions
Belief: Organizations like the UN, WTO, and WHO don’t always act in America’s best interest.
Motivation: A feeling that globalism had undermined American sovereignty.
Goal: Reassert national independence in decision-making.
7. Cultural Traditionalism
Belief: Traditional values — faith, family, patriotism — are under assault.
Motivation: Rapid cultural change, secularism, and progressive social norms created anxiety and backlash.
Goal: Defend what many saw as the moral foundation of the country.
Summary:
MAGA began as a reaction to lost trust in institutions — economic, political, and cultural. It channeled authentic frustration with globalization, elitism, and cultural displacement. Many of its early supporters were not racist, authoritarian, or conspiracy-driven — they were disillusioned voters looking for someone to listen.
What Went Wrong:
Trump harnessed that energy but weaponized it, shifting the focus from policy solutions to personal loyalty, vengeance, and spectacle.
MAGA became less about “Make America Great Again” and more about “Make Trump Untouchable.”
But if you strip the narcissism and noise away, what remains are concerns that deserve serious, non-extremist attention — and could form the basis of a healthier populism if reclaimed from demagogues.
Part 2: What Trump Turned it Into
Part 3: Is It Too Late Getting Back on Track
Share this:
If You Want to Fix It, You Have to Touch It
/
RSS Feed
 “If You Want to Fix It, You Have to Touch It”
We’ve pointed fingers. We’ve said, “This isn’t what I voted for.”
Now comes the part where we ask: What are you willing to do about it?
We Live in What We Build
You don’t get to sit in silence while others vote, organize, or legislate — and then act shocked when the country veers hard left or right. If the future looks more like a police state than a democracy, ask yourself:
-
Did I speak up?
-
Did I show up?
-
Did I support institutions or just complain about them?
If you don’t want a police state, don’t wait for someone else to stop it. If you do want one, at least own that openly — and let the rest of us challenge you in public.
Five Things You Can Actually Do
Regardless of party or position:
-
Talk to someone who disagrees with you. Not to win — but to listen and be heard.
-
Show up at a local meeting. City council, school board, precinct — they decide more than you think.
-
Register and vote in the primaries. That’s where extremes get filtered or empowered.
-
Support local journalism. National media stirs outrage; local media tracks who’s making decisions quietly.
-
Volunteer somewhere — not for a party, for a cause. The country needs doers, not just voters.
Bottom Line: Majority Rule Means Majority Responsibility
If we’re heading toward authoritarianism, polarization, or colla
pse, it’s because too many people have chosen silence over effort.
You don’t have to fix everything. But you do have to pick something.
Or someone else will pick it for you.
Share this:
Electorial College or Popular Vote
Public Opinion (2023–2024 polls):
~60% to 65% of Americans support deciding presidential elections by popular vote.
~35% to 40% prefer keeping the Electoral College.
Source: Pew Research, Gallup, Axios/Ipsos, and others.
Partisan Divide:
Democrats: Around 80% favor the popular vote.
Republicans: Around 60–65% prefer the Electoral College.
Independents: Lean toward popular vote, but less strongly (~55–60%).
This split has grown since 2000 and 2016 — both years where Republicans won the presidency while losing the national popular vote.
Why People Support Popular Vote:
Simpler and more democratic: each vote counts equally.
Avoids “swing state” bias — candidates currently focus on a handful of battlegrounds.
Prevents outcomes where the Electoral College winner loses the popular vote.
Why People Defend the Electoral College:
It protects smaller states from being ignored by big population centers.
It forces candidates to build broader coalitions across regions.
It’s part of the federalist structure — states choose electors, not individuals directly.
Compromise in the Works?
Yes — the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact (NPVIC) is a workaround gaining traction:
States agree to give their electoral votes to the winner of the national popular vote — once enough states join to reach 270 electoral votes.
So far, 17 states + D.C. have joined (totaling 205 electoral votes as of 2025).
Summary:
Most Americans support a national popular vote.
But political self-interest and structural inertia keep the Electoral College firmly in place — for now.
The path forward may come through the NPVIC, not a constitutional amendment.
Here’s the chart showing support for the Popular Vote vs. Electoral College across major political groups. As you can see:
-
Democrats overwhelmingly favor the popular vote.
-
Republicans strongly prefer the Electoral College.
-
Independents lean toward the popular vote but are more divided.
-
Overall, most Americans favor switching to a popular vote system.
Share this:
“Boring? Try Being a Moderate.”
/
RSS Feed
“Boring? Try Being a Moderate.”
“Boring. You’re boring. You’re a moderate. How boring.”
Yeah, I’m a moderate. Do you know what that actually means? Because I’ll tell you this: it’s not boring.
Let’s take a simplified look at our current politics. We have a two-party system locked in a tug-of-war between extremes. Each side keeps attacking the other, and in response, both sides retreat further — farther left, farther right — until they’re not just disagreeing anymore, they’re trained to hate each other. That’s not governance. That’s dysfunction.
So what are we left with? Two radical ends.
The Radical Left:
The extreme radical left represents a fringe segment of progressive politics that pushes for sweeping systemic change through aggressive, often uncompromising means. This group tends to reject capitalism, traditional institutions, and incremental reform, favoring revolutionary approaches to issues like race, gender, climate, and economic equality. They often prioritize ideology over dialogue, and in doing so, can alienate potential allies and undermine broader efforts at progress by insisting that moral purity trumps practical coalition-building.
The Radical Right:
The extreme radical right represents a fringe segment of conservative politics that embraces authoritarianism, ultranationalism, and rigid traditionalism. This group often resists social progress and diversity, favoring exclusionary policies and rhetoric rooted in fear, grievance, and cultural dominance. They prioritize loyalty over law, and often reject democratic norms when those norms threaten their power or worldview. In doing so, they undermine the very principles of liberty and equality they claim to defend.
And then there’s us. The moderates. Maybe what’s sometimes called the “silent majority.”
The Moderate Middle:
The moderate middle is often dismissed as indecisive or dull, but in reality, it’s where the hard work of democracy happens. It’s the space where values meet reality — where compromise isn’t weakness, but a strategy for progress. Moderates challenge extremism on both sides, not by shouting louder, but by thinking deeper — weighing facts, listening to others, and choosing country over party. It may not grab headlines, but the middle holds the line when others pull us apart.
Now, if you’re reading my articles, rants, and commentary, you might think I lean left. But that’s only because of the current administration — a gang of political gangsters whose zealousness is causing damage that could take generations to repair.
But make no mistake: if it were Marxists or Leninists destroying us, I’d be saying the exact same thing. Sometimes you have to throw the punch across the line to be heard. That doesn’t mean you switched sides — it means you’re paying attention.
If you feel the need to belong somewhere, take a look at something like the Forward Party. They seem grounded. They seem sane. But I’m not here to recruit you. I’m here to challenge you: Be a thinker, not a follower.
I’ve made mistakes. I’ve been swindled, both financially and politically. But it wasn’t because I was ignorant — and that’s the one thing I want for you, too.
Just take one hour. One hour a week. Do some real research. Learn what’s really going on. Then make decisions. Do something.
The Silent Majority — yes, majority — has to find its voice. It’s no longer safe or sane to just go along with the flow. If you’re still a Republican or Democrat just because that’s what your family always was (that used to be me), ask yourself this:
Is the country we live in today the same one your father or grandfather built their values on?
If not? I’m not asking you to change — I’m asking you to be sure.
Share this:
Tell Me About the Forward Party
On
- purple
Tell Me About the Forward Party
The following is the response I recieved from Grok.
The Forward Party, often shortened to Forward (FWD), is a centrist political party in the United States founded by Andrew Yang, a former Democratic presidential and New York City mayoral candidate. Launched in 2021 as a political action committee (PAC), it aims to provide an alternative to the two-party system by reducing partisan polarization and implementing electoral reforms. In July 2022, it merged with the Renew America Movement and Serve America Movement to strengthen its efforts, with a goal of achieving ballot access in all 50 states by 2025 and federal recognition by 2028.
If you want more information on the Forward Party, please vitit their web site. Join the Movement
Core Principles and Goals The Forward Party emphasizes pragmatic, data-driven solutions over ideological rigidity, rejecting the extreme partisanship of the traditional left-right spectrum. Its primary focus is on democratic reform, including: Electoral Reforms: Advocating for open primaries, ranked-choice voting, and independent redistricting commissions to reduce gerrymandering and increase voter choice.
Vibrant Democracy: Empowering voters with more choices and confidence in government through systems that prioritize accountability and representation.
Free People and Thriving Communities: Promoting individual choice, rejecting hate, and fostering safe, flourishing communities with policies tailored to local needs rather than top-down mandates.
Bottom-Up Governance: Unlike traditional parties, Forward avoids a rigid national platform, encouraging local leaders to craft solutions specific to their communities.
The party positions itself as “Not Left. Not Right. Forward,” appealing to independents, moderates, and those disillusioned with the Republican and Democratic parties. It supports candidates across the political spectrum—Democrats, Republicans, and independents—who align with its values of collaboration, integrity, and problem-solving.
Key Features Candidate Support: Forward endorses candidates at local, state, and federal levels who share its principles, often cross-endorsing Democrats and Republicans. For example, in 2022, it backed candidates like Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) and Rep. Mark Kelly (D-AZ). It also supports its own candidates in states where it has ballot access.
No Presidential Run: The party has stated it will not run a presidential candidate in 2024, focusing instead on reducing partisan gridlock in Congress and state legislatures.
Grassroots Approach: Forward builds from the ground up, starting with local races like school boards and city councils, aiming to create a sustainable third-party presence over multiple election cycles.
Financial Backing: The party started with a $5 million budget in 2022, with contributions from donors like William Perkins and groups like the Renew America Movement. It reported raising $97,607.59 from January to June 2025.
Criticisms and Challenges Lack of Platform: Critics argue the party’s lack of a specific policy platform makes it vague and ineffective, with some comparing it to failed tech startups like Theranos for prioritizing disruption over substance. Former national press secretary Mary Anna Mancuso noted its reliance on Yang’s personality and lack of ideological cohesion.
Spoiler Concerns: Some Democrats fear Forward could siphon votes, inadvertently helping Republicans in close races, though the party insists its endorsement strategy and focus on electoral reform mitigate this risk.
Skepticism on Viability: Political analysts doubt its ability to break the two-party dominance, citing historical failures of third parties and the challenge of gaining widespread support without clear policy stances.
Current Sentiment and Activities Growth Efforts: Forward is actively working to gain party registration in states like California (needing 75,000 registrations) and Pennsylvania, where achieving 2% of the vote in certain races could grant minor party status.
Public Perception: Posts on X reflect mixed views, with some praising its rejection of partisanship () while others criticize it as a “failed” or “vapid” stunt lacking substance.
Recent Developments: In 2024, Forward held its national watch party in Philadelphia, expressing optimism about laying the foundation for future growth despite electoral losses. Leaders like Andrew Yang and Craig Snyder emphasized long-term goals over immediate wins.
Why It Matters The Forward Party taps into widespread dissatisfaction with the two-party system, with polls showing 51% of Americans identifying as independents and two-thirds believing a third party is needed. Its focus on electoral reform and local governance aims to address systemic issues like polarization and voter disenfranchisement, though its success hinges on overcoming skepticism and building a durable infrastructure.
Share this:
A Call for Violence—Is That Really What You Want?
/
RSS Feed
A Call for Violence—Is That Really What You Want?
For most of us, the answer is no. But there are some out there who want to play Rambo—and I understand the temptation.
After all, First Blood had a message: push people too far, and they break. And yes—Trump has drawn first blood. That’s on him, no matter how he tries to spin it.
But is violence the answer? I hope not.
Because Trump’s army is being built—we see it. And yes, it’s evil.
Not because they’re enforcing immigration laws, but because of how they’re doing it.
We’re watching armed bullies act with impunity—given permission to intimidate, provoke, and escalate. And it’s not random. It’s strategic. They are pushing the buttons.
They need to be stopped—and they need to be stopped now.
Every day that passes, they grow stronger, bolder, more dangerous.
But here’s the trap: if you answer their violence with violence, you’re walking straight into Trump’s plan.
He needs the chaos. His playbook is short—and this is the play:
Provoke violence. Then declare martial law.
Once that happens, democracy won’t stand a chance.
These are dangerous times. We must resist—but not fall into his hands.
We must fight back—but not start a war.
Go back to peaceful demonstrations. Go back to community rallies.
Go back to trusting in democracy—and fighting for it the right way.
Go back to your families, but don’t give up. And don’t give in.
Make your signs personal. Speak from the heart.
When you see the uniformed enforcers, remind them: their oath is to the Constitution, not the President.
Ask them: Is this what you want for your children’s future?
Ask them: Do you want a fight? Because if you do, it won’t be a foreign enemy. You’ll be fighting fellow Americans—Americans who won’t bow, won’t flinch, and won’t move out of the way.
We stand for a country that still belongs to all of us.
Don’t let Trump burn it down to save himself.
Share this:
🥒 Well, This Is a Fine Pickle We’re In
/
RSS Feed
Well, This Is a Fine Pickle We’re In
Now what can we do about it?
First off, let’s figure out just who did this to us.
All of you. That’s who.
I’m blameless.
Well, maybe not completely blameless. I didn’t vote for him—I wrote in a name, thinking that would “send a message.”
To who? Probably nobody. But hey, it made me feel better.
Let’s start casting blame where it belongs.
The Non-Voters
You’re to blame.
Maybe if you’d actually shown up, the outcome would’ve been different. Democracy doesn’t run on vibes—it runs on participation.
The Democrats
Wake. Up.
You knew Biden was slipping. Everyone knew. And you picked him anyway, assuming Trump didn’t have a chance.
He was nuts, sure—but he had a loyal following.
He had dirt. On everybody. Senators. Congressmen. You name it.
And Epstein? Oh, right. There never was an Epstein—just more “fake news.” But if Musk read the Epstein files, where do you think he read them? Yeah. Duh.
And Kamala Harris?
I’m not sexist. But she was attached to the Biden administration like a sidecar on a sinking motorcycle.
Trump crucified the whole administration, and she’s the backup plan?
Democrats, seriously—get your act together.
Quit the infighting. Form a real party line or we’ll be stuck with Trump until he dies—and then his loyalists will carry on like foot soldiers in a post-apocalyptic monarchy.
The Party-less Voters
Yep. You too.
You saw the writing on the wall. Most of you didn’t want Trump or Harris—fine. But this isn’t fantasy football. You don’t get points for having cool opinions while the house burns down.
Look hard at someone like the Forward Party. Moderates. Grounded. Some idealism but not delusional. Take it seriously this time.
Third-Party Voters (and Me)
I’m all for third parties. I’m a moderate.
But when the devil’s knocking, don’t do what I did.
Hold your nose, vote for the lesser evil. It sucks. But it’s better than a man who told you to your face that he wanted to be a dictator.
That “ha ha” wasn’t a joke. He meant it.
The Republican Voter Who Just Votes the Line
“My granddaddy was Republican, my daddy was Republican, so I vote Republican.”
Well, grow up.
I did. And for way too many years, I voted the party no matter who was running. That was my mistake. Don’t make it yours.
The MAGA Crowd—Two Kinds
Let’s be real—there are two MAGAs:
-
The ones who genuinely want to Make America Great Again.
Smaller government. Border security. Law and order.
I get it. I want those things too. I want affordable healthcare. Kids who aren’t hungry. An American Dream worth chasing. -
The Cult of Trump.
You think he’s your Jesus. Your savior. You’d sacrifice your firstborn for him if he told you to.
When Truth Is a Liability and Laughter a Crime
When Truth Is a Liability and Laughter a Crime
There was a time in America when satire was celebrated — a necessary pressure valve in a democracy, a mirror that reflected uncomfortable truths through the safety of humor. But today, that mirror is being shattered, not by mobs or movements, but by boardrooms and political power.
The recent cancellation of The Late Show — conveniently following an administration’s sustained pressure campaign — is more than a programming change. It’s a warning shot across the bow of every parent company, streaming platform, and publication: comedy that speaks truth to power is no longer good for business. Or rather, it’s no longer safe for business.
Why did Paramount fold? Why now? And who’s next?
We are witnessing a quiet but forceful reshaping of the public square. Instead of government censorship, we get corporate compliance. Instead of storming newsrooms, leaders merely have to hint — threaten a lawsuit here, suggest regulatory pressure there — and truth buckles under the weight of liability.
Donald Trump’s threat to sue The Wall Street Journal if it published an article linking him to Jeffrey Epstein isn’t just a blustering headline — it’s an attempt to preemptively kill reporting that may be factual, inconvenient, or worse: undeniable. Whether or not the story sees daylight, the chilling effect already spreads.
What we’re left with is a hollowed-out discourse. Facts are rebranded as attacks. Jokes become “fake news.” And networks — fearing backlash more than boredom — simply choose silence.
It’s not about whether you liked Colbert or hated him, whether you trust the Journal or cancel your subscription. This is about whether we still believe truth matters. Whether satire still has a place. Whether comedy, critique, and inconvenient reporting are signs of a functioning democracy — or symptoms to be suppressed.
Because when power no longer fears the truth, it doesn’t argue with it. It simply erases it.
Share this:
Like this: