An elderly man both verbally and physically assaulted a young Turning Point USA volunteer at the polls, a video posted to X shows.

An elderly man both verbally and physically assaulted a young Turning Point USA volunteer at the polls, a video posted to X shows.

An 18-year-old man was volunteering with Turning Point Action outside a polling station in New Hampshire on Tuesday when an elderly man approached him and began to raise his voice. The confrontation then escalated, as depicted in a video included in Turning Point Action’s Tuesday afternoon X post.

The context of the conflict in the 40 second video is unclear. However, the elderly man is seen yelling, “you have no idea who I am, so how dare you say I don’t know much!”

The volunteer then responded, “you haven’t presented a single statistic.”

The elderly man then seemed to grow increasingly agitated, continuing to yell at the 18-year-old.

“Neither have you! Goddamn. I cannot believe that bullshit. You sat there and dare to look me in the face. And say I don’t know anything,” he shouted, gesturing at the teen before giving him the middle finger.

“That’s what I know. **** you,” the elderly man continued, slapping the volunteer in the face.

After bystanders can be heard saying “woah,” the old man marched away.

“He stayed calm. The left got violent,” Turning Point Action’s X post featuring the video stated. “Don’t cede the ground, show up to the polls. Your vote helps us outnumber these people.”

Jillian Butler

Vandals sent an apparently violent message to Maine Senator Susan Collins, waiting for her on Election Day, by defacing the longtime Republican incumbent’s office during the night.

Vandals sent an apparently violent message to Maine Senator Susan Collins, waiting for her on Election Day, by defacing the longtime Republican incumbent’s office during the night.

On Tuesday morning, staffers found the sidewalk outside Collins’ office in Biddeford, Maine, covered in red paint and splattered on the door with the words “blood on your hands” scrawled at the front entrance, WMTW-TV reported. The senator received the messages hours before polls close in her race for a sixth term against Democratic Senate nominee Troy Jackson — which the nonpartisan Cook Political Report rates as a “toss up.”

“This is another incident in a series and the second attempt at our Biddeford office to intimidate the senator and her staff. These tactics are disturbing, but not effective,” Collins’ chief of staff, Katie Brown, said in a statement reported by WMTW-TV. “Our staff is undeterred and on the job.”

Libby Bandelin

Every issue carries consequences. Every promise comes with a price.

A Democratic Congress could negotiate legislation, approve spending, and exercise oversight. But passing its own agenda would still require dealing with a Republican president who holds the veto pen.

And that creates a problem.

If Democrats promise sweeping changes and cannot deliver them, voters may not be interested in hearing excuses about Donald Trump.

𝗧𝗛𝗘𝗬 𝗪𝗢𝗡 𝗖𝗢𝗡𝗧𝗥𝗢𝗟 𝗢𝗙 𝗖𝗢𝗡𝗚𝗥𝗘𝗦𝗦. 𝗡𝗢𝗪 𝗪𝗛𝗔𝗧?

Of course, there is one power a congressional majority could choose to emphasize instead.

And that’s where things become particularly fascinating.

𝗜𝗠𝗣𝗘𝗔𝗖𝗛𝗠𝗘𝗡𝗧.

Suppose Democrats win the House and decide to impeach Donald Trump.

They can do that with a simple majority.

Terrific.

Now remove him.

Oh, wait.

That requires a two-thirds vote in the Senate. Sixty-seven senators if all 100 are present.

So imagine months of hearings, accusations, investigations, and political theater.

And at the end?

𝗗𝗢𝗡𝗔𝗟𝗗 𝗧𝗥𝗨𝗠𝗣 𝗜𝗦 𝗦𝗧𝗜𝗟𝗟 𝗣𝗥𝗘𝗦𝗜𝗗𝗘𝗡𝗧.

But let’s imagine something extraordinary.

𝗪𝗛𝗔𝗧 𝗜𝗙 𝗧𝗛𝗘𝗬 𝗔𝗖𝗧𝗨𝗔𝗟𝗟𝗬 𝗦𝗨𝗖𝗖𝗘𝗘𝗗𝗘𝗗?

What if enough Republicans joined Democrats to convict and remove Donald Trump?

Would Trump automatically go to prison?

No. Impeachment isn’t a criminal conviction. He leaves office.

And who becomes president?

𝗝𝗗 𝗩𝗔𝗡𝗖𝗘.

That’s right.

The man who could very well become the Republican presidential nominee in 2028.

Except now he isn’t campaigning as a former vice president.

𝗛𝗘’𝗦 𝗖𝗔𝗠𝗣𝗔𝗜𝗚𝗡𝗜𝗡𝗚 𝗔𝗦 𝗧𝗛𝗘 𝗜𝗡𝗖𝗨𝗠𝗕𝗘𝗡𝗧 𝗣𝗥𝗘𝗦𝗜𝗗𝗘𝗡𝗧 𝗢𝗙 𝗧𝗛𝗘 𝗨𝗡𝗜𝗧𝗘𝗗 𝗦𝗧𝗔𝗧𝗘𝗦.

So if Democrats were to succeed in impeaching and removing Donald Trump, they would have handed the White House to JD Vance.

Again, I don’t think for a moment they thought any of this through.

That’s what happens when political decisions are driven by blind rage.

𝗜𝗧’𝗦 𝗥𝗜𝗚𝗛𝗧 𝗧𝗛𝗘𝗥𝗘 𝗜𝗡 𝗧𝗛𝗘 𝗡𝗔𝗠𝗘. 𝗥𝗔𝗚𝗘 𝗠𝗔𝗞𝗘𝗦 𝗬𝗢𝗨 𝗕𝗟𝗜𝗡𝗗.

He has the remainder of Trump’s term to establish his record, demonstrate his leadership, and build public confidence.

And who might still be offering him advice? Donald Trump.

No longer president, but hardly disappearing from American politics.

And what happens if Democrats discover that removing Trump hasn’t eliminated the policies or political movement they opposed?

𝗧𝗛𝗘 𝗢𝗨𝗧𝗥𝗔𝗚𝗘 𝗦𝗧𝗔𝗥𝗧𝗦 𝗔𝗟𝗟 𝗢𝗩𝗘𝗥 𝗔𝗚𝗔𝗜𝗡.

Only this time, JD Vance becomes the villain. New accusations. New investigations. Perhaps even new impeachment proceedings.

𝗖𝗛𝗔𝗡𝗚𝗘 𝗧𝗛𝗘 𝗣𝗥𝗘𝗦𝗜𝗗𝗘𝗡𝗧. 𝗞𝗘𝗘𝗣 𝗧𝗛𝗘 𝗢𝗨𝗧𝗥𝗔𝗚𝗘. 𝗥𝗘𝗣𝗘𝗔𝗧 𝗧𝗛𝗘 𝗣𝗥𝗢𝗖𝗘𝗦𝗦.

But imagine Democrats spending years trying to remove Donald Trump, finally succeeding, and potentially handing the next Republican presidential candidate the advantages of incumbency.

𝗬𝗢𝗨 𝗦𝗣𝗘𝗡𝗧 𝗬𝗘𝗔𝗥𝗦 𝗧𝗥𝗬𝗜𝗡𝗚 𝗧𝗢 𝗥𝗘𝗠𝗢𝗩𝗘 𝗢𝗡𝗘 𝗥𝗘𝗣𝗨𝗕𝗟𝗜𝗖𝗔𝗡 𝗣𝗥𝗘𝗦𝗜𝗗𝗘𝗡𝗧, 𝗢𝗡𝗟𝗬 𝗧𝗢 𝗣𝗨𝗧 𝗔𝗡𝗢𝗧𝗛𝗘𝗥 𝗥𝗘𝗣𝗨𝗕𝗟𝗜𝗖𝗔𝗡 𝗜𝗡 𝗧𝗛𝗘 𝗢𝗩𝗔𝗟 𝗢𝗙𝗙𝗜𝗖𝗘.

Now THAT would be quite an accomplishment!

𝗦𝗢 𝗛𝗘𝗥𝗘’𝗦 𝗠𝗬 𝗤𝗨𝗘𝗦𝗧𝗜𝗢𝗡.

What exactly would Democrats accomplish if they won both chambers?

They could investigate Donald Trump.

𝗕𝗨𝗧 𝗛𝗔𝗩𝗘𝗡’𝗧 𝗧𝗛𝗘𝗬 𝗔𝗟𝗥𝗘𝗔𝗗𝗬 𝗕𝗘𝗘𝗡 𝗗𝗢𝗜𝗡𝗚 𝗧𝗛𝗔𝗧 𝗙𝗢𝗥 𝗠𝗢𝗥𝗘 𝗧𝗛𝗔𝗡 𝗔 𝗗𝗘𝗖𝗔𝗗𝗘?

They could hold hearings.

They could threaten impeachment.

They could attempt to block his policies.

But the more time they spend fighting Donald Trump, the less time they’ll have to demonstrate that their own ideas can deliver results.

And eventually, somebody is going to ask a much more important question.

𝗪𝗛𝗔𝗧 𝗗𝗜𝗗 𝗬𝗢𝗨 𝗔𝗖𝗧𝗨𝗔𝗟𝗟𝗬 𝗔𝗖𝗖𝗢𝗠𝗣𝗟𝗜𝗦𝗛 𝗙𝗢𝗥 𝗧𝗛𝗘 𝗔𝗠𝗘𝗥𝗜𝗖𝗔𝗡 𝗣𝗘𝗢𝗣𝗟𝗘?

Because pointing fingers across the aisle isn’t going to pay the grocery bill, lower insurance premiums, build factories, or end wars.

And if Democrats control Congress, they’ll have to answer for their decisions as well as their opposition.

𝗪𝗜𝗡𝗡𝗜𝗡𝗚 𝗧𝗛𝗘 𝗘𝗟𝗘𝗖𝗧𝗜𝗢𝗡 𝗠𝗔𝗬 𝗕𝗘 𝗧𝗛𝗘 𝗘𝗔𝗦𝗬 𝗣𝗔𝗥𝗧. 𝗦𝗨𝗥𝗩𝗜𝗩𝗜𝗡𝗚 𝗧𝗛𝗘 𝗖𝗢𝗡𝗦𝗘𝗤𝗨𝗘𝗡𝗖𝗘𝗦 𝗢𝗙 𝗪𝗜𝗡𝗡𝗜𝗡𝗚?

That could be an entirely different story.

But November 3 is still ahead of us.

And I haven’t lost faith in the American people.

I believe voters understand what’s at stake. I believe they recognize the possibility of congressional gridlock, escalating hostility, and promises that may never be fulfilled.

The patterns are there. In my view, they’ve been developing for more than a decade.

The investigations. The hostility. The political division. The seemingly endless determination to defeat an opponent rather than persuade the American people with better ideas.

And if Democrats win these midterms, I fear the political turmoil I’ve described could become our reality for the next two years.

Not because it was inevitable.

But because the American people chose the representatives who would help shape it.

𝗘𝗟𝗘𝗖𝗧𝗜𝗢𝗡𝗦 𝗛𝗔𝗩𝗘 𝗖𝗢𝗡𝗦𝗘𝗤𝗨𝗘𝗡𝗖𝗘𝗦. 𝗔𝗡𝗗 𝗦𝗢 𝗗𝗢 𝗧𝗛𝗘 𝗣𝗘𝗢𝗣𝗟𝗘 𝗪𝗘 𝗘𝗟𝗘𝗖𝗧.

The American people still get to decide.

And if Democrats win on November 3, I fear they won’t stop at going after Donald Trump.

They won’t stop at politicians.

𝗧𝗛𝗘𝗬’𝗟𝗟 𝗕𝗘 𝗖𝗢𝗠𝗜𝗡𝗚 𝗙𝗢𝗥 𝗬𝗢𝗨.

But that’s a subject for my next post.

𝗩𝗢𝗧𝗘. 𝗩𝗢𝗧𝗘. 𝗩𝗢𝗧𝗘.

Vote as though your whole world depends upon it.

𝗕𝗘𝗖𝗔𝗨𝗦𝗘, 𝗜𝗡 𝗠𝗔𝗡𝗬 𝗪𝗔𝗬𝗦, 𝗜𝗧 𝗔𝗖𝗧𝗨𝗔𝗟𝗟𝗬 𝗗𝗢𝗘𝗦.

Michael McCune, Facebook

U.S. — The state of California has officially annexed the state formerly known as Texas.

Texas has flown six different flags over the years, going from Spanish to French to Mexican rule before becoming an independent nation. After a stint of secession during the Civil War, Texas has been part of the U.S. as the Lone Star State for over 150 years. That chapter came to a close last night.

“Welcome to California,” announced Governor Gavin Newsom, as the California flag was raised over the Capitol in Austin. “You’re going to love it here. Just look at what has become of California over the past decades. This is what’s in store for all of you lucky people.”

The annexation was reportedly accomplished without a single shot being fired, thanks to a years-long operation involving thousands of U-Hauls. “We thought they were refugees,” said longtime Texas resident Dale Patterson. “By the time we figured out it was an invasion, it was too late.”

Newsom assured Texans that their cherished traditions would be preserved, with barbecue restaurants permitted to resume smoking brisket as soon as a nine-year environmental review could be completed. Residents were also informed that their beloved slogan “Come and Take It” would now apply to their paychecks.

At publishing time, Californians had begun fleeing Texas.

The Babylon Bee

Tuesday’s midterm elections are shaping up to be the “biggest national wipeout for Republicans since 2006, when voters brutally punished the GOP for an ill-advised and poorly planned war in the Middle East,” The Federalist’s CEO and co-founder Sean Davis said in a post on X.

In 2006, 56 percent of voters disapproved of the Iraq War, according to a Pew Research Center analysis of a national exit poll. The majority of those voters backed Democrat candidates, 80 percent to 18 percent.

Twenty years later, Pew released a survey in October that found 65 percent of Americans disapproved of how President Donald Trump was handling U.S. military action in Iran, while just 33 percent approved. According to the Associated Press, roughly one-third of voters said the Iran War was a crucial factor in their vote for Congress this election cycle.

But this wasn’t the outcome that the war’s advocates have pushed.

“There is no U.S. downside to striking the Iranian regime,” Marc Thiessen wrote in The Washington Post in January.

“There is no downside to striking the regime. Trump has already done so twice, and each time, Iran was unable or unwilling to retaliate. Indeed, the Soleimani strike came at a time when Iran was much stronger than it is today. Since then, Iran has suffered repeated blows that have left it weaker than at any time since the 1979 revolution,” Thiessen wrote. Thiessen went so far as to say “Iran is strategically naked” and “unable to effectively defend itself against a U.S. strike or respond decisively either directly or by proxy. This gives Trump a historic opportunity to deal the regime a mortal blow.”

The New York Times’ Bret Stephens wrote an entire piece making “the case for striking Iran” in February. Stephens noted that Trump was not giving an explanation for possibly striking, but that “it doesn’t mean there isn’t a compelling case for action.”

“Despite the risk that military strikes entail, the bigger risk, in the judgment of history, would be to fail to take it,” Stephens wrote.

Heritage Foundation Senior Counselor James Carafano said in response to a March press briefing that, “The reality is the U.S. has already won this war, period. Mic drop. End of statement.”

But now, the war we were repeatedly promised would end quickly is still dragging on, and Americans are clearly unhappy with Trump’s handling of the conflict.

A poll released last month found only 35 percent of Americans were confident in Trump’s foreign-policy decision-making, down from 53 percent in November of 2024. Confidence in Trump’s economic decision-making also went from 59 percent to 35 percent over the same period. Meanwhile, by Election Day 2006, a margin of 59 to 35 percent of voters said the Iraq War had not made America safer.

The political consequences of the Iran War also mirror those of the Iraq War. In 2006, 36 percent of voters claimed they voted to oppose President George W. Bush. Meanwhile, in a Pew survey released in October of this year, 44 percent of registered voters saw their congressional vote as a vote against Trump.

Brianna Lyman, The Federalist

One of the things the data analysts on our side obsessed over was “composition”—whether the electorate looked close enough to 2024 for Republicans to win. And despite polls that showed a Democrat blowout, the data kept on telling us the same story: in some states turnout was merely OK, in other states it was downright amazing, and in no state was it catastrophic. There was a genuine sense of optimism on our team: our people were showing up.

So, I asked the smartest data guy I know, does that mean we’re going to shock the world? “No,” he told me. “We might do better than the polls suggest. But the data is telling us that a lot of Trump/Vance 2024 voters are pissed and planning to vote for the other guys. Our voters are turning out, but they may not vote for us.”

Well, that looks prophetic now. Our voters did show up. In Florida, for example, the electorate was 9 points more Republican than Democrat, just a couple points worse than 2024. Undoubtedly there were places we could have done better on turnout. But the main problem is not turnout. The main problem is that many people who voted for Trump/Vance in 2024 voted for Democrats in 2026.

There will be a lot of infighting and arguing over what happened and why that is. One of the pollsters I really respect told me that our economic messaging wasn’t sharp enough down the stretch. I’m sure that’s true.

But the real reason we lost is obvious to almost everyone.

Another pollster—one of the smartest people I know in politics, told me yesterday we’d lose the generic ballot by 13 points. I felt negative going into Tuesday, but even I was shocked by this. In his polling, he saw that a lot of Trump 2024 voters were angry and planning to vote for Democrats. He asked those voters who had abandoned us what would cause them to come back on our team. The top four answers, accounting for nearly all of the responses were:

1) End the war
2) Focus on cost of living/inflation
3) Put America First
4) Change our relationship to Israel

Our voters showed up. And the above four reasons are why many of them voted for Democrats. This is according to a pollster who nailed the results. While many spent Monday attacking Rachel Campos Duffy for calling for a diplomatic resolution to the conflict, it turns out her political advice was sound. (She’s also a great person.)

In the next few months, there’s going to be a lot of gaslighting. Expect to hear any number of establishment politicians say the solution to our woes is amnesty. I’m open to the idea that we should change enforcement—by focusing more on businesses that hire illegal labor, for instance. But anyone pushing amnesty is lying to you.

The reason we lost is the war. The president himself said so last night.

If you’d like to argue it was worth it, that losing the Senate for the next 6 years was worth it, then do so. Argue it was a worthwhile cost to pay. Agree or disagree, that’s at least honest.

But everyone knows why we lost. And any honest conversation about where we go from here must start there.

I remain hopeful about our country. To the people who are pissed off and want to say, “I told you so”: you’re right, you did tell us so. Take that energy into electing Republicans who share your worldview. To the people who are just pissed at the results, you should be. Let’s take that anger and get back to the work of saving our country.

J. D. Vance

Physicists have found evidence of a particle decay so rare that it is expected to occur only around once in every 10 billion “beauty” particles. The result, from the upgraded LHCb experiment at CERN’s Large Hadron Collider (LHC), follows a search spanning more than 40 years and brings physicists closer to exploring the “Zeptoverse”—an unexplored world that exists at distances of a billionth of a trillionth of a meter, or a “zeptometer,” where new particles and forces of nature may be hiding.

Researchers from The University of Manchester have played key roles in the LHCb experiment and its major upgrade—which can now collect data at up to five times its previous rate—including developing detector technology that has helped make the new measurement possible.

The finding will allow physicists to test the Standard Model, our current best theory of fundamental particles and their interactions, with greater precision and search for signs of particles or forces that may lie beyond it. Searching for signs of new physics

The LHCb studies particles containing beauty quarks, heavier relatives of the up and down quarks found in the ordinary matter around us.

Beauty quarks are produced in huge numbers in collisions at the LHC but exist for only around one and a half trillionths of a second before decaying.

By making precise measurements of the different ways beauty quarks decay, physicists can detect the influence of new particles that may be far too small to see at the LHC.

The rarer a decay is, the more sensitive it can be to the influence of new particles. These particles could alter how often the decay occurs.

The new result concerns a particularly rare decay known as ‘Bd to mu mu,’ in which a particle containing a beauty quark decays into two muons, heavier relatives of electrons.

Scientists predict that this happens only around once in every 10 billion beauty particles. Until now, no single experiment had found solid evidence for the process.

The new measurement reached a statistical significance of 3.2 sigma. This is sufficient for physicists to describe the result as the first evidence of the decay, although further data will be needed to reach the five-sigma threshold required to claim a discovery in particle physics.

Professor Chris Parkes, head of the Department of Physics and Astronomy at The University of Manchester, led the international LHCb collaboration through the construction of the upgrade and led the collaboration’s approval of the new result.

He said, “The upgraded LHCb was a major undertaking—a 15-year design and construction project from a 1,900-member international collaboration.

“The U.K. made the largest national contribution to the project, pioneering new technologies that have made today’s result possible where we probe nature at a new scale. But this is also just the start; we are planning the construction of an experiment that will exploit the capabilities of the next-generation High Luminosity LHC, probing physics at an even smaller scale.”

Professor Parkes, who was made a fellow of the Royal Society earlier this year for his work on LHCb, added, “This decay is remarkably unlikely; the chance of it happening is roughly like going on a romantic date and, on your very first try, finding the one perfect match for you among everyone on Earth.”

A major U.K.-built component of the upgraded LHCb experiment is a silicon pixel detector that tracks the paths of particles created in collisions at the LHC with extreme precision.

Known as the Vertex Locator, it sits just five millimeters from the LHC beams and enables scientists to pinpoint where particles are produced and where they decay.

Dr. Stefano De Capua, who led the construction of the detectors at The University of Manchester, added, “We worked with nearly 90 U.K. companies to construct this detector and trained the next generation of scientists and engineers on the novel technologies we are using. It is these detectors that we use to locate where the beauty meson was produced and pinpoint where it decayed into two muons.”

| Sadie Harley and Robert Egan, physics.org

Aber Kawas (D) won election to the New York State Senate on Tuesday, becoming the first Palestinian-American to serve in the state legislature after defeating Republican Han-Khon To in the heavily Democratic 12th District.

Her victory celebration is an example of why residents of the Empire State are terrified of how quickly the pro-Hamas, pro-terror arm of the Left is infiltrating government.

The Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) member, who received the endorsement of New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani (straight-up Communist), marked the result by posting a campaign graphic declaring her the first Palestinian elected in New York State.

Let me repeat that. She celebrated being the “First Palestinian.”

Kawas didn’t even bother to hyphenate the “American” part.

“We made history,” she wrote, adding a Palestinian flag emoji.

We made history. 🇵🇸 https://t.co/r9dnacASP5

— Aber Kawas (@AberKawas) November 4, 2026 People who love America and want this nation to continue leading as the greatest nation on Earth probably would have celebrated with the American flag. Instead, Kawas showed her true allegiance. Her unmistakable allegiance to Palestine first.

No interest in assimilation. No pride in the country or even the state that elevated her to her current role.

Kawas, a community organizer born in Brooklyn to Palestinian parents, had campaigned on affordable housing, defense of illegal aliens, and opposition to U.S. support for Israel.

Her victory revived scrutiny of comments she made in a 2017 podcast discussion in which she described 9/11 as the manifestation of a long trajectory of capitalism, racism, white supremacy, and Islamophobia. In other words, all of the buzzwords that America-hating leftists love to use.

She also referred to the worst terrorist attack ever on American soil as something “a couple of people did.”

“The system of capitalism and racism and White supremacy… and Islamophobia have all been used to colonize lands, to take resources from other people and so this is a long trajectory, and we’re just seeing the manifestations of that continuation with 9/11,” she said in a 2017 episode of the Asian American Writers’ Association podcast.

“The idea we have to apologize for a terror attack that a couple of people did, and then there is no apology or reparations for genocides and for slavery… is something I find reprehensible.”

What’s reprehensible is anybody who voted to put trash like this in any level of government.

DSA’s Aber Kawas called 9/11 “a terror attack that a couple of people did” and blamed America for it. Mamdani endorsed Kawas for NY State Senate – not despite those comments, but because he agreed with them. https://t.co/ZLNCITWiWk

— Canary Mission (@canarymission) July 30, 2026 Channeling her inner Ilhan Omar there with the “some people did something” downplaying of one of the most tragic events in United States history.

No wonder Mamdani, who praised Imam Siraj Wahhaj, an unindicted co-conspirator in the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, blamed the United States for radicalizing al-Qaeda propagandist Anwar al-Awlaki, and appointed a chief counsel who previously defended an al-Qaeda terrorist, loves her so much.

Rusty Weiss, Red State

President Donald Trump said Tuesday he would accept the results of US midterm elections — but quickly sought to shift the blame for the historic rout to his fellow Republicans.

Time and again on the campaign trail the 80-year-old told Republicans to “pretend I’m on the ballot.” That may have been exactly the problem, as voters put Democrats in control of the House and Senate.

But Trump has never been one to take the blame, and in his first reaction to the election results Tuesday he insisted that the Republican Party would have won in a “landslide” if he had actually been running.

“I wasn’t on the Ballot and if I was, we would have won IN A LANDSLIDE! Thank you for your attention to this matter,” Trump said in a post on his Truth Social platform.

Dismissing speculation about whether he would repeat his refusal to accept his 2020 presidential election loss to Joe Biden, Trump later took a conciliatory tone with the New York Times.

“I am absolutely willing to accept those results,” he told The New York Times. “We’ll work with the Democrats, and we’ll, you know, look forward to working with them. We’ll probably work something out.”

But Trump later gave a hint of what he really intended to do to Democratic attempts at legislating, posting a picture of his trademark red MAGA baseball hat with the single word: “VETO.”

There was a bunker mentality in the White House as Trump and his top cabinet members watched the bruising results come in at a reception in the lavish East Room.

“The White House mood is defiant,” a White House official told AFP.

– ‘Buckle up’ –

A White House official questioned the quality of Republican candidates for the House and Senate.

Many of them Trump had endorsed and traveled across the country to rally support for — even lavishing praise, in one case, on Republican Ohio Senate candidate Jon Husted.

“Candidate quality matters, and President Trump did a better job promoting many of the candidates on the ballot than the candidates did themselves,” the White House official said.

Trump himself added later that he was going to “become a political pundit” and give the reasons why Republicans lost.

First in his crosshairs was Greg Abbott, the loyal Texas governor unseated by Democrat Gina Hinojosa. Trump said that if Abbott hadn’t become a “RINO” (Republican In Name Only) “he wouldn’t have lost.”

The question now is how Trump will react to being a lame duck president for the last two years of his second term, with Democrats in control of both the House and Senate.

The White House indicated that Trump is unlikely to go quietly.

Iran is on his mind and there is widespread speculation that the president will resume large-scale military action against Tehran — doubling down on a war that it is now clear voters loathed.

“Anyone who voted Democrat today is going to have a serious case of buyer’s remorse when gas prices come down quickly when the Iran conflict is solved but they’re still stuck with a list of liberal extremist Democrats,” the White House official said.

The White House also gave a dark hint of retribution against his political enemies.

“A final note here: regardless of how today plays out, President Trump’s resolve to stop the Radical Left is only going to become stronger. Buckle up.”

Trump had appeared agitated before the first results even came in, posting a string of angry messages on social media lashing out at conservative broadcaster Fox News’s coverage.

In one post sent as the first polls closed, Trump said Fox’s ratings were “way down, not because of me, but because they are AGAINST me!”

Mikel Tacknailer

Gridlock is the next best thing to having a constitution.” – M. Stanton Evans

Now that the election is over, it’s time to ask if all the hyperventilating for the past year was worth it. Was this “the most important election in our history,” as so many have declared?

We are entirely unconvinced. If all it does is produce gridlock in Washington, we will be happy, because the biggest threat to the country is when lawmakers are productive.

To be clear, it would have been better if the GOP had kept their majorities, and we are deeply disturbed by the choices voters made in several races. The fact that a Casper Milquetoast leftist like James Talarico or a Hamas-loving extremist like Abdul Al-Sayed could get more than 2% of the vote does not bode well for our nation’s future.

But let’s go through the reasons not to be too overly concerned about the results.

First, it’s in the interest of Democrats to hype the importance of this election because they want to claim a mandate. But the norm is for the party out of power in the White House to gain seats in congressional races.

And even big swings don’t necessarily mean much long term. In 2010, for example, Republicans gained a net of 68 seats (and reclaimed the majority in the House), gained six seats in the Senate, and took six governorships away from Democrats.

It was a stunning rebuke of Barack Obama’s first two years in office, after which Obama said he’d just use his pen and phone to get things done, and then went on to win reelection.

Second, Democrats didn’t run on an agenda this year – other than Trump hatred – so they have no mandate for the next two years.

When Republicans gained control of the House in Bill Clinton’s first term, they did so by nationalizing the election under the banner of Newt Gingrich’s Contract with America. Their outsized midterm win forced Clinton to compromise and let the GOP get things like welfare reform and a capital gains tax cut enacted.

The only thing Democrats have promised voters is that they will hold Trump “accountable.”

And if Democrats do try to get bills passed, none will make it into law unless they do the unthinkable and reach across the aisle, because President Donald Trump still holds the veto pen and has already declared that he will be the Veto President if Democrats take control of Congress.

So, the only thing we know for sure is that for the next two years, Washington, D.C., will be in a state of gridlock while Democrats unleash a torrent of investigations, impeachments, and endless claims of corruption and wrongdoing.

While that might keep the Democratic base happy, it’s likely to hurt them more than Republicans once the public realizes that revenge is not productive. And if the economy starts gaining momentum and Trump and the rest of the GOP stay focused on delivering good news about jobs and growth and income, Democrats will look even more out of touch with everyday Americans.

That’s not to say there is no risk. Democratic socialist wins today can provide tremendous momentum going into 2028. And if Democrats, God forbid, do win the White House that year, the country will be all but lost. But it’s just likely that emboldened radicals in the Democratic Party will turn off far more voters than they gain.

So, our advice is to let Democrats have their celebrations. Enjoy the gridlock for the next two years. And get busy laying the groundwork for massive victories in 2028, when the elections really matter.

Issues & Insights Editorial Board