The Democratic National Committee’s decision to nullify David Hogg’s election as its youngest vice chair arguably reeks of the same elitist meddling that has plagued the party for years.
Just 101 days after Hogg, the first "Zoomer" to hold the office, was elected to help Democrats reconnect with young male voters, the DNC declared his victory void, citing broken parliamentary rules, and the move exposes the party’s hypocrisy and its obsession with control over fairness, as Hayden Ludwig writes for RealClearPolitics.
Hogg’s election was meant to signal a shift toward engaging young men, a demographic the Democrats have struggled to retain. The DNC’s nullification, announced two days after Hogg criticized the party for alienating this group, suggests a deliberate effort to silence dissent. The party’s actions reveal a deeper pattern of manipulating internal processes to maintain power.
The DNC justified its decision by pointing to rules mandating "gender parity," which prioritize female candidates over males. This excuse, however, feels flimsy when viewed against the backdrop of Hogg’s outspoken critique of the party’s failures. It’s hard to see this as anything but a calculated move to protect the status quo, Ludwig argues.
Hogg didn’t hold back, accusing party elites of defending an “indefensible status quo.” He described young men in the Democratic Party as feeling like they must “walk on eggshells” to avoid being judged or ostracized. His words struck a nerve, and the DNC’s swift response suggests they weren’t ready to hear the truth.
“The DNC has pledged to remove me,” Hogg said, calling out the party’s plan to fast-track his ouster. The timing of the nullification, just two days after his public criticism, paints a picture of a party more interested in loyalty than reform. This isn’t about rules -- it’s about punishing a young leader who dared to speak up.
Hogg’s experience echoes historical instances of DNC election meddling, such as the use of superdelegates in 2016 and 2020 to tilt the nomination process against Bernie Sanders. The Vermont senator himself called out the “oligarchs and billionaires” who cost him those races, a sentiment that resonates with Hogg’s situation. The party’s playbook hasn’t changed: control the outcome, no matter the cost.
The DNC’s actions fit into a broader pattern of Democrats questioning election legitimacy only when it suits them. Congressional Democrats haven’t accepted a Republican presidential victory as legitimate since 1988. House Democrats even tried to nullify Republican wins in 2016 and 2024, branding them illegitimate.
Yet, when allegations of a stolen election surfaced in 2020, Democrats were quick to label them “misinformation.” This double standard exposes their selective outrage -- elections are only valid when they produce the “right” result. The DNC’s nullification of Hogg’s election is just the latest example of this mindset.
In 2024, leftists went so far as to try removing Donald Trump from ballots in several states, aiming for a one-party election. Despite their efforts, Trump secured a landslide victory, including a popular vote majority. The DNC’s willingness to bend rules internally mirrors these external attempts to manipulate democratic processes.
Democrats have pushed a “national popular vote” scheme to award all Electoral College votes to the candidate with the most nationwide votes. In 2016, this would have handed Hillary Clinton all 538 electoral votes, regardless of state outcomes. Michigan Democrats quietly abandoned this bill weeks after Trump’s 2024 popular vote win, proving their commitment to “fairness” is purely opportunistic.
Kamala Harris, a product of California’s one-party machine politics, never won a primary vote despite running in two presidential elections. Her campaigns, fueled by dark money from Big Business and Wall Street donors, highlight the DNC’s reliance on elite insiders. Harris’ rise through party connections, not merit, underscores the disconnect between the party’s base and its leadership, according to Ludwig.
The Democratic Party is run by a small clique of ultra-partisan activists, lobbyists, and operatives in Washington, D.C. These insiders prioritize power over principle, as seen in their treatment of Hogg and Sanders. Their grip on the party stifles any attempt at meaningful change.
Special interests are already organizing a second Trump “Resistance” to undermine his agenda following his 2024 victory. This effort, like the DNC’s internal machinations, aims to thwart the will of voters. The party’s refusal to accept defeat gracefully shows a disdain for the democratic process.
Ludwig argues that Hogg’s nullified election is a microcosm of the Democrats’ broader approach to power: control at all costs. By sidelining a young leader who sought to bridge gaps with voters, the DNC has doubled down on its elitist tendencies. America deserves better than a party that rigs its elections while preaching about democracy. The DNC’s treatment of Hogg proves that its commitment to fairness is a sham. Traditional values of hard work, merit, and accountability have no place in a party beholden to insiders and special interests.
A routine physical exam revealed a troubling health concern for former President Joe Biden, raising questions about his physical condition.
A small nodule was found in Biden's prostate, prompting immediate calls for further medical evaluation, and the discovery fuels ongoing concerns about the health of a man who led America through turbulent times, as ABC News reports.
Doctors discovered the prostate nodule during a standard checkup, as confirmed by a spokesperson on May 13. The finding demands additional testing to determine whether the nodule is benign or something more serious.
Such nodules can stem from simple inflammation or point to more serious conditions, according to medical experts. The uncertainty surrounding Biden’s health adds to public scrutiny of his past ability to endure the rigors of leadership. Americans deserve transparency when it comes to the well-being of their former leaders.
Biden’s medical history includes prior battles with skin cancer, which resurface in light of this new finding. Before taking office, he underwent Mohs surgery to remove several non-melanoma skin cancers. These procedures were successful, but they underscore a pattern of health concerns.
In February 2023, while still president, Biden had a cancerous lesion removed from his chest. A biopsy confirmed it as basal cell carcinoma, a common but serious form of skin cancer. White House physician Dr. Kevin O’Connor assured the public that all cancerous tissue was excised. “As expected, the biopsy confirmed that the small lesion was basal cell carcinoma,” O’Connor stated. “All cancerous tissue was successfully removed.”
The successful removal of the 2023 lesion provided temporary relief for Biden’s medical team. However, the recent prostate nodule discovery has reignited concerns about his physical resilience. Americans, particularly those who value strong leadership and candor with the public, are watching closely.
A spokesperson emphasized the need for additional review, stating, “In a routine physical exam a small nodule was found in the prostate which necessitated further evaluation.” This measured response does little to quell speculation about Biden’s overall health. The lack of immediate answers frustrates those who demand clarity from public figures.
Biden’s health has long been a topic of discussion, especially among hardworking Americans skeptical of elitist narratives. The former president’s physical condition, including a halting gait, has drawn attention in recent years. These observations have long fueled doubts about his capacity to lead effectively.
A new book, Original Sin, President Biden’s Decline, Its Cover-Up, and His Disastrous Choice to Run Again, by Jake Tapper and Alex Thompson, has intensified scrutiny. Published details, reported by Axios on May 13, claim that Biden’s physical decline was so severe that aides discussed wheelchair use. These allegations paint a stark picture of a leader struggling under the weight of age and responsibility.
“Biden’s physical deterioration -- most apparent in his halting walk -- had become so severe that there were internal discussions about putting the president in a wheelchair,” the book excerpt revealed. No action was taken, but the mere discussion raises alarms. Americans who prioritize strength and vitality in leadership find such reports deeply unsettling.
The former president's team has remained tight-lipped, with a spokesperson declining to address the book’s claims when pressed by ABC News. This silence only deepens skepticism among those who reject the polished narratives of Washington insiders. The working class, in particular, demands honesty over political spin.
Last week, Biden and former first lady Dr. Jill Biden appeared on ABC’s The View to counter claims about his health. Addressing allegations of cognitive decline, Biden dismissed them as baseless. “They are wrong. There’s nothing to sustain that,” he asserted, pushing back against critics.
Jill Biden echoed his defense, emphasizing his tireless work ethic. “One of the things I think is that the people who wrote those books were not in the White House with us,” she said. Her words reflect a broader frustration with media portrayals that clash with their reality.
Yet, for many Americans, these denials ring hollow against the backdrop of Biden’s visible struggles and the new prostate concern. The nodule discovery, reported by ABC News with contributions from Sony Salzman, underscores the need for vigilance. As Biden faces further tests, the nation watches, hoping for answers that align with the values of truth and resilience.
In a bold move to ease economic tensions, the U.S. and China have struck a deal to slash crippling tariffs, giving American workers and businesses a much-needed break.
On Monday, trade representatives from both the Trump administration and Beijing agreed to reduce tariffs from a punishing 125% to just 10% for 90 days, starting Wednesday, and this agreement, forged after intense negotiations in Switzerland, signals a rare moment of cooperation between the world’s economic giants, as CNBC reports.
The deal temporarily halts most tariffs on goods traded between the U.S. and China. It follows months of aggressive trade policies, including President Donald Trump’s imposition of tariffs as high as 145% on Chinese imports since January. China retaliated with its own measures, tightening restrictions on rare earth elements critical to American industries.
Negotiations took place over the weekend in Switzerland, where both sides committed to ongoing discussions. The 90-day tariff pause aims to stabilize markets and foster dialogue on broader economic policies. U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent praised the talks, noting the serene Lake Geneva setting helped create a productive atmosphere.
Financial markets roared in approval of the tariff suspension. Nasdaq futures surged 3.7%, while S&P 500 futures climbed 2.7%. The Dow jumped over 840 points, a 2% gain, reflecting investor confidence in the deal. Global markets also felt the ripple effects. The pan-European Stoxx 600 index rose about 1% during midmorning trading. Brent crude futures for July 2025 spiked 2.7% to $65.66 per barrel, and U.S. West Texas Intermediate futures gained 2.9% to $62.81 per barrel.
The ICE U.S. Dollar Index climbed 1.1% to 101.46, signaling strengthened economic optimism. This market rally underscores the deal’s immediate impact on global trade expectations. American small businesses, often hit hardest by tariff wars, stand to benefit from reduced costs.
Despite the progress, not all tariffs have been lifted. The U.S. will maintain 20% duties on Chinese imports linked to fentanyl, keeping total U.S. tariffs on China at 30%. This carve-out reflects ongoing concerns about national security and public health.
Critics warn the truce may be fragile. Mark Williams, chief Asia economist at Capital Economics, noted that U.S. tariffs on China remain higher than those on other nations. He cautioned that the 90-day window might not lead to a permanent resolution.
Williams also highlighted U.S. efforts to encourage other countries to restrict trade with China. Such moves could complicate future negotiations. The temporary nature of the deal leaves room for uncertainty, as both sides face pressure to deliver lasting results.
The 90-day period is a tight timeline for resolving deep-seated trade disputes. Tai Hui, APAC chief market strategist at J.P. Morgan Asset Management, said the pause reflects both nations’ recognition that tariffs harm global growth. He emphasized that negotiation is the smarter path forward.
However, Hui warned that 90 days may not suffice for a comprehensive agreement. The deadline keeps negotiators focused but raises the stakes for quick progress. American workers and consumers, weary of rising costs, hope for a more permanent solution.
Bessent described the agreement as a significant step, with both sides agreeing to drop reciprocal tariffs by 115%. He credited the calm Swiss setting for fostering productive dialogue. His optimism contrasts with skeptics who fear renewed tensions if talks falter.
This deal offers immediate relief to industries battered by high tariffs. Manufacturers, farmers, and small business owners can expect lower costs on imported goods, boosting competitiveness. The tariff reduction aligns with President Trump’s focus on protecting American jobs while confronting China’s trade practices.
Yet, the U.S. maintains a tougher stance on China than on other trading partners. This approach reflects a commitment to national sovereignty and economic strength, priorities that resonate with working-class Americans. The fentanyl-related tariffs underscore a refusal to compromise on critical issues.
For now, the tariff pause is a victory for common-sense trade policy. It buys time for negotiators to address complex issues without punishing businesses and consumers. As talks continue, Americans will watch closely, hoping for a deal that restores economic stability and puts the nation first.
