Aside From Donald Trump’s Win, The GOP Is Still Dying

While the GOP holds a majority in the Senate and the House of Representatives, Senators and Representatives alike have failed to unite themselves.

In fact, the Republicans were an opposition party for the better part of the last seven years.

While there was some skeleton of a plan to replace Obamacare, it was never given too much thought or reviewed by committees effectively.

When Donald Trump won the White House, although the Republican party became the majority, it was still an opposition party.

For Republicans to rally behind Mitch McConnell and Paul Ryan seemed to be too much.

While Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer organized and filibustered, Paul Ryan and Mitch McConnell failed to unite behind one bill.

President Trump spent hours and hours on the phone from the early hours of the morning until late at night converting one senator after the other to his vision and plan for healthcare.

Key senators like Rand Paul also failed to unite behind the American Healthcare Act.

While the plan was flawed, in my opinion, it still improved upon the healthcare system that many found to be failing.

The GOP needs to transition from an opposing body and become a legislative and policy oriented body.

The Republicans no longer have an excuse.

They are now the majority party and must capitalize on the situations that are in front of them.

The Republicans now have the option to improve the Tax Code from millions of words into perhaps just thousands, which details what people owe their Government.

In fact, the Government owes us a system that works for and by the people.

The Republicans have the responsibility to get behind some of the bills and plans that the Trump Administration proposes even if they are mildly flawed, as most bills are.

Just because it isn’t perfect doesn’t mean it should be completely rejected.

Obamacare had flaws and it was still introduced.

Many American’s could not keep their doctors.

For many, the premiums or deductibles were too high.

For example, some were covered, but the deductible was too high and thus, they weren’t effectively covered.

The problems with Obamacare were real, but so was the solution that was put forth.

Sure, it had problems, but it was still better than Obamacare.

While Rand Paul and Paul Ryan had different visions of healthcare than Trump, they both believe that Obamacare is a disaster and should be repealed and replaced.

The question was never about if it should be replaced, but rather what should replace it.

If this failure to unite behind our President continues, the Republican party has a long four years ahead and will likely have a difficult time in the midterm elections.

Pelosi and Schumer need to capitalize on this opportunity if they want their party to succeed.

The Democratic party forgot to nominate Bernie Sanders and underwent some serious divisiveness during the presidential campaign.

The victory of the Republicans will be short lived if they can’t unite behind the man who won it all, President Donald Trump.

There is some great news though.

The Republican party can use the nuclear option to nominate Neil Gorsuch, who was unanimously nominated to be a judge back in 2006.

The Republicans have the ball in their court, it is up to Speaker Ryan and Mitch McConnell to not drop it.

RISE NEWS is a grassroots journalism news organization that is working to change the way young people become informed and engaged in the world. You can write for us.

Cover Photo Credit: Patrick Feller/ Flickr (CC By 2.0)

The DNC Is In An Impossible Situation

On Feb. 25, the Democratic National Committee chose former Labor Secretary Tom Perez to lead the party into the disarrayed, foggy wilderness of modern American politics.

As the Bernie Sanders-backed candidate Rep. Keith Ellison (D-MN) was denied the position, the bifurcation of the mainstay liberal party continues.

The DNC is in an impossible situation.

They are pitted against two raging participants, both with heads angry and fierce, who have vastly different visions of the party moving forward.

Questions surrounding how to combat the efforts of President Trump and how to regain what the Democratic party has lost in recent decades, most notably the populace squeezed between the liberal coasts, is stoking the inner frustrations.

Left-ward bound are the progressives, closely aligned with the ‘social justice warrior’ mindset who are diligent activists that have shaped a lot of the dialogue of the past election.

Their strategy is defined by identity politics, safe spaces and trigger warnings.

Their goals are post-national and rabidly unpatriotic.

They have come to dominate what hordes of Americans see as modern day liberalism.

There are hints of anarchic chaos in this camp as well.

When we watched the Berkeley anti-fascist protesters erupt into violence at the very thought of Milo opening his mouth, very few of us imagined the existence of a master plan.

There was no commanding officer directing deployments, only low-level infantry grasping at whatever could become a flaming projectile.

There is, coincidentally, a Trump-like element to their anti-Trump beliefs.

What unites them is the ultimate desire to just burn the whole thing to the ground.

This group aims to wholeheartedly refuse to work with President Trump on anything, as that would be shaking the metaphorical hand of a genocidal, Hitlerian ruler whose only wish is to inflict harm on non-white persons from any and all nations. This strategy won’t go over well in dispatched corners of Trump country.

The progressives on the left are fed up with the Democratic establishment just like the pro-Trump movement is fed up with the Republican establishment.

They did find some success when Sen. Bernie Sanders sounded the horn of economic populism, a core message used by both sides during the campaign cycle.

New DNC chair Tom Perez has an impossibly tough job ahead. Photo Credit: Maryland GovPics/ Flickr (CC By 2.0)

As he talked of the harmful trade deals and low wages, millions found him to be speaking their long-awaited mother tongue.

On the other hand, there is the establishment end of the party.

A moderate, less-rebellious brand of liberal politics with the expectation of some compromise with those on the other side.

Tom Perez falls squarely in this camp, as does Hillary Clinton and similar figureheads in Democratic politics.

If there was a section of the Democratic party that was to undergo a serious self-reflection as to why 2016 became the year for the GOP, it would be from this end.

That is a big if, but for disaffected areas that saw promise in Trump, a steadied working-class approach by level-headed Democrats would entice them more than Antifa protests or an extra dose of virtue signaling.

The establishment’s main problem is, well, the fact that they are the establishment.

The big money, shadowy donors, corporatist leanings, the hawkish Democrats who resemble neocons instead of war-weary liberals.

There is the perceived rigging of the 2016 nomination in favor of Clinton over Sanders and the inside baseball we all characterize as a symptom, or possibly the definition, of the Washington machine.

Ultimately, they lack the intoxicant of change – the most potent reason to overlook them in the ballot box.

Upholding the status quo doesn’t feed the hungry masses, it doesn’t put people in the seats, nor does it fire people up to ‘make history’, even if it is to elect the first female President of the United States.

This is why Perez and the DNC have a virtually impossible challenge to overcome.

They must choose one side over the other, and both are undoubtedly flawed.

Can Democrats compete in parking lots like these all over America again? Photo Credit: Jimmy Jim Jim Shabadoo/ Flickr (CC By 2.0)

The division won’t naturally melt away.

The progressives can unite the young, the energetic, and the squadrons of protestors at a Trump hotel or a dance-off outside of Vice President Mike Pence’s house.

However, they struggle to connect with ‘fly-over’ country.

The people who are concerned with overspending at Wal-Mart, not the amount of gender identities recognized in the legal code.

To people outside of major cities and college campuses, the progressives are consumed with trivial anger and idealistic revolutions the world has tried over and over again.

The establishment of the Democratic Party can show that they aren’t identical to the social justice warrior type.

If they, for example, promote a pro-business campaign that isn’t completely anti-gun, they could compete in some of these rural areas, places where American flags fly high but Main Street is all but abandoned.

But doing that will alienate the anti-capitalist, anti-establishment thread running through the party.

They would lose the progressives to the Jill Stein’s of the world, only to be inevitably shut out of the power structure again.

Choose the progressives, you lose those within the margin of persuasion.

Choose the moderates, and the hatred of the elites may sweep them further away from elected office.

Republicans have factions erupting as well, but with controlling so much power their movement isn’t in the same state as the left.

I’m not a Democrat so I don’t have skin in this game.

However, I can acknowledge that Tom Perez has very little room to work with.

He must walk on the edge of a razor blade.

Every move he makes will infuriate half of his party and embolden the rest.

RISE NEWS is a grassroots journalism news organization that is working to change the way young people become informed and engaged in the world. You can write for us.

Photo Credit: Lars Plougmann/flickr (CC by-SA 2.0)

Cover Photo Credit: Kim Love/ Flickr (CC By 2.0)

Milo Isn’t Going Away

By Joshua Hudson

Milo Yiannopoulos is the second most polarizing figure in the current political scene.

Whether it is his pro-pedophilia comments that recently came to light, campus protests at UC-Berkeley, Twitter-ban, open condemnations of Islam, or “humorous” rants about obesity, abortion, race, feminism, homosexuality, and religion, the British-Greek former Senior Editor and provocateur of Breitbart News creates continuous controversy in a society conditioned by political correctness.

With his bleached-blonde hair, flagrant homosexuality, and exuberance, it would be easy to expect Milo to be a prominent liberal figure, but with any research into his ideals, it becomes clear that is not the case.

However, despite his consistently conservative views, establishment Republicans dare not associate with such an outlandish, vexed person.

READ MORE: Milo To RISE NEWS: “Racist? Me? I’ve had more black dick in me than the entire Kardashian family” 

Instead, Yiannopoulos is viewed as a figurehead of the Alt-Right movement characterized by divisive, regressive ideas such as white supremacy, but Yiannopoulos refutes this association due to his sexuality and preference of black male partners.

So, where does he fit in?

In light of his controversial comments on the benefits of hebephiliac-homosexual relationships, intuition would imply that the answer is nowhere.

In an era dominated by the resounding voices and opinions of partisan extremes, that is not the case.

Milo Yiannopoulos embodies the “Freedom of Speech” doctrine and extensively conservative views.

By incurring the cost of hurt feelings, Milo destroys a range of stereotypes and political correctness so perfectly that his presence is the Achilles’ heel and consummate antagonist to the modern media and progressive millennials.

The direct honesty of his world view and opinions resonates with a niche populace that is determined to be heard.

By supporting Yiannopoulos and others like Tomi Lahren and Ben Shapiro, many conservative millennials have voices to combat the likes of John Oliver, Van Jones, and the many liberal voices in the media and Hollywood.

These supporters say they treasure the Constitution, freedom, patriotism, and nationalism.

They despise the rise of social justice warriors, safe spaces, the modern feminism narrative, gender non-conformity, the perceived liberal-bias in the media, and feel exiled by not conforming to the rise of Bernie Sanders like many of their peers.

This rebellion from the mainstream is the exact vein that Donald Trump tapped into to win the 2016 Presidential Election.

Their stream-of-consciousness style connects with the silent majority in America that rebukes the scripted, robotic political styles of many mainstream politicians.

Despite the controversies, there is no denying that Yiannopoulos is a talented, research-driven debater, who’s witty attacks and ability to frazzle even the most composed opponents are perfect for an age of information driven by echo-chambering, 10 seconds videos, and memes on Facebook.

Milo’s recent misstep with pedophilia was drastic enough to be the final nail in the coffin of his “Dangerous” book deal from Simon & Schuster his invitation to CPAC and his career at Breitbart.

But based on the exemplified steadfast support he has continued to receive on social media, it is very unlikely that this ends the career of America’s most infamous provocateur.

RISE NEWS is a grassroots journalism news organization that is working to change the way young people become informed and engaged in the world. You can write for us.

Cover Photo Credit: OFFICIAL LEWEB PHOTOS/ Flickr (CC By 2.0)

Political Correctness Could Be Making Millennials More Conservative Than They Want To Be

On the Jan. 27 episode of HBO’s Real Time with Bill Maher, the eponymous host burst into a montage of situations where celebrities were forced to apologize for comments and actions which were viewed as being culturally insensitive.

He began by saying, “Republicans apologize for nothing, Democrats for everything. Can’t we find a balance?”.

Maher is absolutely right.

Political correctness has gone awry in America.

What was once believed to be an instrument to bring us all together, to blanket our society in expressions that brought the marginalized into the fold has only deepened the divide among liberals and conservatives.

It is also apparent that the 2016 election was the battlefield on which this separation raged on.

The main problem is the restriction on language that follows the insistence on political correctness, and college campuses have become its overwhelming stomping ground.

Political correctness places rules and procedures on the way we communicate, which is only to lead to a skewed and incomplete form of dialogue.

Currently, there are things that you can say, and things that you can’t.

Unfortunately, the things you can’t say haven’t been deemed incomprehensible through debate.

No, they have been shut out completely in an attempt to eradicate them forever.

Instead of having individuals discuss opposing opinions, one view tends to be accepted as fact and the other is pushed underground because the surface is now inhospitable to a civil disagreement.

If some views are incomprehensible, shouldn’t it be simple to defeat it in debate?

If so, why the need to stop the conversation instead of using it to prove the point?

We all know what some of these disavowed ideas are.

Have a not-so-liberal opinion on the transgender bathroom issue?

You’re transphobic.

Want a tightened immigration system?

Don’t talk to me you xenophobe.

Are you a big believer in capitalism?

It sucks that you hate working class people.

It’s a perfectly democratic notion to disagree with someone on political issues because the very nature of these questions show a lack of consensus.

Their elimination from civil discourse is tyrannical.

These responses, or ones with similar sentiments, have succeeded on campuses for a number of years.

However, I believe it has come back to haunt the liberal cause.

These politically correct attitudes have backed people into a corner and micromanaged them into submission.

This leaves them no political escape other than doing exactly what they were told not to do.

Photo Credit: Pug50/ Flickr (CC By 2.0)

We have all done things simply because we were warned against them and, at times, we have all wanted to be the person that is completely rebellious to a status quo we don’t like.

We listen to music that asserts no remorse for their honest lyrics, we watch movies in which recalcitrant characters are respected, and we look up to individuals who never change their resistance even with the strongest of winds in their face.

Yet, you may not express a politically incorrect opinion because you were told not to.

It’s quite obvious why our generation is splitting at the seams.

I can’t even count the amount of people I know that have rejected many a liberal cause not because they disagree with it, but because the way they felt forced into the belief.

Political correctness has stripped the human element from conversation.

Our conversations have become robotic, mechanical, hierarchical, something relegated to you at the permission of someone else.

People do not give their honest opinion because we have branded those that disagree with us as bigots, or ideologues, or fascists, or mentally ill.

This is where the difference Maher referred to becomes relevant. The two major parties differ on this topic in vast ways.

Donald Trump, whether you love him or think of him as an evil ruler, is clearly the antithesis to a politically correct way of speaking.

Other Republicans aren’t very cozy with it either.

To many average college students, the Democrats demand an apology before they seek safety for your family, a truthful media, or accountable governance.

To a rather aloof millennial, they very well may see Democrats as the party of political correctness.

Some of these young people found solace in a candidate like Trump. Not because they like him or his policies or what he speaks of, but because they saw the majority of elected Democrats and those running for office as the enforcers of this PC mindset they are disgusted by. A mindset that is omnipresent and affects them on a daily basis.

This drug was initially meant to numb the pain of the oppressed, which is an effort worth respect.

Unfortunately, it has done serious damage to the language we use to express ourselves.

Language is the waterway on which humans explore the unknown; it’s the mechanism from which society breathes.

The greatest conversations about life, religion, politics and love occur when, in that moment, our words have no filter.

It’s just your free flowing thoughts and emotion that unleash the truth.

People love Quentin Tarantino’s “Pulp Fiction” because it’s raw and unflinching.

We read Wilfred Owen’s “Dulce et Decorum est” because it is bold and shakes us to the core.

Honestly, how can you describe the horrors of the First World War while using a filter? You can’t.

The truth is ugly.

It stings, it’s chaotic, and at times makes us writhe.

But we won’t solve anything if we refuse to listen to other arguments.

It is how we find the truth.

Without it, who knows where it will lead.

For the time being, this is an issue met with warm applause and visceral condemnation, sending many into the ballot box aiming to remove it from their lives entirely.

RISE NEWS is a grassroots journalism news organization that is working to change the way young people become informed and engaged in the world. You can write for us.

Cover Photo Credit: Nicolas Raymond/Flickr (CC BY 2.0)

Scroll to top