thank you for the great article. You touch on so many important points. And what if #shewon
How about and just withhold your 'election denier gaslighting' for a second, She REALLY DID WIN? Doesn't that make more sense? There is a coalition building around the DATA that has been collected by the ElectionTruthAlliance.org They in partnership with smartelections.us and The Common Coalition have exposed the ROT inside the 2024 election. We urge everyone to educate themselves. Take 15 mins and read THE REPORT at thecommoncoalition.com Read the data. There is a 1 in 1 Octillion (seriously) chance that he;
1. Won all the Swing States
2. Turned 88 districts from Blue to Red
without the election being rigged. Not to mention:
Elon launched new DTC satellites just days before the election! Elon calling the election for Trump 4 hours before the polls closed. etc. PLEASE PLEASE stop beating yourselves over the head with their gaslighting! She Was a Great Candidate and we had an awesome message and it was stolen from us and for why i'll never know, we did nothing. A bigger problem. The Midterms won't matter if they are stolen too. WAKE UP READ THE REPORT - JOIN US!
Your articles are so needed! From the start of the loss to the turd I’ve detested the ridiculous and what I instinctively knew to be utterly wrong takes on the whole thing. You are putting into words exactly what is truth. Thank you so much!
This is a brilliant analysis of the Democrats long history of eating our own. Kamala talked about a “big tent,” while others ran around in circles, talking about ideological purity tests. I feel as if WE lost this election for her; she didn’t lose it for herself. And now…fascism. I hope the purists are squirming.
I like your debris-filled lane analogy. Harris was given a broken vehicle, a debris-filled lane, and damn near brought it to the finish line. I agree with your "assessing the room" regarding Liz Chaney. Chaney came to our city and was part of an half-week left-of-center "Idea Fest." Sure, I disagree with quite a few things she believes and does. But, we are talking survival. "T" did not receive a mandate. We need a return to civility and responsibility. Flip the Senate, flip the House, and flip the Executive before it's too late.
Thank you so much for reading and for this thoughtful reply, Morris. I’m glad the debris-filled lane analogy resonated—it really felt like the only way to describe what Kamala was handed. A broken-down vehicle, a pothole-riddled track, and somehow she still nearly brought it home. That kind of grit deserves way more recognition than it’s getting.
I also appreciate your take on Liz Cheney. I get it—there’s plenty to disagree with when it comes to her policies, but like you said, we’re talking survival. She read the room early and chose to stand on principle when it mattered most. That doesn’t make her a hero, but it does make her useful in this very specific moment. Sometimes you need allies in strange places to keep democracy breathing.
And you’re right: “T” didn’t receive a mandate. What he got was an electoral college fluke enabled by a fractured opposition and a complicit media ecosystem. That’s all the more reason we need to flip the Senate, flip the House, and reclaim the Executive—not just to win, but to reestablish some baseline of sanity, civility, and responsibility before we lose the ability to do so.
Thanks again for engaging with the piece. Your perspective sharpens the discussion.
Thank you so much for reading and for this thoughtful reply, Morris. I’m glad the debris-filled lane analogy resonated—it really felt like the only way to describe what Kamala was handed. A broken-down vehicle, a pothole-riddled track, and somehow she still nearly brought it home. That kind of grit deserves way more recognition than it’s getting.
I also appreciate your take on Liz Cheney. I get it—there’s plenty to disagree with when it comes to her policies, but like you said, we’re talking survival. She read the room early and chose to stand on principle when it mattered most. That doesn’t make her a hero, but it does make her useful in this very specific moment. Sometimes you need allies in strange places to keep democracy breathing.
And you’re right: “T” didn’t receive a mandate. What he got was an electoral college fluke enabled by a fractured opposition and a complicit media ecosystem. That’s all the more reason we need to flip the Senate, flip the House, and reclaim the Executive—not just to win, but to reestablish some baseline of sanity, civility, and responsibility before we lose the ability to do so.
Thanks again for engaging with the piece. Your perspective sharpens the discussion.
Damn! My eyes are watering. Because of the misery I see in this country because Trump won. The reality of what I see versus the vision of what life could have been if she had won. But the reality of that vision is what the Republicans would have done if they had retained the majority in the House and/or the Senate. They would had renewed vigor to oppose her just like they did when President Obama was elected. No, we need to elect her when we have the House and the Senate so that she can be the transformative leader we desperately need. 2028 needs to be the start of the transformation of America into a more perfect union. I believe Trump's reign of terror will help us get there.
Thank you so much for reading, Donald. Your comment really hit hard—and I mean that in the best possible way. The emotion in your words mirrors what so many of us are feeling right now: that aching contrast between what could have been and what we’re living through. You’re absolutely right that had she won, Republicans in Congress would’ve likely made it their mission to undermine her every step of the way—just like they did with Obama. That’s not pessimism; that’s pattern recognition.
But your point about needing both the presidency and the House and Senate is key. We’ve learned the hard way that transformative leadership only works when it’s backed by legislative muscle. Without it, obstruction wins. Your line about Trump’s “reign of terror” being the fuel that pushes us toward real transformation is powerful—and deeply true. Pain tends to wake people up. 2028 can’t just be a referendum on Trumpism. It has to be the year we reclaim power with purpose.
Well said. A couple of things I wonder about is whether some people thought, better the devil we know than the angel they don't kow enough about. And maybe if dems had released the Epstein files she would have coasted to victory.
I saw a change after dems stopped the 'weird' description of trump and GOP. They were on offense for the first time in years. Then they feel back into their defensive crouch and got the crap kicked out of them. Standard dem approach. Take the defense, and get throttled. We have trump 2.0 because dems played patty cake with the bully. trump disn't win, dems lost.
Appreciate you reading, MPT—and you raise some sharp points.
That idea of “better the devil you know” absolutely applies here. Voter psychology has long shown that fear of the unknown often overrides frustration with the status quo. And you’re right: had more voters seen Harris as a known quantity rather than a wildcard, the margins might’ve shifted.
As for the Epstein files—I get the instinct, but I’m not sure their release would’ve done much to move the needle for Harris. The reality is, Democrats weren’t banking on them, weren’t hyping them, and most weren’t even talking about them—until we saw how MAGA world was imploding over the revelations. Just look at the timeline: the momentum around the Epstein documents was driven by outlets like InfoWars, Candace Owens, and random right-wing Telegram channels—not MSNBC or The Nation. And when Trump’s name started appearing in connection with the unsealed documents, that’s when the frenzy really took off—on their side. It wasn’t some 4D chess move by Democrats. It was MAGA lighting a match and forgetting they were standing in a fireworks warehouse.
Your larger point about the Democratic messaging strategy, though, is dead-on. When Dems stopped being afraid to call out Trumpism as dangerous and weird—when they went on offense—there was a brief flash of momentum. But too often they fall back into caution, into “maybe we’ll win if we’re just not them.” And like you said, that’s how you get throttled. Trump didn’t win. Dems lost. That distinction matters.
Insults and condemnations against the HARRIS/WALZ campaign are slurs and condemnations against the millions of us who voted for them. We wanted them. We believed they had the brains and education to overcome the razor-thin R advantages in the House and Senate.
Give the Democratic Party to the voters, get shed of the sponges running it.
Just like the 30% of MAGA voters who highjacked the Republican party in 2016, if the democratic voters formed a coalition that demands change and will only support candidates who advocate for change then we can remake America. The Republican establishment didn't want Trump in 2016 but they had to follow their voters and still are right now. As MAGA wavers on Trump because of the Epstein files, House members are beginning to waver too. It's up to us as voters to move towards a better government.
Thank you for reading, SLMontgo. I hear you—and you’re right to name the emotional exhaustion that comes with this political moment. It’s hard to keep hope alive when the machinery feels rigged and the stakes are so high.
You’re absolutely right that our biggest weapon can’t just be fear of Trump. That gets old. It numbs people. What actually mobilizes folks is a vision—something to fight for, not just against. Democrats can’t afford to keep handing people empty calories and expecting them to show up out of obligation or trauma. They need to offer something bold, tangible, and worth believing in.
You also hit on something key: this isn’t just about elections—it’s about how we sustain ourselves in the meantime. Community, organizing, storytelling, art, protest—all of it matters. Because if we wait for politicians alone to save us, we’ll stay stuck in survival mode. But if we build momentum from the ground up, they’ll have to keep up with us.
Appreciate you being here and sharing your thoughts. Keep pushing.
I donated far more to her presidential campaign than I have to all other candidates cumulatively (and I’m over 70). And I’m proud of those donations. But I won’t donate to another democratic candidate until that party gets its shit together. I’m so tired of the “what aboutism” that Democratic Party “leaders” have engaged in when our form of democracy is under existential attack.
Thanks for reading and taking the time to share your thoughts, George. I completely understand the frustration you’re feeling—you’re not alone. A lot of us are asking the same thing: Where’s the strategy? It’s hard to keep giving time, energy, or money to a party that still hasn’t laid out a clear, compelling game plan in the face of authoritarian creep.
Your point about feeling like we’re shouting into the void while the other side barrels forward is real. It’s demoralizing when it seems like Democratic leadership is reacting instead of leading—especially when the stakes couldn’t be higher.
That said, one productive move in the meantime might be to redirect your support to PACs or activist organizations that are actually doing the ground work—groups with a sense of urgency and clarity. Whether it’s voter protection orgs, local civil rights coalitions, or media watchdogs, your money and energy might make more impact there until the Democratic Party shows us they’re serious.
I hear you. And I appreciate you for being engaged and demanding better. We all should.
Was Melania Cheeto Involved With the Epstein Ring?
There are at least 2 photos of the 2 swinger couples together in public during Cheeto’s bad boy years….Melania and Cheeto along with Epstein and Maxwell Cheeto started dating Melania in 1998 This is 2 years after Maria Farmer had come forward to file a complaint with local and then FBI authorities about what Epstein and Maxwell were up to with their international sex trafficking ring It’s now public knowledge that Epstein said the Melania and Cheeto first had intercourse on Epstein’s plane and then in 2005 Melania married Cheeto but Epstein and Maxwell were not on the invitation list Was Cheeto trying to divest himself to Epstein’s friendship?
In 2006 the FBI contacted Maria Farmer and she divulged all her details of her relationship with Epstein and Maxwell In 2006 Epstein got a plea deal with Florida authorities and then continued on with his pedophilia journey with schoolgirls(not young women)
An interview with the Daily Beast(https://bit.ly/46px65j) Michael Wolff(author of 4 books on Cheeto) states that Maxwell’s shot across the bow with her release of the birthday wishes from Cheeto to Epstein, Blanche’s interview with Maxwell is to find out what she will divulge and what can be done to shut her up For Cheeto and Melania Cheeto a lot is riding on this settlement
And what does Baron Cheeto think about his momma’s past sordid group she hung out with including his lecherous father?
Thanks for reading and laying all this out, Dr. Bill. You raise a lot of questions that people are starting to ask more publicly, especially as the Epstein files continue to circulate and new connections come to light. That said, I want to be clear and careful here about what’s verifiable and what isn’t—because when we’re dealing with something this serious, precision matters.
It is confirmed that Melania began dating Trump (a.k.a. “Cheeto,” as you’ve dubbed him) around 1998, and yes—Trump’s connections to Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell are well documented. There are multiple public photos of Trump and Melania with Epstein and Maxwell at social events in the early 2000s. Trump himself said in a 2002 quote for New York Magazine that Epstein “likes beautiful women as much as I do, and many of them are on the younger side.” That quote has aged like radioactive milk.
Maria Farmer’s statements to the FBI and her interviews—especially her 2019 interview with journalist Whitney Webb—are also part of the public record. She did, in fact, raise the alarm about Epstein and Maxwell’s trafficking ring long before the mainstream media took it seriously. She identified both as dangerous predators, and the FBI’s documented lack of urgency at the time has since come under scrutiny.
Now, here’s where we need to tread carefully: claims about Melania personally being involved with Epstein beyond social proximity are not substantiated by hard evidence. The part about her and Trump allegedly having intercourse on Epstein’s plane is attributed to Epstein, according to some reporting, but there’s no corroborating documentation or independent verification. It remains hearsay unless further documentation or credible testimony surfaces.
Likewise, the idea that Maxwell’s legal team is negotiating a gag or exploring what she’ll “divulge” about Trump and Melania has been speculated in interviews and analysis—such as by Michael Wolff, as you cited—but again, there’s a difference between informed speculation and confirmed fact. Wolff has written extensively about Trump, and while his reporting can be insightful, he’s also faced criticism for relying on off-the-record sourcing and anonymous accounts.
So here’s my position: if there’s something there—whether it involves Melania, Trump, or anyone else—then by all means, look into it. No one should be above scrutiny. But if we’re going to hold bad actors accountable, we’ve got to do it with airtight facts. Otherwise, we give them an easy out by claiming persecution or smear.
Appreciate your contribution to this conversation. These are the exact types of questions journalists and investigators need to be following up on—and I respect your vigilance in raising them.
Kamala was a fantastic candidate and could not have done better with a hand she was dealt. I initially didn’t even like her, but after watching her campaign, I was very impressed. The biggest reason she lost was sexism, but there were plenty of other contributing factors as well.
All Americans —us eligible “voters” —need to take a hard look at ourselves and start taking our share of the blame for what’s going on . Most of us on “both sides” have contributed to this mess in one way or another.
Thank you for reading and for such a thoughtful comment, Linda. You’re absolutely right—Kamala was a far stronger candidate than most people gave her credit for, and she made the most of an incredibly difficult situation. The fact that you started out skeptical but came away impressed speaks volumes, and I think that experience mirrors a lot of voters who were paying attention.
Sexism definitely played a major role in how she was perceived and covered. But like you said, there were plenty of other factors at play too—structural, strategic, and media-driven. None of this happened in a vacuum.
And I really appreciate your final point about self-reflection. It’s easy to point fingers at politicians or parties, but we also have to take ownership of the civic culture we’ve allowed to fester. Apathy, performative bothsidesism, and media addiction to outrage cycles have all contributed to this mess. Your call for voters to take a hard look at ourselves is exactly what more people need to hear right now.
“No, what she did was calculated. What she faced was stacked. And what she pulled off, given the circumstances, deserves a hell of a lot more credit than she’s been getting.” Spot on , Kamala Harris had very little time to get the campaign off and running and with Biden’s baggage, Biden’s team, and the never-should-have -been -allowed debate with Trump or anyone, that was very bad judgment . Biden should not have run and I have been a supporter of Biden for as long as he was in politics, some things are obvious if one is sentient.
Harris is smart, astute, canny, honorable, and experienced and I would vote for her again. Democrats always shoot themselves at election time and end up losing the election — Trump as POTUS twice? Gimme a break! Once was too much, some people never learn.
Thank you for reading, Jeanne—and for laying this out with such clarity and conviction. You’re absolutely right: what Kamala Harris pulled off under the weight of Biden’s baggage, a fractured party, and a compressed timeline was nothing short of remarkable. She didn’t just run a campaign—she carried one that was built to collapse on her. And yet, she did it with poise, smarts, and resilience.
Your point about Biden never debating Trump is one I share completely. That decision left voters with unanswered questions and allowed the right to define the narrative uncontested. It was a major misstep.
And yes—Harris is sharp, strategic, and has more experience than most of her critics combined. The fact that she was able to generate the kind of enthusiasm she did, even with one hand tied behind her back, is proof of how much potential is still untapped. Before she makes any decision about 2028, I truly hope she takes stock of just how far she moved the needle—not just in this country, but globally. There are a lot of us who aren’t ready to give up on her. Not even close. And this time, we’d have the gift of time—to build the infrastructure, sharpen the message, and make sure the right lessons are learned.
Thanks again for being part of this conversation. You’re not alone in your frustration—or your hope.
This is so correct! Thank you for publishing your insights. I believe that ever since JFK Democrats have been addicted to finding the next supernova flashing across the sky and in the process have not recognized exceptional candidates that could be winners. Kamala’s performance in that debate should be studied for year to come as a model for rising to the occasion and hitting all the marks. I think that after being in two Presidential campaigns she’s paid dues, learned lessons, and I’m not counting her out!
Thank you so much for reading, Virginia—and for this incredibly insightful comment. You nailed something that doesn’t get discussed enough: the Democratic obsession with chasing the next “supernova” candidate. It’s like we’ve been trained to value spectacle over substance, forgetting that steady, prepared, and battle-tested candidates often win the long game.
Kamala’s debate performance was absolutely a masterclass. She came in with the odds stacked and still managed to deliver poise, command, and clarity when it mattered most. That’s not just political instinct—that’s preparation and leadership. You’re right: it should be studied as a model for how to rise under pressure.
And I couldn’t agree more—after being part of two presidential campaigns, she’s earned her scars, gained real-world experience, and proved she can stand toe-to-toe with the best. It would be a mistake to count her out, and I’m glad you’re not doing that. Some candidates burn bright and fade fast. Harris is still here—and still standing.
Appreciate your voice and support in this conversation.
For the second time in the space of only a few days, thank you. Thank you for underlining an important fact that all the screaming and moaning and finger-pointing and yes, outright mansplaining have buried. Harris came within a whisker of winning. That hurts, but given the circumstances, it's also amazing. What did she do right to pull off that trick, and how can she (or another candidate) repeat and improve on it next time?
Thank you so much for reading, Lisa—and for cutting right to the heart of it. You’re absolutely right: in the middle of all the noise, blame games, and yes, the relentless mansplaining, the fact that Kamala Harris came within a whisker of winning has been completely buried. People act like she got blown out, when in reality, she held the line under historically brutal conditions.
It really is amazing when you step back and look at it objectively. She inherited a campaign she didn’t build, was saddled with Biden’s legacy and liabilities, and still managed to energize a base that was tired, fractured, and demoralized. That doesn’t happen by accident—it takes skill, discipline, and an ability to adapt under pressure.
And I love the question you posed: what did she do right, and how can that be repeated or improved next time? That’s exactly the kind of conversation we need to be having—not who to blame, but how to build on what worked. Because a lot actually did work, and with the right support and time to prepare, the next run could be the one that breaks through.
Really appreciate your clarity and your engagement in this dialogue.
Seldom in discussions of inflation do we mention that Trump's ignoring and then lying about the Covid Pandemic was the primary cause of the uptake in inflation this last go-round, (not to mention untold unnecessary loss of people the world over. We need billboards quoting his lies, and short, concise proof that they are lies. His "two week" promises that never come to pass, etc.
Thank you so much for reading and bringing this up, Carol Jane. You’re absolutely right—there’s been a massive failure in messaging around the real causes of inflation, especially when it comes to Trump’s role. Too many conversations leave out how his catastrophic mishandling of the COVID pandemic set the stage for global economic disruption, supply chain collapse, and the very inflation spiral he now pretends to have had no part in.
It’s staggering how quickly people forget that he downplayed the virus, delayed response efforts, politicized masks, and outright lied about timelines—his infamous “two weeks” line being a perfect example. That gaslighting didn’t just harm public health—it contributed to lasting economic fallout. And now, those same lies are being recycled to attack Democrats who inherited the mess.
You’re spot on that we need better counter-messaging. Billboards, ad campaigns, TikToks, bumper stickers—whatever it takes to remind people of the timeline and the receipts. This isn’t about rehashing the past for sport—it’s about making sure truth doesn’t get erased by the loudest liars in the room.
Thank you again for speaking up and calling it what it is. We need more voices like yours.
Hello,
thank you for the great article. You touch on so many important points. And what if #shewon
How about and just withhold your 'election denier gaslighting' for a second, She REALLY DID WIN? Doesn't that make more sense? There is a coalition building around the DATA that has been collected by the ElectionTruthAlliance.org They in partnership with smartelections.us and The Common Coalition have exposed the ROT inside the 2024 election. We urge everyone to educate themselves. Take 15 mins and read THE REPORT at thecommoncoalition.com Read the data. There is a 1 in 1 Octillion (seriously) chance that he;
1. Won all the Swing States
2. Turned 88 districts from Blue to Red
without the election being rigged. Not to mention:
Elon launched new DTC satellites just days before the election! Elon calling the election for Trump 4 hours before the polls closed. etc. PLEASE PLEASE stop beating yourselves over the head with their gaslighting! She Was a Great Candidate and we had an awesome message and it was stolen from us and for why i'll never know, we did nothing. A bigger problem. The Midterms won't matter if they are stolen too. WAKE UP READ THE REPORT - JOIN US!
Your articles are so needed! From the start of the loss to the turd I’ve detested the ridiculous and what I instinctively knew to be utterly wrong takes on the whole thing. You are putting into words exactly what is truth. Thank you so much!
This is a brilliant analysis of the Democrats long history of eating our own. Kamala talked about a “big tent,” while others ran around in circles, talking about ideological purity tests. I feel as if WE lost this election for her; she didn’t lose it for herself. And now…fascism. I hope the purists are squirming.
YES! Louder for the cheap seats in the back!
Damn good! Thank you!
I like your debris-filled lane analogy. Harris was given a broken vehicle, a debris-filled lane, and damn near brought it to the finish line. I agree with your "assessing the room" regarding Liz Chaney. Chaney came to our city and was part of an half-week left-of-center "Idea Fest." Sure, I disagree with quite a few things she believes and does. But, we are talking survival. "T" did not receive a mandate. We need a return to civility and responsibility. Flip the Senate, flip the House, and flip the Executive before it's too late.
Thank you so much for reading and for this thoughtful reply, Morris. I’m glad the debris-filled lane analogy resonated—it really felt like the only way to describe what Kamala was handed. A broken-down vehicle, a pothole-riddled track, and somehow she still nearly brought it home. That kind of grit deserves way more recognition than it’s getting.
I also appreciate your take on Liz Cheney. I get it—there’s plenty to disagree with when it comes to her policies, but like you said, we’re talking survival. She read the room early and chose to stand on principle when it mattered most. That doesn’t make her a hero, but it does make her useful in this very specific moment. Sometimes you need allies in strange places to keep democracy breathing.
And you’re right: “T” didn’t receive a mandate. What he got was an electoral college fluke enabled by a fractured opposition and a complicit media ecosystem. That’s all the more reason we need to flip the Senate, flip the House, and reclaim the Executive—not just to win, but to reestablish some baseline of sanity, civility, and responsibility before we lose the ability to do so.
Thanks again for engaging with the piece. Your perspective sharpens the discussion.
Thank you so much for reading and for this thoughtful reply, Morris. I’m glad the debris-filled lane analogy resonated—it really felt like the only way to describe what Kamala was handed. A broken-down vehicle, a pothole-riddled track, and somehow she still nearly brought it home. That kind of grit deserves way more recognition than it’s getting.
I also appreciate your take on Liz Cheney. I get it—there’s plenty to disagree with when it comes to her policies, but like you said, we’re talking survival. She read the room early and chose to stand on principle when it mattered most. That doesn’t make her a hero, but it does make her useful in this very specific moment. Sometimes you need allies in strange places to keep democracy breathing.
And you’re right: “T” didn’t receive a mandate. What he got was an electoral college fluke enabled by a fractured opposition and a complicit media ecosystem. That’s all the more reason we need to flip the Senate, flip the House, and reclaim the Executive—not just to win, but to reestablish some baseline of sanity, civility, and responsibility before we lose the ability to do so.
Thanks again for engaging with the piece. Your perspective sharpens the discussion.
Damn! My eyes are watering. Because of the misery I see in this country because Trump won. The reality of what I see versus the vision of what life could have been if she had won. But the reality of that vision is what the Republicans would have done if they had retained the majority in the House and/or the Senate. They would had renewed vigor to oppose her just like they did when President Obama was elected. No, we need to elect her when we have the House and the Senate so that she can be the transformative leader we desperately need. 2028 needs to be the start of the transformation of America into a more perfect union. I believe Trump's reign of terror will help us get there.
Thank you so much for reading, Donald. Your comment really hit hard—and I mean that in the best possible way. The emotion in your words mirrors what so many of us are feeling right now: that aching contrast between what could have been and what we’re living through. You’re absolutely right that had she won, Republicans in Congress would’ve likely made it their mission to undermine her every step of the way—just like they did with Obama. That’s not pessimism; that’s pattern recognition.
But your point about needing both the presidency and the House and Senate is key. We’ve learned the hard way that transformative leadership only works when it’s backed by legislative muscle. Without it, obstruction wins. Your line about Trump’s “reign of terror” being the fuel that pushes us toward real transformation is powerful—and deeply true. Pain tends to wake people up. 2028 can’t just be a referendum on Trumpism. It has to be the year we reclaim power with purpose.
Appreciate your voice here. Keep fighting.
Well said. A couple of things I wonder about is whether some people thought, better the devil we know than the angel they don't kow enough about. And maybe if dems had released the Epstein files she would have coasted to victory.
I saw a change after dems stopped the 'weird' description of trump and GOP. They were on offense for the first time in years. Then they feel back into their defensive crouch and got the crap kicked out of them. Standard dem approach. Take the defense, and get throttled. We have trump 2.0 because dems played patty cake with the bully. trump disn't win, dems lost.
Appreciate you reading, MPT—and you raise some sharp points.
That idea of “better the devil you know” absolutely applies here. Voter psychology has long shown that fear of the unknown often overrides frustration with the status quo. And you’re right: had more voters seen Harris as a known quantity rather than a wildcard, the margins might’ve shifted.
As for the Epstein files—I get the instinct, but I’m not sure their release would’ve done much to move the needle for Harris. The reality is, Democrats weren’t banking on them, weren’t hyping them, and most weren’t even talking about them—until we saw how MAGA world was imploding over the revelations. Just look at the timeline: the momentum around the Epstein documents was driven by outlets like InfoWars, Candace Owens, and random right-wing Telegram channels—not MSNBC or The Nation. And when Trump’s name started appearing in connection with the unsealed documents, that’s when the frenzy really took off—on their side. It wasn’t some 4D chess move by Democrats. It was MAGA lighting a match and forgetting they were standing in a fireworks warehouse.
Your larger point about the Democratic messaging strategy, though, is dead-on. When Dems stopped being afraid to call out Trumpism as dangerous and weird—when they went on offense—there was a brief flash of momentum. But too often they fall back into caution, into “maybe we’ll win if we’re just not them.” And like you said, that’s how you get throttled. Trump didn’t win. Dems lost. That distinction matters.
Thanks again for weighing in with such clarity.
Insults and condemnations against the HARRIS/WALZ campaign are slurs and condemnations against the millions of us who voted for them. We wanted them. We believed they had the brains and education to overcome the razor-thin R advantages in the House and Senate.
Give the Democratic Party to the voters, get shed of the sponges running it.
Just like the 30% of MAGA voters who highjacked the Republican party in 2016, if the democratic voters formed a coalition that demands change and will only support candidates who advocate for change then we can remake America. The Republican establishment didn't want Trump in 2016 but they had to follow their voters and still are right now. As MAGA wavers on Trump because of the Epstein files, House members are beginning to waver too. It's up to us as voters to move towards a better government.
Thank you for reading, SLMontgo. I hear you—and you’re right to name the emotional exhaustion that comes with this political moment. It’s hard to keep hope alive when the machinery feels rigged and the stakes are so high.
You’re absolutely right that our biggest weapon can’t just be fear of Trump. That gets old. It numbs people. What actually mobilizes folks is a vision—something to fight for, not just against. Democrats can’t afford to keep handing people empty calories and expecting them to show up out of obligation or trauma. They need to offer something bold, tangible, and worth believing in.
You also hit on something key: this isn’t just about elections—it’s about how we sustain ourselves in the meantime. Community, organizing, storytelling, art, protest—all of it matters. Because if we wait for politicians alone to save us, we’ll stay stuck in survival mode. But if we build momentum from the ground up, they’ll have to keep up with us.
Appreciate you being here and sharing your thoughts. Keep pushing.
I donated far more to her presidential campaign than I have to all other candidates cumulatively (and I’m over 70). And I’m proud of those donations. But I won’t donate to another democratic candidate until that party gets its shit together. I’m so tired of the “what aboutism” that Democratic Party “leaders” have engaged in when our form of democracy is under existential attack.
Thanks for reading and taking the time to share your thoughts, George. I completely understand the frustration you’re feeling—you’re not alone. A lot of us are asking the same thing: Where’s the strategy? It’s hard to keep giving time, energy, or money to a party that still hasn’t laid out a clear, compelling game plan in the face of authoritarian creep.
Your point about feeling like we’re shouting into the void while the other side barrels forward is real. It’s demoralizing when it seems like Democratic leadership is reacting instead of leading—especially when the stakes couldn’t be higher.
That said, one productive move in the meantime might be to redirect your support to PACs or activist organizations that are actually doing the ground work—groups with a sense of urgency and clarity. Whether it’s voter protection orgs, local civil rights coalitions, or media watchdogs, your money and energy might make more impact there until the Democratic Party shows us they’re serious.
I hear you. And I appreciate you for being engaged and demanding better. We all should.
Was Melania Cheeto Involved With the Epstein Ring?
There are at least 2 photos of the 2 swinger couples together in public during Cheeto’s bad boy years….Melania and Cheeto along with Epstein and Maxwell Cheeto started dating Melania in 1998 This is 2 years after Maria Farmer had come forward to file a complaint with local and then FBI authorities about what Epstein and Maxwell were up to with their international sex trafficking ring It’s now public knowledge that Epstein said the Melania and Cheeto first had intercourse on Epstein’s plane and then in 2005 Melania married Cheeto but Epstein and Maxwell were not on the invitation list Was Cheeto trying to divest himself to Epstein’s friendship?
In 2006 the FBI contacted Maria Farmer and she divulged all her details of her relationship with Epstein and Maxwell In 2006 Epstein got a plea deal with Florida authorities and then continued on with his pedophilia journey with schoolgirls(not young women)
An interview with the Daily Beast(https://bit.ly/46px65j) Michael Wolff(author of 4 books on Cheeto) states that Maxwell’s shot across the bow with her release of the birthday wishes from Cheeto to Epstein, Blanche’s interview with Maxwell is to find out what she will divulge and what can be done to shut her up For Cheeto and Melania Cheeto a lot is riding on this settlement
And what does Baron Cheeto think about his momma’s past sordid group she hung out with including his lecherous father?
Thanks for reading and laying all this out, Dr. Bill. You raise a lot of questions that people are starting to ask more publicly, especially as the Epstein files continue to circulate and new connections come to light. That said, I want to be clear and careful here about what’s verifiable and what isn’t—because when we’re dealing with something this serious, precision matters.
It is confirmed that Melania began dating Trump (a.k.a. “Cheeto,” as you’ve dubbed him) around 1998, and yes—Trump’s connections to Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell are well documented. There are multiple public photos of Trump and Melania with Epstein and Maxwell at social events in the early 2000s. Trump himself said in a 2002 quote for New York Magazine that Epstein “likes beautiful women as much as I do, and many of them are on the younger side.” That quote has aged like radioactive milk.
Maria Farmer’s statements to the FBI and her interviews—especially her 2019 interview with journalist Whitney Webb—are also part of the public record. She did, in fact, raise the alarm about Epstein and Maxwell’s trafficking ring long before the mainstream media took it seriously. She identified both as dangerous predators, and the FBI’s documented lack of urgency at the time has since come under scrutiny.
Now, here’s where we need to tread carefully: claims about Melania personally being involved with Epstein beyond social proximity are not substantiated by hard evidence. The part about her and Trump allegedly having intercourse on Epstein’s plane is attributed to Epstein, according to some reporting, but there’s no corroborating documentation or independent verification. It remains hearsay unless further documentation or credible testimony surfaces.
Likewise, the idea that Maxwell’s legal team is negotiating a gag or exploring what she’ll “divulge” about Trump and Melania has been speculated in interviews and analysis—such as by Michael Wolff, as you cited—but again, there’s a difference between informed speculation and confirmed fact. Wolff has written extensively about Trump, and while his reporting can be insightful, he’s also faced criticism for relying on off-the-record sourcing and anonymous accounts.
So here’s my position: if there’s something there—whether it involves Melania, Trump, or anyone else—then by all means, look into it. No one should be above scrutiny. But if we’re going to hold bad actors accountable, we’ve got to do it with airtight facts. Otherwise, we give them an easy out by claiming persecution or smear.
Appreciate your contribution to this conversation. These are the exact types of questions journalists and investigators need to be following up on—and I respect your vigilance in raising them.
Totally agree with your comments that it's speculation and conspiratorial
Kamala was a fantastic candidate and could not have done better with a hand she was dealt. I initially didn’t even like her, but after watching her campaign, I was very impressed. The biggest reason she lost was sexism, but there were plenty of other contributing factors as well.
All Americans —us eligible “voters” —need to take a hard look at ourselves and start taking our share of the blame for what’s going on . Most of us on “both sides” have contributed to this mess in one way or another.
Thank you for reading and for such a thoughtful comment, Linda. You’re absolutely right—Kamala was a far stronger candidate than most people gave her credit for, and she made the most of an incredibly difficult situation. The fact that you started out skeptical but came away impressed speaks volumes, and I think that experience mirrors a lot of voters who were paying attention.
Sexism definitely played a major role in how she was perceived and covered. But like you said, there were plenty of other factors at play too—structural, strategic, and media-driven. None of this happened in a vacuum.
And I really appreciate your final point about self-reflection. It’s easy to point fingers at politicians or parties, but we also have to take ownership of the civic culture we’ve allowed to fester. Apathy, performative bothsidesism, and media addiction to outrage cycles have all contributed to this mess. Your call for voters to take a hard look at ourselves is exactly what more people need to hear right now.
Thanks again for being part of the conversation.
“No, what she did was calculated. What she faced was stacked. And what she pulled off, given the circumstances, deserves a hell of a lot more credit than she’s been getting.” Spot on , Kamala Harris had very little time to get the campaign off and running and with Biden’s baggage, Biden’s team, and the never-should-have -been -allowed debate with Trump or anyone, that was very bad judgment . Biden should not have run and I have been a supporter of Biden for as long as he was in politics, some things are obvious if one is sentient.
Harris is smart, astute, canny, honorable, and experienced and I would vote for her again. Democrats always shoot themselves at election time and end up losing the election — Trump as POTUS twice? Gimme a break! Once was too much, some people never learn.
Thank you for reading, Jeanne—and for laying this out with such clarity and conviction. You’re absolutely right: what Kamala Harris pulled off under the weight of Biden’s baggage, a fractured party, and a compressed timeline was nothing short of remarkable. She didn’t just run a campaign—she carried one that was built to collapse on her. And yet, she did it with poise, smarts, and resilience.
Your point about Biden never debating Trump is one I share completely. That decision left voters with unanswered questions and allowed the right to define the narrative uncontested. It was a major misstep.
And yes—Harris is sharp, strategic, and has more experience than most of her critics combined. The fact that she was able to generate the kind of enthusiasm she did, even with one hand tied behind her back, is proof of how much potential is still untapped. Before she makes any decision about 2028, I truly hope she takes stock of just how far she moved the needle—not just in this country, but globally. There are a lot of us who aren’t ready to give up on her. Not even close. And this time, we’d have the gift of time—to build the infrastructure, sharpen the message, and make sure the right lessons are learned.
Thanks again for being part of this conversation. You’re not alone in your frustration—or your hope.
This is so correct! Thank you for publishing your insights. I believe that ever since JFK Democrats have been addicted to finding the next supernova flashing across the sky and in the process have not recognized exceptional candidates that could be winners. Kamala’s performance in that debate should be studied for year to come as a model for rising to the occasion and hitting all the marks. I think that after being in two Presidential campaigns she’s paid dues, learned lessons, and I’m not counting her out!
Thank you so much for reading, Virginia—and for this incredibly insightful comment. You nailed something that doesn’t get discussed enough: the Democratic obsession with chasing the next “supernova” candidate. It’s like we’ve been trained to value spectacle over substance, forgetting that steady, prepared, and battle-tested candidates often win the long game.
Kamala’s debate performance was absolutely a masterclass. She came in with the odds stacked and still managed to deliver poise, command, and clarity when it mattered most. That’s not just political instinct—that’s preparation and leadership. You’re right: it should be studied as a model for how to rise under pressure.
And I couldn’t agree more—after being part of two presidential campaigns, she’s earned her scars, gained real-world experience, and proved she can stand toe-to-toe with the best. It would be a mistake to count her out, and I’m glad you’re not doing that. Some candidates burn bright and fade fast. Harris is still here—and still standing.
Appreciate your voice and support in this conversation.
For the second time in the space of only a few days, thank you. Thank you for underlining an important fact that all the screaming and moaning and finger-pointing and yes, outright mansplaining have buried. Harris came within a whisker of winning. That hurts, but given the circumstances, it's also amazing. What did she do right to pull off that trick, and how can she (or another candidate) repeat and improve on it next time?
Thank you so much for reading, Lisa—and for cutting right to the heart of it. You’re absolutely right: in the middle of all the noise, blame games, and yes, the relentless mansplaining, the fact that Kamala Harris came within a whisker of winning has been completely buried. People act like she got blown out, when in reality, she held the line under historically brutal conditions.
It really is amazing when you step back and look at it objectively. She inherited a campaign she didn’t build, was saddled with Biden’s legacy and liabilities, and still managed to energize a base that was tired, fractured, and demoralized. That doesn’t happen by accident—it takes skill, discipline, and an ability to adapt under pressure.
And I love the question you posed: what did she do right, and how can that be repeated or improved next time? That’s exactly the kind of conversation we need to be having—not who to blame, but how to build on what worked. Because a lot actually did work, and with the right support and time to prepare, the next run could be the one that breaks through.
Really appreciate your clarity and your engagement in this dialogue.
Seldom in discussions of inflation do we mention that Trump's ignoring and then lying about the Covid Pandemic was the primary cause of the uptake in inflation this last go-round, (not to mention untold unnecessary loss of people the world over. We need billboards quoting his lies, and short, concise proof that they are lies. His "two week" promises that never come to pass, etc.
Thank you so much for reading and bringing this up, Carol Jane. You’re absolutely right—there’s been a massive failure in messaging around the real causes of inflation, especially when it comes to Trump’s role. Too many conversations leave out how his catastrophic mishandling of the COVID pandemic set the stage for global economic disruption, supply chain collapse, and the very inflation spiral he now pretends to have had no part in.
It’s staggering how quickly people forget that he downplayed the virus, delayed response efforts, politicized masks, and outright lied about timelines—his infamous “two weeks” line being a perfect example. That gaslighting didn’t just harm public health—it contributed to lasting economic fallout. And now, those same lies are being recycled to attack Democrats who inherited the mess.
You’re spot on that we need better counter-messaging. Billboards, ad campaigns, TikToks, bumper stickers—whatever it takes to remind people of the timeline and the receipts. This isn’t about rehashing the past for sport—it’s about making sure truth doesn’t get erased by the loudest liars in the room.
Thank you again for speaking up and calling it what it is. We need more voices like yours.