Democrats around the country are still licking their wounds after last month’s stinging election defeat — but the party might be sailing toward an even bigger iceberg.
New research from progressive polling outfit Navigator Research shows the party’s reputation is in tatters even among previous backers, who have come to view the Dems as weak, obsessed with “woke” initiatives such DEI and overly accommodating to the elites at the expense of the middle class.
Democratic voters are fed up with the party’s fixation on wokeness and abandonment of the middle class, new research shows.AFP via Getty Images
They’re “not a friend of the working class anymore,” a respondent wrote.
Navigator at one point asked participants to compare the Democratic Party to an animal.
One likened them to an ostrich because “they’ve got their heads in the sand and are absolutely committed to their own ideas, even when they’re failing,” said Politico, which first published details of the research.
Another person answered koalas, owing to the fact that the marsupials are “complacent and lazy about getting policy wins we really need.”
Rachel Russell, Navigator Research’s director of polling and analytics, said the findings represent “a pretty scathing rebuke” of the Democratic Party.
“This weakness they see, [Democrats] not getting things done, not being able to actually fight for people — is something that needs to be figured out,” Russell said.
“It might not be the message, it might be the policy. It might be something a little bit deeper that has to be addressed by the party.”
Some research participants said they felt Vice President Kamala Harris was too polished and on-script, which made them feel like she was disingenuous compared to the famously off-the-cuff President-elect Donald Trump.AFP via Getty Images
The research was conducted just after the 2024 election and included three distinct focus groups: young men in battleground states who voted Trump in 2020 but Biden this year; battleground state voters who backed Biden in 2020 but abstained from voting in 2024, and blue-state voters who previously backed Democrats — or third-party candidates — but supported Trump in November 2024.
“The elites that run the Democratic Party — I think they’re way too obsessed with appealing to these very far-left social progressivism that’s very popular on college campuses,” said a Georgia man, who backed Biden in the last election but went for Trump in 2024, to the outlet.
The poll’s participants also didn’t hold back with their criticism of Vice President Kamala Harris — who was abruptly named the party’s standard-bearer for 2024 after elderly President Biden was pushed to step aside by fellow Democrats.
Harris was abruptly named the party’s standard-bearer for 2024 after President Biden was pushed to step aside by fellow Democrats, a move that has since left some supporters with buyer’s remorse.Bloomberg via Getty Images
“It seemed like a lot of what she came out and said wasn’t really off-the-cuff, wasn’t coming from her,” said a man who switched his support from Biden in 2020 to Trump in 2024.
“Seemed like every interview, every time she came out and talked about something, it was planned out and never her thoughts, didn’t seem genuine to her thoughts,” he said, drawing a contrast with Trump’s famously improvisational style.
“Trump, even though you never really knew what he was going to say, when he was going to say it, it was always him and genuine to what he thought, so that’s what swayed me.”
A Wisconsin woman who said she didn’t vote at all in 2024 told the researchers that the Democrats’ embrace of fringe social issues were a turn-off to her.119
“I think that there needs to be some parameters on what’s accepted in society and what isn’t,” she said. “Some of the societal norms, and I think that the Democrats have tried to open that up a little too much.”
The moderator asked whether she was referring to issues around transgender Americans, to which she conceded, “primarily that.”
Since Harris’ resounding defeat at the polls, the idea of her running for governor of California has been floated in recent days, much to the consternation of many liberals.
Due to the unhappiness of the Democratic Party and the loss in the 2024 election, it might be a good time to include a GROSS NATIONAL HAPPINESS (GNH) poll to gauge the people and find out if they are improving as the country moves forward.
We do have a country that does measure happiness.
Bhutan is the only country in the world to officially measure national happiness. The index is known as GNH (Gross National Happiness). Rather than placing emphasis on GDP, Bhutan attempts to track the satisfaction of its population. The United Nations bought into the idea in 2011 and released the World Happiness Report in 2012.
The annual report uses Gallup data and ranks countries by factors such as social, health, and environmental wellness rather than just economic concerns.
Despite a focus on internal happiness, the Bhutanese government has been accused of numerous human rights violations against the ethnic minorities living there; many were forced out of the country or into refugee camps. The United States accepted 30,870 Bhutanese refugees between 2008 and 2010.
Where Is Bhutan?
Surrounded by the Himalayas, Bhutan is a small country sandwiched between India and Tibet, east of Nepal and north of Bangladesh.
Bhutan is considered to be part of South Asia and a destination of many travelers.
****
It is a good way to allow the folks to express their opinion whether or not they are happy with the government’s policies and also be a gauge to measure the temperature of the population.
People who curse lack the intelligence necessary to continue the conversation. The cursing is used to silence the subject matter. and, usually, the rest of the conversation.
Which in a normal conversation – is usually a “shock” to a normal person.
Some answers on how to deal with a person who resorts to profanity. Most business have a “no profanity” clause.
The Congress doesn’t have one? It is called “mutual” respect?
– “I understand you’re upset. Cursing at me will not help me fix your problem.”
– “I know this is frustrating. I am on your team here, and profanity isn’t going to help me help you.”
– “I have a hard time focusing when people are yelling at me. If you want my help, please lower your volume, or come back later once you’ve calmed down.”
The Dem’s seem to be speechless and are infected with Democrats/Kamala’s one word out of her salad plate. Instead of working with DOGE and helping to clean up the government they tried to destroy – the Dem’s are out of touch with the citizens.
Democrats aren’t fussing about President Trump and Elon Musk.
They’re cussing about President Trump and Elon Musk.
It’s customary for members of Congress to express their views on the president of the United States.
They may request a concrete step on domestic policy. A healthcare issue. Suggest an approach on dealing with China or the Middle East. Maybe an initiative to improve the economy, bolster jobs or increase productivity.
But congressional Democrats have very specific ideas about President Trump — and what should happen to him. And in some cases, Musk.
(Yep – ten years worth of wasted tax money and losing the 2024 election.)
“F— Donald Trump and Elon Musk,” said Rep. Mark Pocan, D-Wisc., at a Capitol Hill rally for the union which represents many federal employees.
(Was this lack of intelligence/knowledge on the subject matter – yep!)
Rep. Donald Norcross, D-N.J., spoke about working as a construction worker and electrician for the International Brotherhood of Electoral Workers in Atlantic City.
“We had a guy called Donald Trump. We fought with him for ten years,” said Norcross. “I’m from Jersey. So we speak a little differently. I say f— Trump!”
(This tells me they wasted ten years of our tax money – nothing smart here.)
Rep. Maxine Dexter, D-Ore., is a freshman and a pulmonologist.
“I don’t swear in public very well,” conceded Dexter.
But the congresswoman proved she could cuss like a sailor.
(Does that enhance her ability to sway anyone? How boring! No sign of intelligence.)
“We have to f— Trump!” fulminated Dexter.
(Just trying to get attention.)
It’s unclear what rubric Dexter relied on to judge if she swore “very well” or failed in her lexical mission. But just six weeks into her first term in Congress, Dexter had cussed out the president of the United States. It’s a feat her predecessor, former Rep. Earl Blumenauer, D-Ore., never matched in his nearly three decades in Congress.
Rep. Linda Sanchez, D-Calif., took a slightly different approach. She didn’t issue a verbal disposition to the president. She issued a slightly sanitized call to action.
“It’s time to push back on the bullies. Are you guys ready to fight? Let’s effing go!” yelled Sachez at the protest with federal employees.
Rep. Brendan Boyle, D-Penn., did not direct his obscenities at the president. Instead, Boyle was more general in his characterization about what has gone down during the first month of the Trump administration.
“I’m from the home of the Super Bowl champion Eagles,” bragged Boyle. “The great Super Bowl run was actually a welcome distraction for me and all of us in Philly from the sort of bulls— that’s been going on.”
Fly Eagles, fly.
But for the record, Boyle did not give the president the bird.
“Bulls—. Bulls—. That is why we’re here to fight them,” said Frost, focusing on Musk. “We can’t allow this unelected billionaire to come in and to eviscerate the things we fought so hard to get right. This isn’t about protecting the system.”
Son of a biscuit eater!
I don’t know where you went to school, but where I grew up in rural Ohio, a teacher might threaten to wash out a student’s mouth with soap if they used salty language. Hey. It was the 1970s. It’s unclear if there’s a remedy to pasteurize the vulgar language now directed toward the president from congressional Democrats.
But apparently to the Democrats, desperate times call for #*&@?+&! measures.
In fact, if Democrats kept a “swear jar,” it’s possible their regular contributions could offset some of the proposed cuts by DOGE.
Major League Baseball players returned to the diamond for an abbreviated season in the summer of 2020 — cut short by the pandemic. With no fans cheering and the games unfolding inside cavernous, empty stadiums, field microphones truly picked up the “sounds of the game.” The experience put an entirely new spin on “color commentary.”
Turns out there were more than just foul balls in the national pastime.
So for Democrats, perhaps cursing is the new vernacular. It may be helpful to let off steam. The language may rile up the base. It may even pep up a crowd of government workers who fear for their jobs under DOGE. Does it make a difference in the policy? Probably not. Does it persuade the president? No. Does it capture the attention of those aligned with President Trump — whom Democrats need to bring into their fray? Doubtful.
“We have to start liberating politicians to speak to the truth,” said former Democratic presidential candidate and Rep. Dean Phillips, D-Minn., on Fox.
Phillips just left Congress last month. Democrats are certainly speaking. It’s just unclear if their cussing boosts the message.
Or, is the swearing the message. It might underscore just how frustrated Democrats are with what President Trump is doing — to say nothing of the fact that he’s in office for a second term.
The language replicates what Democrats did in 2017 during Mr. Trump’s first term.
“We should go the f— home,” said Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, D-N.Y., eight years ago if Democrats weren’t tangibly helping people.
Granted, President Trump’s expletives shifted the political linguistic paradigm when he first campaigned in 2015 and 2016. A 2019 New York Times article referred to Mr. Trump as the “profanity President.” Part of the president’s political appeal was that he spoke “everyday” language. That resonated with large swaths of voters who wanted answers to their problems and were fatigued by sterilized bromides.
Clean language was usually the default of public officials until recent years. Now everyone seems to have a case of political potty mouth.
But politicians have long relied on expletives.
Former President Biden was captured on mics in a stage whisper when he leaned in to tell President Obama that passing Obamacare was “a big f—ing deal” in 2010.
In 2000, President George W. Bush spotted the late New York Times political reporter Adam Clymer in the crowd while campaigning in Naperville, Illnois. The future president observed to Cheney that Clymer was a “major league a–hole.”
So for now, Democrats are trying to calibrate their response to President Trump.
“We can’t always be at a 10,” said Rep. Jared Moskowitz, D-Fla. “We’re going to have to find degrees of outrage here.”
‘Vampires’ in Social Security data? Here’s what to know after Elon Musk claims SSA fraud
02/19/2025
My question – if the people are in the system who are over the age of probability (not alive) – are checks being printed for them? If so, where are the checks being sent and who is cashing them (slush fund in the government?) Otherwise, how are they being distinguished from actual living people? Confusing, if they are on the list and not receiving a check?
****
The Department of Government Efficiency has turned its attention to the Social Security Administration database after Elon Musk claimed that tens of millions of dead people are still collecting benefits.DOGE responded on Monday, saying it was “looking into this,” in reply to a Musk post on X Sunday that stated:
“According to the Social Security database, these are the numbers of people in each age bucket with the death field set to FALSE!” Musk’s post read with a screenshot of a spreadsheet. “Maybe Twilight is real and there are a lot of vampires collecting Social Security.”
Musk’s and DOGE’s efforts at the SSA come as they face pushback over concerns about their access to sensitive data at the SSA and other agencies, like the Internal Revenue Service and the Department of Education.
The issue of Social Security numbers belonging to people too old to be alive is not new and does not imply widespread fraud. A 2023 audit by the SSA Office of the Inspector General found that 18.9 million Social Security number holders born in 1920 or earlier were not marked as deceased, due to technological changes. However, most of these individuals were not receiving benefits.
Are there millions in the Social Security database aged 100-159?
Yes, but the SSA knows many are presumed dead, and close to none of them receive payments.
The SSA uses death reports from a number of sources to denote when a person with a Social Security number has died and adds the information to a “death master file,” according to the 2023 report. Versions of the death master file are also given to federal benefits agencies and financial institutions to prevent and spot fraud.
The 2023 review found that 18.9 million people born in 1920 or earlier had not been reported dead nor kicked over to the death master file. That accounted for about 3.6% of all the unique Social Security numbers ever made.
“We believe it likely SSA did not receive or record most of the 18.9 million individuals’ death information primarily because the individuals died decades ago − before the use of electronic death reporting,” the report stated.
However, “almost none” of the 18.9 million Social Security number holders born in 1920 or earlier were receiving SSA payments, the 2023 report said, noting there were about 44,000 who were still receiving payments at the time of the audit.
Social Security protocol halts payment at age 115
The agency’s lack of an automatic process to add people’s information to the death master file once they surpass a reasonable life expectancy age was also flagged in an inspector general report in 2015.
As of September 2015, the SSA began to automate terminating benefits once people reached age 115, according to the website.
Elon Musk, DOGE and Social Security: What to know
Musk’s DOGE has attempted to access sensitive information at several federal agencies. The acting commissioner of the SSA left over the weekend after DOGE attempted to access private information, USA TODAY reported.
“They suspect that there are tens of millions of deceased people receiving fraudulent Social Security payments,” she said. “Rest assured to all the people … if you paid into the system honestly you will continue to receive your Social Security checks.”
She accused the media of “fearmongering” and was adamant Musk’s reviews would not disrupt payments.
Contributing: Joey Garrison
Kinsey Crowley is a trending news reporter at USA TODAY. Reach her at kcrowley@gannett.com, and follow her on X and TikTok @kinseycrowley.
FOX News
kommonsentsjane 