A Yale psychiatrist and medical doctor joined MSNBC to recommend that liberals totally sever all ties with pro-Trump family members and refuse to see them on holidays. On Thursday’s episode of The ReidOut, host Joy Reid [...] The post Yale Psychiatrist Urges Liberals to Totally Sever Ties with Trump Voting Family Members appeared first on The People's Voice.

According to the Wall Street Journal, advisors to President-Elect Donald Trump are drawing up plans to carry out mass deportation. They want to begin with the 1.3 million here illegally who have had due process and deportation orders. Imagine that – 1.3 million that were ordered to leave and haven’t because of Democrat policies. They […] The post Mass Deportation Includes 1.3M Who Have Deportation Orders appeared first on www.independentsentinel.com.

Donald Trump. He’s back. After the most dramatic election cycle in modern American history, Trump won a sweeping victory, moving every single state in America in his direction from 2020. He didn’t just sweep the swing states. He lost New Jersey by only five points. He won Miami-Dade County in Florida—the first Republican presidential candidate to win the county since George H.W. Bush in 1988. He won 45% of the Hispanic vote. In several key swing states, he broke 40% with the Jewish vote. He won north of 20% of the black male vote. Trump grew his coalition in every single area. Across the board. So, what happened? The answer has two components: First, Trump. And second, the Democratic Party and its apparatchiks in the media. First, Trump. Trump is a unique figure. He was one of the most famous people on earth before he ever ran for president. This made him immune to attempts to characterize him in overwrought fashion. Nobody truly believed Donald Trump was Hitler; after his first term, there was literally zero evidence that he would ever be. Yet Democrats continued to treat Trump as a threat to the very fabric of the republic, a would-be dictator hell-bent on seizing power and wielding it against his enemies. The attack didn’t land Trump also has magnetic charisma. It’s a sort of charisma that many Americans don’t understand: He rambles, he jokes, he says silly things. But he is absolutely himself, 100% of the time. He is the most authentic political candidate of our lifetimes. Americans trust him, despite his penchant for exaggeration and tall tales, because they know him.  And what’s more, Trump knows them, too. Trump has an innate love for the American people. When he dons an apron at a McDonald’s and serves fries, he’s not doing that because he wants Americans to believe that he’s suddenly a blue-collar fry cook. It’s because he wants them to know he likes and respects them. And that he likes and respects their values. Which brings us to the Democratic Party and its propagandists in the media. The story of the 2024 election isn’t about Kamala Harris. She is a nothingburger. She always was. She was never “joy” or “brat.” She is a career politician who has never won a vote outside of California. She was slotted into Joe Biden‘s nomination because the sitting president physically expired on the debate stage. And she then proceeded to act as a fresh coat of paint on the battered jalopy of the Democratic Party record. Americans saw through it. What Americans saw, instead of her celebrity-flecked candidacy of pseudo-excitement, was yet another iteration of the Democratic Party’s playbook: transgressive values disconnected from the traditional family values Americans like; a peculiarly insular view of the economy that believes a government handout can make up for expensive groceries and declining prospects; an arrogance rooted in the supposed superiority of a pseudo-intellectual self-appointed nobility—a nobility that scorns achievement and innovation in the name of luxury beliefs; an anti-American sense of our country’s history and role in the world. Americans have been saddled with this Democratic playbook since the Obama era. And they hate it. That’s why Trump won in 2016. And it’s why Trump won again in 2024. Because while the Left likes to proclaim that Trump isn’t normal, the reality is that their agenda isn’t normal. The form of normality they cherish is deeply abnormal. It runs counter to American notions of virtue and individual freedom, of property rights and American exceptionalism. Slathering platitudinous nonsense on that abnormality doesn’t render it more normal; it just renders it more dishonest. And so the normies struck back. They said enough. They want the American dream:—Hispanics in south Texas and white Americans in northern Ohio and black voters in Wisconsin; Catholics and Protestants, Jews and Muslims. It turns out the American dream is still alive in the hearts of Americans. We want our share of that dream. Even more, we want to dream that dream together. That’s why Donald Trump is back. Because America is back. COPYRIGHT 2024 CREATORS.COM We publish a variety of perspectives. Nothing written here is to be construed as representing the views of The Daily Signal. The post Why Trump Won appeared first on The Daily Signal.

Pelosi: What, Me Worry?

Ivy League universities, particularly Harvard and Columbia, have faced a crisis since October 2023, when both institutions revealed themselves as places where blatant anti-Semitism openly flourishes. Amid the anti-Semitic uprisings on campus, the presidents of both schools also faced academic plagiarism charges. Alumni and donors, who expected more from the schools’ leaders and did not share the apparent tolerance for Jew-hatred, have stopped contributing financially.As reputational and financial damage mounted, Harvard President Claudine Gay resigned in disgrace last January, and Columbia President Minouche Shafik followed in August.Despite an endowment exceeding $50 billion, Harvard had to expedite bond offerings earlier this year to quickly raise $1.6 billion in cash. But with those poison Ivies still trying to find a way to balance a hollow commitment to “tolerance” with appeasement of the widespread anti-Semitism demanded by much of their faculty and student body, donors remain repelled, and fundraising continues to struggle.In early October, Harvard’s new president, Alan Garber, teased that some very bad financial news was about to be revealed for the fiscal year that ended on June 30, 2024. The Harvard Crimson reported Garber as stating, "Some of the new commitments have been disappointing compared to past years.” In discussing the passion of alumni who are concerned about the current culture and events at Harvard, Garber added, “They’ve been quite vocal.”The bad news came out a week later. The Harvard Crimson reported:Harvard’s fundraising crisis now has a price tag: $151 million. Total philanthropic contributions fell by 14 percent in fiscal year 2024 as several billionaire donors publicly severed ties with Harvard over its response to campus antisemitism. The $151 million decline marks one of the most significant year-over-year drops in donations in the past decade.The donor crisis at Columbia has worsened. The university held its annual Giving Day event this fall, but donations dropped 29% from the previous Giving Day in 2022. (Due to campus turmoil over the university community’s support of Hamas' October 2023 terror attack, there was no Giving Day in 2023.)The Columbia Spectator laid out the bad news:Columbia held its 12th annual Giving Day on Tuesday, raising a total of $21,362,592 after a one-year hiatus, a 28.8 percent decline in funds compared to 2022’s record-breaking year.As the University grapples with a donor crisis—born out of concerns regarding campus protests—this year saw a 27.9 percent drop in the number of gifts, falling from 19,229 in 2022 to 13,870, the lowest since 2015. This year is the first that the total monetary amount of donations has declined from the previous Giving Day since the event’s inception in 2012.Viewed over a two-year span, the situation at Columbia is simply catastrophic. The university raised $58 million combined in 2021 and 2022. But over 2023 and 2024, the combined total plummeted to just $21 million. The $38 million decrease in biennial giving represents a 64% decline.Amid declining contributions, it seems both schools are facing a liquidity squeeze.Despite an endowment exceeding $50 billion, Harvard had to expedite bond offerings earlier this year to quickly raise $1.6 billion in cash. The university raised $750 million in taxable bonds through Goldman Sachs and received approval from Massachusetts to issue up to $2 billion in state tax-exempt bonds. However, investor demand only supported $735 million of those state bonds, leaving Harvard more than $100 million short of its $1.6 billion goal.Having contributions fall off further in the meantime can’t be helping Harvard’s cash crunch.Published reports indicate that Harvard’s endowment is only about 20% in liquid assets (cash, stocks, bonds) with about 40% invested in private equity, about 30% in hedge funds, and 10% in real estate and other illiquid assets.Several months ago, billionaire Bill Ackman noted that Harvard’s budgeting and endowment management rely on certain assumptions about alumni donations. These assumptions didn’t account for the possibility of a donor revolt and the steep decline in current-year cash gifts. Ackman speculated that Harvard’s need for quick cash to make up for lost donations led to the recent bond offerings, especially given the current high-interest rate environment.Journalist Ira Stoll revealed that much of the cash Harvard raised was used to pay off maturing debt issued at lower interest rates and to roll over some short-term debt.I don’t know enough to question the legitimacy of Harvard’s illiquid investments, but it is reasonable to question the “investment strategy” of Harvard’s famous endowment if it is so illiquid that even with several years lead time to prepare for bond maturity, its other investment assets cannot get converted into cash to pay off maturing bonds, thus requiring new, higher-interest debt. If an investment cannot ultimately be converted to cash, how does it have a value?Columbia University also announced a few weeks ago that it too was hitting the bond market for a cash infusion. Columbia is seeking to raise about $500 million with this new debt, despite having an endowment valued at around $15 billion.The Ivy League schools, especially Harvard and Columbia, have exhausted their reputational capital, and now they are exhausting their working capital. They have shown themselves to be morally and ethically bankrupt. If their liquidity problems can’t be rectified, and if donors have permanently slashed their recurring cash lifelines, perhaps financial bankruptcy is also in the offing for Harvard and Columbia. It would be a long time coming.

RAGE ADDICTS: Jonathan Turley Explains Why the Left's Second Anti-Trump Resistance Movement Will FAIL

Take a Chill Pill: Joy Reid Tries Blaming Gen X for Trump, Gen X Responds as ONLY Gen X Can

Drunk on Grift? Why Many are Saying it's Time to Take Away Allan Lichtman's 'Keys'

Amanda Marcotte Predicts Rise of 'Gendered Violence' Following Trump Win