Login
FIRST ON THE DAILY SIGNAL—Why are Democrats wasting time plotting against a policy agenda called Project 2025 when Donald Trump has his own initiative, dubbed Agenda 47?
A woman raised this question in an online webinar hosted Friday by Georgia Democrats, shedding light on the problem with the Left’s obsession with Project 2025.
Project 2025 is the latest version of The Heritage Foundation’s presidential transition project, a guide to conservative policy solutions compiled and published by the think tank since before the 1980 election. More than 100 other conservative organizations participated this time.
“President Trump says he hasn’t read it,” Peggy Fenton, the Georgia woman, said of Project 2025 during the webinar. “So why are we spending time talking about things that are not on Agenda 47?”
Former President Donald Trump repeatedly has distanced himself from Project 2025.
“They’ve been told officially, legally, in every way, that we have nothing to do with Project 25,” Trump said of Democrats who use the Heritage-led initiative to attack him. “They know it, but they bring it up anyway. They bring up every single thing that you can bring up. Every one of them was false.”
Still, Democrats are holding webinars, lectures, and even a hearing on Project 2025.
In Georgia on Friday, Maya Carter and David Samuel led an information session on Project 2025, describing it in a slideshow as “the 922 Page Conservative Plan to Give Trump More Power Over Your Daily Life, Gut Democratic Checks and Balances, and Consolidate Power in the Oval Office.”
“It is taking control of our lives, our decisions, the way we associate,” Samuel said during the webinar.
When asked by Fenton why Democrats spend so much time criticizing Project 2025, Carter argued that Project 2025 and Agenda 47 are virtually the same.
“Agenda 47 is a dumbed-down version of Project 2025,” she said. “It’s got the same foundational blocks as Project 2025 has. It calls for an abortion ban, just like Project 2025 does.”
Fenton, however, interrupted Carter to point out an error in her claim.
“It doesn’t!” Fenton yelled, prompting Carter to walk back her claim that Project 2025 embraces a national abortion ban, albeit with another error.
“It [Project 2025] takes it back to the states, which in turn is an abortion ban by the federal government,” Carter said.
After the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade and returned decisions on abortion to the states, some states have decided to enact no restrictions on abortion while others passed laws limiting abortion or banning the procedure altogether.
Carter said Project 2025 marks a “radical change” in the conservative agenda, moving away from the principles on The Heritage Foundation’s website—including “individual liberty” and “free-market economics”—and toward “controlling the government in order to own everything, to decide everything, and to push forward the agenda of family first.”
“However, we’ve seen that the Republican Party isn’t necessarily the family-first party,” she said. “So their new agenda is just, it’s about greed.”
The Daily Signal sought comment from the organizers of the webinar and the Georgia Democratic Party, but received no reply by publication time.
“The Left is obsessed with Project 2025 because they know its ideas, which are open to any candidate, would provide for effective conservative policy changes and help to reform an unaccountable Washington, D.C., bureaucracy,” a spokesman for Project 2025 told The Daily Signal.
The post EXCLUSIVE: Democrats Struggle to Defend Obsession With Project 2025 appeared first on The Daily Signal.
Anyone who has been following singer Taylor Swift since 2020 should not be remotely surprised by her endorsing Kamala Harris for president on Tuesday night.
As much as some conservatives want to view Swift’s endorsement as an earth-shattering betrayal, they would do well not to look for validation in celebrity endorsements to begin with.
People on all positions on the political spectrum think being a conservative and being a “Swiftie” is oxymoronic. This week, friends and family have asked me if I would take down my Time magazine cover of Swift at my office (the one of her striking a pose donning her cat as a scarf), or if I would change my red-themed birthday party this month, inspired by Swift’s 2012 album “Red.”
As a proud conservative who has been a huge fan of Swift since 2017, I assure you both remain intact. And I’m not the only one.
The X account “Swifties for Trump,” which has more than 20,000 followers, wrote on Sept. 11, “Taylor Swift is not your average American. She doesn’t balance her checkbook.”
As most of you undoubtedly know by now, Taylor Swift endorsed Kamala Harris after last night's debate. We respect Taylor's right to voice her support for the candidate she feels best represents her vision of America, just as we respected her decision to support Joe Biden in 2020.…
— Swifties for Trump (@trumpswiftie) September 11, 2024
“The majority of us, however, live in a very different world than Taylor Swift. She can afford to vote on emotion and identity politics,” the account added.
Sounds reasonable enough. On the other hand, Elon Musk and other influencers have wasted no time roasting Miss Americana, a tactic I bet wins over precisely none of her fans.
Fine Taylor … you win … I will give you a child and guard your cats with my life
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) September 11, 2024
“You can kiss your sales from your Republican audience goodbye, Taylor,” podcaster Megyn Kelly said. “I hope you enjoyed them while you had them.”
Even as a conservative myself, I anticipate these attacks provide more ammunition for the mainstream media to mock conservatives as petty and hypocritical.
Those who are personally offended by Swift’s endorsement and call to boycott her music are about as tolerant as the NFL fans who want to cancel Kansas City Chiefs quarterback Patrick Mahomes’ wife, Brittany Mahomes, for liking pro-Trump comments on her Instagram.
No matter what you think of either lady, I assure you they are not losing sleep or money over your political views. Neither of them has to worry about making ends meet, yet calls to boycott Swift grow nonetheless.
I fear that the political ridicule of Swift and her fans will backfire, feeding the Left’s narrative that conservatives are hysterical, cat-lady-hating men who care more about fewer women deciding to have kids than looking out for their neighbors.
This may come as a surprise, as it goes against all social media users’ impulse to share secondary, out-of-context sound bites and shallow retweets that are at our fingertips.
Was I thrilled about Swift’s political post? No. Mostly because I am aware the singer’s massive influence may sadly be the deciding factor for some young voters of my generation, who are uninterested in how disastrous (yet innocuous-sounding) policies affect everyday Americans.
In my generation, liberal ideals usually face not even a smidgen of earnest debate in college classrooms, on hit TV shows, or on most popular influencers’ social media pages.
That said, everyone is entitled to his or her political opinion, and Swift’s politics have no influence on my being a fan of her music. Her views certainly haven’t kept me from being an admirer of her work ethic in a grueling industry.
Now, a more polite way of putting Musk and others’ message is “just stick to singing,” and I agree. Not just as a conservative skeptical of elitism, but as someone who doesn’t look to celebrities for political validation.
However, out-of-touch liberals in Hollywood who add activist roles to their bios are nothing new. For instance, I haven’t seen anyone object to watching “The Avengers” over Incredible Hulk actor Mark Ruffalo’s joyful tweets.
Join me on Sunday, 9/8 for Kamala-Con, a meeting of heroes from all universes. As Trump and his allies cast themselves as real-world villains, the heroes among us are fighting for a brighter, more just future. Join us at https://t.co/YN9GTqgKfL.
— Mark Ruffalo (@MarkRuffalo) August 30, 2024
Perhaps we can separate art from artist, enjoying entertainment made by those who do not share our political affiliations or beliefs. Most conservatives are used to that reality and are experienced in civil disagreement.
If conservatives supported only the entertainers they agreed with, they would have slim pickings on another level. Far slimmer than liberals will ever have.
Besides, the very mindset of aiming to end someone’s career over politics alone echoes the cancel culture that conservatives condemn.
If a singer has to agree with your politics for you to like them, that says more about you than it says about him or her.
As for me, I will continue to stream Swift’s music and celebrate my upcoming Swift-themed birthday party. And I intend to keep politics out of that celebration, if for just a few hours.
The post Despite Harris Endorsement, Conservative ‘Swifties’ Still Do Exist. Here’s Why. appeared first on The Daily Signal.
Rep. Bob Good, R-Va., will resign shortly as chairman of the House Freedom Caucus, a group of the chamber’s most conservative members, after losing his primary election.
Good told reporters Monday that he had submitted his resignation to the caucus board, but didn’t provide a timeline for his official resignation as chairman.
Sources familiar with the matter, however, told news outlets that Good’s resignation would become official by week’s end.
In June, Good lost his primary in Virginia’s 5th Congressional District to his challenger, state Sen. John McGuire.
McGuire had the endorsement of former President Donald Trump working on his behalf, as well as the political apparatus of former House Speaker Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif.
The challenger had a 374-vote lead over Good before the primary headed for a recount. That recount solidified McGuire’s victory in early August.
Good attempted to fend off the influence of Trump and McCarthy in the primary. He found himself on Trump’s bad side because, before endorsing Trump, he supported Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis in the GOP presidential primary. Good was also one of the House members who voted to oust McCarthy as speaker last October.
In the coming weeks, the House Freedom Caucus will decide who will become Good’s successor as chairman. With the caucus looking to expand its membership after contested House races throughout the country in the Nov. 5 election, it seems likely that members will move quickly on appointing a new leader, at least on an interim basis.
Recent reports suggest that Reps. Andy Biggs, R-Ariz., and Andy Harris, R-Md., are on the short list to replace Good as chairman of the caucus.
This is a developing story and may be updated.
The post Bob Good to Resign as House Freedom Caucus Chair appeared first on The Daily Signal.
DAILY CALLER NEWS FOUNDATION—YouTube terminated the accounts of a conservative influencer and her media company Thursday evening, one day after the Justice Department indicated the company was tied to a Russian scheme to influence the 2024 election.
The accounts for Tenet Media and Lauren Chen were removed one day after Attorney General Merrick Garland held a press conference announcing an indictment of two Russians in an alleged scheme to influence the 2024 election. A note on Tenet Media’s channel states that it “violated our Community Guidelines” and Chen’s personal account on the Google-owned video site was listed as “not available” Friday morning.
The Justice Department claimed that individuals tied to Russian media outlet RT provided $10 million to promote accounts at a U.S.-based media outlet that had only 16 million views across 2,000 videos. The Justice Department did not name Tenet, but multiple news outlets have confirmed it was the company named in the indictment.
Tenet Media’s talent includes podcasters Tim Pool, Benny Johnson, Dave Rubin, and Lauren Southern, according to its website. The personal YouTube pages for Rubin, Johnson, Pool, and Southern were still available Friday.
The DOJ’s assertions in the indictment have been viewed skeptically by some conservatives, who noted the claims that Russia colluded with former President Donald Trump during his successful 2016 campaign for the White House. The Steele Dossier, which was used to further allegations of collusion, was later discredited.
Across the corporate media everyone's claiming Russia's funding conservative influencers to help Trump in 2024. Their chief culprit is the founder of Tenet Media, Lauren Chen, who received money from RT-linked individuals in 2023. But if that were true, why does almost everything… pic.twitter.com/7OTzMQLOYL
— Tom Elliott (@tomselliott) September 6, 2024
YouTube confirmed its action in a statement to the Daily Caller News Foundation.
“Following an indictment from the US Department of Justice and after careful review, we are terminating the Tenet Media channel and four channels operated by its owner Lauren Chen as part of our ongoing efforts to combat coordinated influence operations,” a spokesperson for YouTube told the Daily Caller News Foundation.
Chen and Tenet Media did not immediately respond to requests for comment from the Daily Caller News Foundation.
Originally published by the Daily Caller News Foundation
The post Conservative YouTube Accounts Terminated Over Fear of Russian Influence appeared first on The Daily Signal.
Vaunce News 
