US GOVERNMENT SHUTDOWN ENDS AFTER DEMOCRATS TAKE A STAND, THEN CONCEDE THEIR DEMANDS

by Nicholas Patti

November 14, 2025, Wake Forest, NC—As the longest US government shutdown dragged on for weeks upon weeks, costs mounted. Millions of airline passengers faced delays and cancellations ahead of the upcoming Thanksgiving holiday and travel rush. Food stamps for 42 million hungry Americans were at risk of not being paid. Hundreds of thousands of federal workers were seeing paycheck after paycheck of zero pay. In the national, off-year, local elections on November 4^th, 2025, Democrats punished Republicans at the polls with an electoral sweep. Apparently, voters blamed Republicans more than Democrats for the shutdown.

Then, a compromise emerged, and the shutdown came to an end. Eight Senate Democrats, including one independent, conceded the Democratic demand of funding for the expiring Obamacare premium subsidies. They were offered a vote on the issue on the Senate floor, sometime in December. Republicans achieved exactly the 60-vote threshold they needed to pass a new temporary funding bill in the Senate, and finally, after all that pain, suffering, and hardship for the American people, Congress was on-track to end the shutdown. The shutdown ended November 12^th, 2025, after the US House passed the legislation, and President Donald Trump signed it into law that very night. The shutdown had lasted 43 days, the longest in US history, and it was finally over.

In this essay, I will ask the critical question, for Democrats, was the shutdown worth it? Was the shutdown a good political ploy for their party, and did it achieve any policy goals? For the Republicans, I will inquire as to whether the outcome of the shutdown vindicated their position from the beginning, and did they win or lose, politically, after all was said and done? I will examine their claim, oft-repeated, that immigrants were to blame for the shutdown. I will respond to the language Republicans used in making this argument about the immigrants and the shutdown. I will consider who was to blame for the shutdown, Democrats or Republicans, after weeks of finger-pointing and blame, back-and-forth, as the shutdown dragged on. Finally, I will conclude with an answer to the question, was it worth it, ultimately, for the Democrats to take a stand against President Trump and the Republicans in Congress, and to shut down the government with their votes. Were the moderate Democrats right in crossing party lines to end the shutdown, or should they have held with the progressives and the majority of the Democratic Party to vote to keep the shutdown open, and the government closed, despite all of the pain felt by the American people? As they did in fact vote to end the shutdown, was this strategy worth it for the Democrats?

After the Republicans gained the 60 votes needed to end the shutdown without making any concessions on extending the subsidies for the Affordable Care Act insurance premiums, they claimed victory. In fact, they argued that the outcome vindicated their position from the very beginning of the shutdown. If the Democrats had voted that way six weeks ago, they could have spared the American people all the pain and suffering of the shutdown, in the first place. In this view, Republicans argued, the shutdown represented an extreme act of bad government and poor policy-making by the Democratic Party. However, Democrats placed the blame for the shutdown back on Republicans. Democrats pointed out that the Republican Party controls both houses of the US Congress and the Presidency, and that the responsibility rested with Republicans to pass legislation, and to open or close the government. As to the Democratic votes on the filibuster in the Senate, the Democrats argued that Republicans refused to negotiate with them at all on the issue of the Obamacare subsidies, and that therefore, the Republicans were to blame. As it turned out, the Republicans never conceded on that issue. Ultimately, the eight Democrats, including one independent, who voted with Republicans to re-open the government, gave up on negotiating with Republicans. In the words of Senator Angus King, independent of Maine, further negotiations with the Republicans on that issue would have been fruitless, since the Republicans were not budging on the issue. I agree that holding out longer for a concession from the Republicans on the Obamacare subsidies would have been pointless. Thus, it did prove to be that the Republican refusal to negotiate caused the Democrats to fail to reach an agreement with Republicans to re-open the government, and ultimately, that same Republican refusal to negotiate caused moderate Democrats to fold, ultimately, and to vote with Republicans to re-open the government. The pain experienced by the American people had grown too great, and it became time to re-open the government.

I believe that there was good reason for the Democrats to begin with a strong attempt at gaining the concessions on the Affordable Care Act from the Republicans, even if that Democratic effort proved fruitless, in the end. I think the Republican position from the beginning was not vindicated by the final outcome on the premium subsidies; the Democrats were justified in trying, even if they ultimately failed to win that outcome in the end in the Senate. It should be noted, however, that Republicans did promise to hold a vote on the Affordable Care Act subsidies by mid-December in the Senate. Moderate Democrats pointed to that concession as an opportunity to hold individual Republican senators accountable for their position for or against the skyrocketing premiums and the subsidies next year in the 2026 mid-term elections. Moderate Democrats plan to press the affordability issue in the mid-terms next year, if Republicans vote to end the subsidies. That vote in the Senate is expected to fail, as the Republicans have shown no interest in extending those subsidies, and the Republicans hold the majority. Democrats did win the ability to put individual Republican senators on-the-record, however, and build for a Democratic victory in the mid-terms (CNN, 11/9/2025; “Senate moves toward ending shutdown after Democratic defectors relent,” News & Observer, Raleigh, NC, digital edition, 11/10/2025; “US Senate compromise sets stage for end to government shutdown,” myEarthlink news, on-line, 11/10/2025).

The next question that arises, naturally, is, did the Republicans win or lose the shutdown, practically, in terms of policy, and politically. It is clear to me that the Republicans did win the shutdown, strictly in terms of policy. As I said above, the Republicans never conceded the Democrats’ primary demand, namely, extending the Obamacare health care subsidies. The moderate Democrats ended up conceding the issue to the Republicans, largely, and so the Republicans did “win” the shutdown. It should be noted, however, that the majority of Democrats voted against re-opening the government, in the end. Also, the Senate Minority Leader, Democrat Chuck Schumer, did vote against re-opening the government, as well. The Republicans only needed eight Democratic votes to win in the Senate, however, and the Republicans, ultimately, found those votes.

Politically, however, I think it is a different story. I think Democrats fared far better than Republicans, politically speaking. Polls showed the American people blaming the Republicans slightly more than the Democrats, 50% to Republicans, vs. 43% to Democrats, in one poll (Reuters/Ipsos, late October, myEarthlink, on-line, 11/10/2025). In the election, however, the story was clearer. There, in the national, off-year elections of November 4^th, Democrats destroyed the Republicans. Democrats won the Governors of New Jersey and Virginia by wide margins, as well as electing a Democratic Party socialist mayor of New York City. In California, Prop 50 to redraw the legislative districts to favor Democrats in that state also passed. Democrats won every single significant electoral plum up for grabs in that national election, and by wide margins in New Jersey and Virginia.

U.S. Congress, Washington, DC
© Alisonh29 | http://www.stockfreeimages.com

Even President Trump admitted defeat in that election. President Trump attributed the Republican losses in the election, in part, to the shutdown. He believed that the voters blamed the Republicans more for the shutdown than the Democrats. That blame game cost the Republicans at the polls, according to Trump. Also, President Trump claimed that the other reason the Republicans lost that election was that President Trump, himself, was not on the ballot. The election showed a clear Republican political loss, stemming from the shutdown.

Having said that, I would like to point out that achieving a policy victory, as the Republicans did in the end, is always a plus, politically. The policy victory from the shutdown was a political win for President Trump and the Republican Party. It can only be a mixed bag for the Republicans, however, in sum, since they performed so poorly, in fact, in the election, held near the end of the shutdown. What is more, depending on how Congress acts on the Affordable Care Act subsidies over the next year, the policy win could be very short-lived: Democrats can win on that issue, highlighting the affordability issue, heading into next year’s mid-terms. Control of Congress is at stake, then.

Next up is the question of the immigrants and the shutdown. Republican leadership claimed, repeatedly, that the Democratic position was to try to spend $1.5 trillion to fund illegal immigrants to receive public health benefits. That was the reason the Democrats shut down the government, in this Republican misrepresentation of the Democrats position. The Democratic response, spoken by Senator Chuck Schumer, was that that claim was blatantly false. The Democrats were not fighting for free health care for immigrants who are here illegally. Schumer pointed out that none of the recipients of the Affordable Care Act subsidies are illegal immigrants. They are not eligible to receive this benefit in the first place, according to Schumer. The issue for the Democrats was not the inclusion of immigrants who are here illegally, but rather the extension of the premium subsidies, themselves, for the millions of Americans who are already receiving them. I agree with Senator Chuck Schumer. The immigrants were not the issue (CNN).

I have a note on the language Republicans used in making this argument about the immigrants’ blame for the shutdown. President Trump and the House Speaker, Republican Mike Johnson referred to the immigrants as simply “illegals” or “illegal aliens” (CNN). This is a slur against these people. This language defines this whole group of people, and each person within that group, solely by their immigration status. I can counter this language by recalling a slogan I heard at a pro-immigrant rights rally in New York City, several years ago. The chant was, “No One Is Illegal!”

Now, on to the questions for the Democrats. First, was the shutdown a good strategy for the Democrats, politically? I discussed the election results, earlier in this essay. Democrats won at the ballot-box this year. On the question of the upcoming mid-terms, next year, Democrats cannot claim a policy victory on extending the Affordable Care Act subsidies this year. If the Republicans fail to extend the subsidies later this year, and next year, then the Democrats can hold the Republicans in Congress accountable for the spiking costs of health care under the Affordable Care Act. In the US Senate, the Democrats won a vote on the issue, this December. Those senators can be held personally responsible for their votes, when next year’s mid-term elections roll around. Thus, while Democrats cannot claim a direct policy victory out of this shutdown exercise, they can hold Republicans accountable in next year’s mid-terms.

Should the moderate Democrats have broken with the rest of their party and voted with Republicans to re-open the government, or should they have held out for another chance to sway the Republican majority into extending the subsidies? The refrain for the moderate Democrats who voted this way, in the end, was that the costs of the shutdown grew too painful for the American people to hold out any longer. The benefit of extending the subsidies was out of reach, given the Republican intransigence, and causing more pain for the American people would be pointless. I agree. I break with the progressives in the Democratic Party who blamed the moderates for voting this way, and Senator Chuck Schumer, for failing to hold the party together in opposition to voting to re-open the government. Progressives blamed Chuck Schumer for the moderate Democratic votes even though Schumer himself voted against the compromise to re-open the government. I think this blame is misplaced. Also, with millions of Americans potentially going hungry with the SNAP benefit cuts, the millions of air travelers stuck in US airports and going nowhere, and the hundreds of thousands of federal employees going more than six weeks without pay, I think the costs of the shutdown were mounting. I agree with the moderate Democrats that the costs became too great for the American people. While I support the Democratic effort to obtain those health care subsidies in the first place, I think that, eventually, the costs became too great to carry on the fight any longer. It only made sense, to me, to re-open the government, at that point.

In sum, was the government shutdown worth it for the Democrats to have waged, in the first place? Was it worth it for the Democrats to take a stand against President Donald Trump and the Republican party that controls all three branches of the federal government, and in particular, the Congress, at this time? My answer is yes, it was worth it. After the passage of the so-called Big Beautiful Bill in Congress, into law, last summer, the shutdown was worth it. That legislation slashed over $1 trillion dollars from Medicaid and food stamps, aside from this shutdown. On top of that, the Affordable Care Act subsidies are expiring this year. In addition to the previous cuts, millions of Americans would see their health care premiums skyrocketing under Obamacare, this year. Republicans had been attacking the Affordable Care Act for over ten years, and now, with majorities in both houses of Congress, they are defunding it. It could be argued that it was critical for the Democrats to take a stand on this issue, alone, at this time. Democrats argued that these shutdown votes on the so-called “clean CR” put forward by the Republicans was their only leverage in the federal government, at this time, and the Democrats were right.

I applaud the Democrats for taking a stand, in the first place, and I applaud the moderate Democrats for having the common sense to vote to re-open the government, after the shutdown became the longest in US history, and the costs to the American people just became too great.

Although the Democratic Party is divided on ending the shutdown, the way it worked out may benefit the Democrats, as a whole, politically. First, Democrats took a stand, as their base was demanding, especially after all of President Trump’s victories this year. Second, in the national election on November 4^th, near the end of the shutdown, as the costs were mounting on the American people, the Democrats clobbered the Republicans, nationally. Next, since the government re-opened, the Democrats would not be blamed for keeping the government closed as the pain was mounting on the American people. Moderate Democrats deserve credit for this decision. Finally, leading up to next year’s mid-term election, Democrats can hold Republicans accountable for spiking health care costs on the issue of affordability. Affordability was a key issue in this year’s elections. It will probably remain an issue into next year’s midterms. If the Republicans fail to extend the Obamacare subsidies, or fail to come up with some other solution to the rising health care costs for Americans under the Affordable Care Act, then Democrats can clobber the Republicans again next year in the mid-terms on the issue of affordability, in general.

As the shutdown turned out, the political winds can favor the Democrats, significantly, heading into next year’s mid-terms. All the Democrats need to do is to play their cards right, from here on out. In conclusion, the Democrats needed to take a stand, and they were right in taking this stand. By conceding the shutdown, in the end, the Democrats, and in particular, the moderate Democrats, deserve credit for bringing us all out of this mess. Simply put, the shutdown had grown too costly to continue any further. Yes, the shutdown was worth it for the Democrats. If they play their cards right from here on out, the shutdown will have been worth it, politically, as well, for the Democrats, heading into next year’s mid-term elections.

—Nicholas Patti

Wake Forest, NC

USA

Additional Sources:

CNN, television, 11/9/2025, 11/12/2025, October, November, 2025; radio, SiriusXM, 10/25, 11/25.

News and Observer, Raleigh, NC: “Congress votes to end shutdown as NC Dem breaks with party in vote for bill,” 11/13/2025, digital edition, newsobserver.com; “Senate moves toward ending shutdown after Democratic defectors relent,” 11/10/2025, digital edition, newsobserver.com.

New York Times, New York, NY: “Food Aid Halt Shatters Faith in Safety Net,” 11/13/2025, p. A1, print edition.

myEarthlink news, on-line: “US government opens back up but deep political divisions remain,” Reuters, 11/13/2025; “US Senate compromise sets stage for end to government shutdown,” 11/10/2025.

WRAL news, WRAL, WRAL+, Raleigh, NC, 2025, NBC, television news.

ABC news, 2025, television

HOPE FOR DEMOCRATS FROM NORTH CAROLINA

March 27, 2025, Wake Forest, NC—Coming out of last Fall’s national election, Democrats can find hope at the state level, including North Carolina. In particular, Democratic NC Governor Josh Stein was elected and is starting his first term, and Democratic NC Attorney General Jeff Jackson won and has since assumed some influence in national politics. The federal level is dominated by Republicans and US President Donald Trump, who began his second term with a whirlwind of executive orders taken right from Project 2025, a far-right, reactionary policy platform that President Trump completely denied any connection to during his election campaign last year.

At the state level, here in North Carolina, however, we now have a sense of where incoming Democratic Governor Josh Stein is taking his first term. In addition, we see how the newly-elected Democratic Attorney General Jeff Jackson is challenging the Trump administration in federal courts to help stall Trump’s reactionary political agenda. In particular, Jackson has enjoined the State of North Carolina to several federal lawsuits countering Trump’s agenda, including specifically, a lawsuit countering an effort by President Trump to amend the US constitution by executive order on the issue of birthright citizenship for children of immigrants.

On day one of President Donald Trump’s second term, he signed an executive order ending birthright citizenship for children of immigrants. Immediately thereafter, several Democratic-leaning states challenged his order in court with a federal lawsuit. In North Carolina, a purple state, newly-elected, Democratic NC Attorney General Jeff Jackson joined those lawsuits. Referring to the Fourteenth Amendment, ratified in 1868, which enshrines citizenship as a constitutional right for all children born in America, Jackson was quoted as saying, “The Constitution leaves no room for executive reinterpretation on this matter—it is clear, settled, and binding. This order seeks to undermine that clarity, creating legal uncertainty and denying fundamental rights to children born in this country” (News & Observer, on-line, newsobserver.com, 1/21/2025; News & Observer, on-line, newsobserver.com, 3/14/2025).

Specifically, President Trump’s order would bar citizenship to any children born in the United States to parents without at least one parent being a citizen or legal permanent resident. Birthright citizenship has been recognized as an established legal right for the children of immigrants in America since the law was upheld by the US Supreme Court in 1898 in the case, United States v. Wong Kim Ark (News & Observer, on-line, newsobserver.com, 1/21/2025). Donald Trump’s executive order would deny this constitutional right and overturn over a century of US legal precedent.

I think President Trump’s executive order would deny a large part of who we are as Americans. While I acknowledge that cracking down on immigration was a central plank of Trump’s election campaign last year, I think we, as Americans, are still a nation of immigrants. The Statue of Liberty in New York Harbor attests to this aspect of American life, in the famous inscription on the statue: “Give me your tired, your poor, Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free.” Donald Trump misunderstood this message; he follows the old joke, instead: “Regarding your poor, your tired, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free. Send them my regards.”

As Americans, we must oppose this rights-grab by executive order by Donald Trump. I support North Carolina AG Jeff Jackson’s legal effort, with the 17 other states enjoined to the lawsuit, to overturn this executive order.

The current status of this executive order is that it has been suspended by the federal courts. It will be heard, ultimately, by the US Supreme Court, which will rule on the matter. I can hardly believe that President Trump is attempting to amend the US Constitution by executive order, as affirmed by the US Supreme Court. Last I checked, there exists a drawn-out process for amending the US constitution, which President Trump lacks the political support to achieve in the US Congress or in ¾ of the State legislatures. I only hope that level heads prevail at the US Supreme Court, and the Court chooses not to overturn this basic right for Americans, and not to overturn more than one century of legal precedent in this country.

Our Democratic party hero in North Carolina, NC Attorney General Jeff Jackson, is not entirely in the clear on this lawsuit in North Carolina, however. The Republican majorities in both houses of the NC State legislature have introduced bills to remove his authority to file any lawsuit against the Trump administration in Washington. North Carolina is, of course, a purple state. On March 11, the NC Senate passed a version of this bill. It all comes down to one vote in the NC House. In the NC House, Republicans fall one vote short of a supermajority needed to override the Governor’s veto. If the NC House passes this bill in the near future, as I expect it will, the question becomes, will the Governor veto it? The newly-elected Democratic Governor, NC’s Josh Stein, I believe will probably veto the legislation, I hope. If Gov. Stein vetoes the bills, then it all comes down to one vote in the NC House, on whether the Republican-led legislature can override that veto. If so, then North Carolina would be removed from that federal lawsuit. If not, then NC AG Jeff Jackson can continue to be the Democratic hero from the State of North Carolina that he is now. Jackson could continue to defend our basic rights as Americans from his perch as AG in North Carolina. I hope Jackson will be able to remain a party to his federal lawsuits, including this one, and will be allowed to continue to challenge the Trump administration in court. North Carolina is a purple state, and the battle in North Carolina will be close (News & Observer, 3/23/2025, p. 19A, print edition; News & Observer, on-line, newsobserver.com, 3/14/2025).

This political battle highlights how important in North Carolina the recent election of NC Governor Josh Stein, a Democrat, is, in addition to the election of the Democratic Attorney General. Without Josh Stein, a Democrat, in the Governor’s office, the Republicans would be able to easily block Jeff Jackson from entering this and other federal lawsuits. That is the glimmer of hope for Democrats in the recent national election in the State of North Carolina.

Now, we are seeing how incoming Democratic Governor Josh Stein’s first term is looking, on its own terms, as well. Josh Stein’s first priority was not Washington, in fact, but North Carolina. Stein’s top priority was rebuilding Western North Carolina after the damage wrought by Hurricane Helene. To that end, Stein signed his first piece of legislation into law, working with the Republicans in the State legislature, last week. That state law provides the fourth round of state funding for recovery from Hurricane Helene. Providing funds for recovery to Western North Carolina remains Gov. Josh Stein’s top priority, and he receives largely bi-partisan support on the issue (News & Observer, 3/23/2025, p. 19A, print edition).

On Wednesday, March 19, Governor Stein presented his first budget to the NC General Assembly and the public at-large. Stein found some agreement and some disagreement on various issues within North Carolina from the Republicans who lead both houses of the State Assembly. On the famous Democratic Party issue of teacher pay, going back to the former NC Governor, Democrat Roy Cooper, Stein has found agreement from NC Republicans. Stein wishes to raise starting teacher pay to $53,000 by 2027, according to Dawn Baumgartner Vaughan, writing in the News & Observer (3/23/2025, p. 19A, print edition). Stein wants North Carolina to be “the highest in the Southeast.” Similarly, Republican NC House Speaker Destin Hall was quoted as saying in the News & Observer that he wants North Carolina to be “as highly ranked in the South as we can be” (3/23/2025, p. 19A, print edition). I hope Stein and the Republican leadership in North Carolina can make significant headway in raising teacher pay in North Carolina.

Gov. Stein and Republicans in North Carolina disagree on private school vouchers, state income taxes, and a statewide school bond issue. Gov. Stein has also drawn attention to the federal effort in Congress by Republican leadership there to cut Medicaid funding. If the federal government cuts Medicaid by $880 billion, then North Carolina would see its Medicaid expansion evaporate. This issue took ten years of wrangling to adopt in North Carolina, and it would be gone in a breath, if Republicans in the US Congress slash the program. NC Gov. Stein mentioned this in his first State of the State address earlier this year, but has not made it an issue otherwise in North Carolina, at this time.

Governor Josh Stein’s first term is coming into vision, now that his first proposed budget has been released. We are looking at June for the NC legislature to pass its budget, and then send the budget to Gov. Stein for his signature. This timeline is only tentative, I should note, however, since the Republicans in the NC state legislature have been known to disagree with themselves, and pass extremely late budgets, in the recent past. In any case, business in North Carolina this year seems to be proceeding at a regular pace, under Governor Josh Stein and the Republican legislature, with or without US President Donald Trump.

That being said, Democrats are lucky to have elected their own party in the Governor’s office and the NC Attorney General’s office this past year. The Democrats in the executive branch of North Carolina are currently able to provide a counter-weight to President Donald Trump’s reactionary agenda in Washington this year. North Carolina remains a purple state, but the Democrats here will not remain silent.

On the issue of birthright citizenship, for example, as currently guaranteed in the US Constitution, Democrats in North Carolina have joined the fight against President Trump. Time will tell whether NC Attorney General Jeff Jackson will be able to stay in this court battle, and time will tell how much of President Donald Trump’s agenda will stand or fall in the halls and the courts of Washington, DC. I hope we can block Trump’s reactionary agenda.

—Nicholas Patti

Wake Forest, NC

USA

Additional Sources:

News and Observer, Raleigh, NC: 3/23/2025, p. 19A, print edition; 1/21/2025, on-line, newsobserver.com; “Will the Supreme Court Overturn Birthright Citizenship? What to know,” 3/14/2025, on-line, newsobserver.com; 2/27/2025, on-line, newsobserver.com; “NC Republicans move fast on DOGE, DEI, Helene, immigration. How 2025 session is playing out,” 3/14/2025, on-line, newsobserver.com.

WRAL news, WRAL, WRAL+, Raleigh, NC, 2025, NBC, television news.

CNN, 2025.

ABC news, 2025, television news.

CONGRATULATIONS TO PRESIDENT-ELECT DONALD TRUMP, WHAT WENT WRONG FOR KAMALA HARRIS?

by Nicholas Patti

November 6, 2024, Wake Forest, NC—If anyone deserves to serve a second term as U.S. President, that person is Donald Trump. He never stopped fighting for it, facing considerable obstacles and overcoming numerous significant personal challenges. I congratulate him on his victory. He earned it, more than anyone else, after all.

That said, his victory in the electoral college, and so far, in the popular vote, as well, has left Vice President Kamala Harris supporters like myself wondering, what happened (Wolf Blitzer, CNN, 11/6/2024)? Wasn’t there supposed to be a so-called “blue wall” of three states that would tilt, reliably, toward the Democrats? Was it merely a glass ceiling among these and other voters around the country that could not support a woman in a leadership role, again (re: Hillary Clinton’s loss in 2016)? What exactly went wrong for Kamala Harris with the American electorate? I have some thoughts.

Finally, I should note that while I congratulate President-elect Donald Trump on his victory in this national presidential election, I continue to have very different politics than he does. I am a democratic socialist, locally and globally, and he is something of a nationalist. I supported Kamala Harris because she is closer to my politics, and because she had the message of looking forward to a better future in America, which is an idea that is closer to the socialist, utopian dream. That dream is for a better world, here on Earth, in the future that we make for ourselves, collectively. That dream has been attempted on Earth in recent history, but has yet to be attempted or achieved on a global scale, and never in the United States. When state socialism fails in one country or another in line with global capitalism or militarily beset against it, people write off the entire idea of socialism. I do not. I believe it is in our collective best interest to continue to strive toward that goal, locally and globally, for a better world for ourselves and for all. That includes improving the environment, and avoiding the pitfalls of over-industrialization on our climate and planet.

Kamala Harris was not a socialist. She was a liberal whose ideas were rejected in a popular vote by the American people yesterday in favor of an American, nationalist, and populist conservatism. For the next four years, we will all live with the results, here in America.

Our only consolation is that we have seen this playbook before. President-elect Trump has already served one term, and we know that he loves the job and takes it very seriously. We lived through it before; chances are we can live through it, again. We know that while he will definitely put his own imprimatur on how he does the job, he will definitely do the job of an American president, just like his successor, and now predecessor, President Joe Biden, did, as well.

First, I should say that I admire just how hard President-elect Donald Trump fought, time and again, to reach this pinnacle for himself. He achieved his political comeback from absolute pariah who lost in 2020 and rioted in response against the entire American political establishment, to victor in this 2024 national election, a victor who has now claimed the new title for himself, President-elect, in addition to only former President. President Trump fought hard, he never stopped fighting, and he won. He deserves credit.

What obstacles did former President Trump overcome on his way to this election victory? First, there were the trials. Namely, two federal trials on hold, and two state trials. The trial in New York actually happened and resulted in 34 felony convictions in New York State criminal courts for President Trump. He is awaiting sentencing. Next, there were the assassination attempts. During one rally in Pennsylvania, Donald Trump was shot. The bullet grazed his ear, but the secret service saved Trump’s life. In this instance, Donald Trump came within inches of dying from the gunshot, but he came out alright, with a small wound on his ear. This assassination attempt did not slow Donald Trump down on the campaign trail, however. He continued to hold rallies, with updated security measures from the Secret Service. Then, there was the second assassination attempt. This time, the Secret Service caught the shooter before the shooter was able to shoot at Trump, at all. Add these challenges for Trump to the usual brutal schedule of frequent rallies and two debates against two different presidential candidates during the course of a heated campaign season. Trump faced it all, and Trump triumphed.

I should note at this time that President-elect Trump did not only defeat one candidate, he defeated two. First, he vanquished President Biden in the first debate of the campaign. Biden dropped out. Enter candidate number two. Vice President Kamala Harris made it through the election, when she lost, including a second debate, for President Trump, against candidate number two. In the end, President Trump not only defeated President Biden in this campaign. President Trump defeated Biden’s entire administration, including President Biden, himself, and Biden’s Vice President, Kamala Harris.

Meeting all of these challenges and winning at the ballot box in the final, national vote is the scale of President-elect Trump’s victory in this election. He came, he saw, he conquered. Now, he wins his second term. That is how much Donald Trump wanted this, and that is what Donald Trump receives—his second term as US president.

TrumpGoogleImage — President-elect Donald Trump

That is all the better for President-elect Donald Trump. What about Vice President Kamala Harris, however, Americans’ last and best hope for progress from the top? She lost. Her supporters, like me, are left wondering, what went wrong?

The first thing that comes to mind is the so-called blue wall. She lost all three states, namely, Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin. They went red, i.e., Republican, every one of them. Those three states were supposed to represent the Democratic Party’s working class support, and would provide the easiest pathway for candidate Kamala Harris to win 270 electoral votes and win the Presidency. Not so. Every last one eventually fell for candidate Donald Trump. Trump turned the so-called blue wall into what could best be described as a purple door. Trump won all three in 2016, then President Biden won all three in 2020, and now Donald Trump has won all three, again, in 2024. They can no longer be described as a blue wall, in my opinion. They have voted for President Trump in two out of three elections since 2016, including this one. I would describe them, instead, as a purple door. They swing this way or that, like a door, in a purple fashion, politically speaking, from election to election.

Of course, there is more going on here than only that. The fact is that real wages have not kept up with inflation during the years under President Biden, according to CNN, 11/5/2024. Biden failed to deliver for the workers of the Blue Wall states, and the economy, high costs, and inflation became a key issue driving voters to the polls for President Trump. If the Blue Wall working class voters failed to deliver for the Democrats, it was because the Democrats failed to deliver for them. They fell for Donald Trump and the Republican Party’s message.

In defense of President Joe Biden’s economic policies, briefly, I will only note that President Biden has helped deliver for Americans in general the best economy in the world, at this time. What that means is that Biden delivered on jobs for the American worker. With all of the money flowing around the economy, as a result, and in addition to massive public spending to stimulate the economy, the economy picked up. As a result, prices and costs increased substantially for the individual American worker and consumer. Gas prices, groceries, and housing costs all skyrocketed. This situation did not produce gratitude for having money and a job; instead, it caused significant discontent. Americans in general, and blue wall American workers, voiced their discontent at the ballot box.

There is another dynamic going on here, however, that I would like to note. This dynamic I would term as the glass ceiling. In 2016, Hillary Clinton lost the blue wall to Trump. People blamed Hillary Clinton. She neglected campaigning there, and she took their support for granted. The fact is, they voted for the man, Donald Trump.

Nobody thought too much about that, however, after President Joe Biden won back the blue wall states in 2020. Then came this election, in 2024. Again, the Democratic Party candidate was a woman. Again, the blue wall voters fell in line for President Trump, not the woman Democrat, Kamala Harris. No one could accuse Kamala Harris of neglecting these voters, nor taking them for granted. Both the Harris and the Trump campaigns spent incredible amounts of time and money campaigning intensively across the traditional Blue Wall states. Nonetheless, the Blue Wall voters fell for Trump, not Harris. It seems that the support from the Blue Wall state voters can be counted on for male candidates, namely, Joe Biden, but not for the women candidates, namely, Hillary Clinton and Kamala Harris.

In light of this, the Blue Wall, working class male voters cannot be accused of being feminists. They can be accused of not delivering their support for a woman candidate, however, in contrast to actually supporting a male candidate. It seems that if a woman candidate takes the primary leadership role, she loses support among the Blue Wall. The glass ceiling, in these cases, seems to end at the Vice President’s office. Above that, forget it. There, the woman candidate will discover a glass ceiling, and not receive the same support that a man does receive. In this case, in 2024, these voters broke for the man in the race, Donald Trump.

Both of these trends help explain the victory of Donald Trump over Kamala Harris, but there is yet another dynamic at play here, so far as I can see. While I may be a socialist voter in America, voting Democratic, the general voters in America, including but not exclusively the Blue Wall voters, are more anarchists than socialists. What do I mean? Vote the bums out, in other words. Since 2016, there is a strong ani-incumbent tendency to the American electorate, writ large. First, the Obamas were surprised that American voters favored a major change in direction when the voters chose the right-wing alternative of Donald Trump in 2016. Next, after one term of Donald Trump, the American voters were sick of him, and elected the challenger, Joe Biden, for many reasons. President Biden promised a dramatic change from the atmosphere and direction of President Trump. Voters chose President Biden.

Now, voters expressed discontent at President Biden, also after one term. They chose the alternative. Donald Trump promised a radical change of direction from President Biden, and papered over his own record as a rosy past for Americans, including jobs and lower costs. Voters chose President Trump, the alternative.

Enter Vice President Kamala Harris. She tried to portray herself as an alternative to both President Biden and President Trump, calling a vote for her a vote for “a new way forward.” She campaigned on a break from the politics of the past. Ultimately, Trump tied her, successfully, to President Biden’s current term, pointing out that she currently served as the Vice President. One campaign ad comes to mind in which Vice President Harris said she could not think of one thing she would do differently from President Biden in her next four years. That ad resonated with voters. They chose to vote against her as part of the incumbent administration of President Biden.

American voters have been voting the bums out since the election of 2016. With limited choices, they continue to vote in this pattern, today. This shows a more anarchist approach to leadership in the United States, notsomuch a socialist vision. I am not seriously arguing that American voters are a bunch of anarchists, which some people, by the way, would take as a complement. No, I am merely saying that American voters are voting, in the last three presidential elections, as if they were anarchists, happily, or angrily, voting in US presidential elections.

This anti-incumbent fervor must be noted among voters in this and recent US presidential elections. In any case, now we are left with President-elect Donald J. Trump. Again. May we all survive his second term. Donald Trump fought hard for this second term, and Donald J. Trump achieved it. Good for him. Now, if we all can just survive a second term of his right-wing, national populism, again, I should note, then we will be all the better for it. I do not think the American government is at risk of falling, now, however. Instead, I think the American government continues, from the last ten to twenty years, and ongoing from here. May we all learn to fight for a better future the way Donald Trump fought for his second term. There is still hope on our horizon, despite the chaos of this election and our recent shared history.

—Nicholas Patti

Wake Forest, NC

USA

Harris_606bb0_copy — Vice President Kamala Harris

Additional Sources:

CNN, 11/6/2024, 11/5/2024.

WRAL news, WRAL, Raleigh, NC, 11/5/2024, 11/6/2024, NBC, television news and alerts.

ABC news, 11/5/2024, 11/6/2024, television news.

News and Observer, Raleigh, NC: 11/6/2024, digital news.

VOTE! Up and Down the Ticket in North Carolina, United States

by Nicholas Patti

The United States of America is a democracy, and one thing that means is that we, the American people, have the chance to vote for our president. In North Carolina, this year is also an election year for our governor. Use it or lose it! My first shout-out on this blog is to urge everyone in North Carolina, and in fact, throughout the United States, to vote. We must exercise our right to vote, if we wish to maintain our country as a democracy. As to whom to vote for, each of us makes up our own mind about each candidate, taking into account policy stances, political party, and yes, the values and character of each candidate. Consider this post my endorsement post on this blog for these two offices, in particular: the president of the United States, and the governor of the State of North Carolina. The important thing is, however, that each person who is a citizen of this country takes up his or her responsibility and duty as a citizen, and votes.

Let us begin with the American president. I would like to add my voice to those Democratic Party convention delegates this year who chanted, “Thank you, Joe!” to current President Joe Biden when he took the stage and addressed the Democratic Party convention this year. I think President Joe Biden has done a bang-up job as an American president during his term, and I thank him for his almost four years of public service as our president, and for his decades of service in American government as vice-president and U.S. senator, before that. He has had a long and terrific career as an elected official serving the American public in Washington.

Having said that, I think it was wise for him to step aside as the Democratic Party candidate for president in this election for the next term. In his speech at the convention this year, President Biden said he was putting country before personal ambition. He argued that we must keep former President Donald Trump out of the executive office, utilizing the ballot box, at all costs. I disagree, humbly. I think President Biden was not placing country before personal ambition, but rather, placing political party before personal ambition. It is true the election looked lost for President Biden when our President made the decision to pull out as a candidate. What President Biden did was to hand-select an alternate candidate whom our current President believed could beat Donald Trump at the ballot box, and make her the Democratic Party candidate. This move would be the Democrats’ best shot at holding the White House in Democratic Party hands. Thus, after ignoring many calls to do so, President Joe Biden handed over the baton to the next generation of leadership in the Democratic Party, and likely, in our country. I follow President Joe Biden’s lead in choosing our current U.S. Vice President Kamala Harris as my preferred candidate for our next American president.

As a much younger candidate than either President Biden or former President Donald Trump, Kamala Harris would represent handing leadership of our country over to the next generation of leadership, if elected. Her selection by the Democrats represented a political disaster for President Trump and the Republicans, at the time, since she was much younger than either of the two previous candidates, Biden and Trump. The Republican Party attack ads and attack lines at the first debate between Biden and Trump, that President Biden was too old and infirm to govern, now fell entirely flat. In fact, these attacks would tarnish President Trump himself, moreso than anyone else, now that he was the only older white guy in the race, and Democratic Party candidate Kamala Harris could paint herself as the clear alternative for the future.

Democratic presidential candidate Kamala Harris introduced herself, described who she is, and outlined what her priorities would be, if elected president, in the Democratic Convention this year. Although she remains politically liberal, she did an end-run to the political center, and reassured all that she would uphold America’s position in the world, militarily, economically, politically, and in concert with traditional U.S. allies across the world. In addition, she promised to cut costs for the American consumer and to fight for the American working and middle class. She contrasted her position with former President Donald Trump, who she claimed would fight only for himself and for billionaires. Whether that is true or not, or only a Democratic Party attack line against the Republican nominee for president, I leave to each individual voter to decide.

What I do know is that after this election for U.S. president, either Kamala Harris or Donald Trump will be our next president. For better or worse, the American people will live with either one for the next four years. We are lucky that we, the American people, have the right to vote and choose which one will be our next president. I plan to vote for Kamala Harris. Either way, I urge every American citizen to make the choice and vote.

Vice President Kamala Harris, Democratic Party nominee for President

My Poetry Book

Enjoy this eclectic, often comic collection of poems by me. One poem, “News Junkie,” covers former President Trump’s first term, pre-pandemic. Price includes taxes and shipping & handling.

$15.00

Let me turn my focus from the race for US president to the race for governor of the State of North Carolina. Before I make my endorsement, let me review who the candidates are, from the Democratic and Republican parties, for the office. When voting for governor of North Carolina, North Carolinian voters may choose from the Democratic candidate, Josh Stein, current North Carolina Attorney General, and the Republican candidate, Mark Robinson, current North Carolina Lieutenant Governor. Both candidates claim to be for the working, sometimes struggling, families of North Carolina. Who is the best choice?

Josh Stein is a reliable Democrat, promising to bring Democratic policies to the state, and continuing on the legacy that the popular current governor, Democrat Roy Cooper, is leaving to the state. Democrat Roy Cooper has brought, for example, medicaid expansion to the North Carolina, which Governor Cooper and the Democrats of North Carolina fought for roughly 10 years to enact as law in North Carolina. Josh Stein would continue that legacy of having a Democrat in the Governor’s mansion.

On crime, Republicans have attacked Josh Stein as soft on crime, largely because he is a Democrat. Fighting crime is a hot-button issue for Republicans. However, Josh Stein has countered that, as the current state Attorney General, he has been fighting crime in North Carolina for years. No one accuses the Republican of being soft on crime.

The issue of choice, or abortion, separates the two candidates. Josh Stein is pro-choice, similar to the current Governor, Roy Cooper. Mark Robinson is pro-life. Robinson has waffled on the extent of his pro-life views, flipping between supporting the current anti-abortion law on the books in North Carolina, and calling for an even more stringent anti-abortion law. The current law bans abortions in North Carolina, with notable exceptions, but the question is six or twelve weeks into the pregnancy, when abortion would become illegal in North Carolina. Six weeks would be sooner than the current law in North Carolina, and Robinson has said he would support a six-week ban. He has qualified his position, however, by saying that the legislature has already enacted the current law, and the power to change the law to restrict abortion even further is not up to him, but the state legislature.

I am pro-choice and I support Democratic candidate Josh Stein on this issue.

Then, there is the question of character and background. The latest news, which made the national news, is a sex scandal concerning the Republican candidate, Mark Robinson. According to CNN, Robinson went on a porn website ten years ago, before he was in politics, and made disconcerting comments. He called himself a “black Nazi,” and endorsed slavery, saying he would buy a few slaves. When interviewed about this scandal by CNN after the report was aired, Robinson denied the whole affair. Robinson called it a lynching of him, using AI, the internet, and cable news. It looks to me that CNN did not make the story up, however, and that the story is true.

The next response Robinson had to this scandal was to state that he is remaining in the race, that he is not dropping out because of this one incident, the truth of which he denies. I agree that he should stay in the race and let the voters of North Carolina decide if this one example of essentially sexual misconduct via an on-line porn site disqualifies him from the highest executive office in North Carolina, or not.

Later, just today, September 20, 2024, on CNN, former North Carolina Governor, Republican Pat McCrory, threw Robinson under the bus. Former Governor Pat McCrory said that Mark Robinson is unfit to be governor. McCrory thought that the Republican Party of North Carolina should do a better job vetting their candidate for governor. McCrory said that for Lieutenant Governor, the job Robinson currently holds, that he would be an ok candidate. Not for governor, McCrory said. McCrory’s opinion is that Robinson has said and done things in the past that should preclude him from holding the highest office in the state. McCrory thinks the governor candidate should be vetted more than for the Lieutenant Governor, since the Governor’s office is more high-profile. McCrory said that the press will look into the full background of the candidate moreso for the governor’s office than the lieutenant governor’s. McCrory said he was vetted by the Republican Party in North Carolina before he became the candidate, and ultimately, the Governor of North Carolina. He continued, that the Republican Party of North Carolina knew these things about Robinson’s questionable background, but chose him anyway. The reason that McCrory gave that the Republican Party of North Carolina chose Robinson for the candidacy is that Robinson is a very good public speaker. McCrory said Robinson is very populist and gives such good speeches, he became very popular. For McCrory, however, it was not just this latest scandal that disqualified Robinson. McCrory said that there are numerous things about Robinson’s background that calls into question his character and fitness for the highest office of the state. McCrory admitted it is too late under North Carolina election law to switch candidates, so the question is academic.

One thing that former Governor Pat McCrory did say was that North Carolina is a purple state. Voters often split their tickets in North Carolina. He said that any questions about Robinson’s influence on the top of the ticket, the U.S. president, cannot be easily discerned. Robinson could bring down other Republicans up and down the ticket, or voters in North Carolina could split their tickets. The implication is that even if voters reject Robinson, they could still vote for Republican Donald Trump for U.S. president.

I think the question of character is relevant for the office of governor. Democrat Josh Stein is a Jew, he is liberal to moderate, and he is the current Attorney General. Can you imagine that Josh Stein’s opponent, Mark Robinson, called himself a Nazi once, who would want to own a slave? Josh Stein is Jewish. The holocaust must be remembered, regarding Nazis, slavery, and Jews. Mark Robinson’s comments are abhorrent.

In defense of Mark Robinson, however, he was using the services of a porn website. These traffic in sexual fantasies with the goal of sexual pleasure for the user. There is another concept at work here. That is the concept of mental slavery. The idea here is that actual slavery has been abolished, but mental slavery persists. It seems that in this on-line porn posting, Mark Robinson was engaging in mental slavery, as the owner, of course, for his own sexual pleasure. Let me note that praying in the Protestant Christian faith frees one from mental slavery, especially in the United States. Robinson has been shown in videos preaching from the pulpit of a black Protestant Church. Suffice it to say, Mark Robinson has been saved, in a Protestant Christian point of view, since that on-line posting. Robinson today disavows that earlier statement he made, on the porn website, some years ago. Would Robinson as governor promote mental slavery or fight to abolish mental slavery? The comment on the porn website sheds doubt on that question, but he disavows that he ever even made that remark. His Protestant Christian faith, which he proudly embraces, suggests Robinson would be squarely on the side of emancipation from mental slavery, to paraphrase the reggae singer, Bob Marley. It seems to me, however, that in that comment Robinson made on the porn website years ago, Robinson was still caught, as a “bad boy,” smack dab in the middle of the mindset of mental slavery. Of course, it should be noted, in the comment on the porn website, Robinson was not a mental slave, he was an owner. The point is to abolish the mindset of mental slavery, entirely.

People derive their sexual pleasure however they derive their sexual pleasure. I am not one to judge on that basis. My only question is, can we trust someone who might be struggling with the concept of mental slavery to be our governor? Is he going to try to make a prisoner, for example, of the State of North Carolina, a mental slave? This is an important question, I think. I think we might take the opportunity to discuss mental slavery, at this point, rather than simply treating this as a sex scandal and demonstrating unfitness for higher office.

I would like to see a reporter ask Mark Robinson if he has heard of mental slavery, and what he thinks about it? Given that he once endorsed it in writing, I think that is a legitimate question.

Both candidates for North Carolina can be asked this question. For example, as NC Attorney General, would Josh Stein allow any correction officer in North Carolina to make any prisoner believe that they were a slave, and I do mean, while incarcerated? This could potentially be used to control the prisoner. It is my sincere hope that, in addition to fighting crime, that the rights of prisoners while incarcerated should be upheld. No one should be made to feel that they are enslaved, even if they were currently imprisoned. I would like to hear both candidates comment on this one example, and on mental slavery, in general.

In any case, Josh Stein has not endorsed slavery in writing. Mark Robinson has. However, Mark Robinson is himself a black man in America, in North Carolina, in particular. Although Mark Robinson was having a sexual fantasy, at the time, as an owner, on a porn website, I think the question is still relevant. It is even more relevant as Robinson is running for the highest executive office in our state.

Anyway, that is what former Governor Pat McCrory is talking about. Character. Myself, I do not think one wild sexual fantasy on a porn website ten years ago necessarily disqualifies one from holding higher office. Pat McCrory is correct about the media and the opposition in politics digging up the dirt on any questionable, certainly scandalous, activity and positions from the past. Ultimately, it is up to the voters of North Carolina to decide.

If it is not clear already, let me make my endorsement for the office of Governor of North Carolina clear. I plan to vote for the Democrat, Josh Stein. I base my endorsement both on policy and personality issues.

I urge all North Carolinians to vote, however, for either candidate, or for independents, for both Governor and President of the United States. I urge all Americans to vote in this year’s presidential election, also.

NC Attorney General Josh Stein, Democratic candidate for Governor

Mark Robinson, Lieutenant Governor of NC, Republican candidate for Governor

—Nicholas Patti

Wake Forest, NC

September 20, 2024

Sources:

News and Observer, Raleigh, NC, multiple articles, 2024.

CNN, 9/20/2024, 9/19/2024, television news.

WRAL news, NBC affiliate, Raleigh, NC, television news.

ABC news, shown over local ABC affiliate, Raleigh, NC, television news.

Photos: all photos complements of respective campaign websites.

Trump Guilty Verdict Tarnishes Image: Stay Outta Jail

by Nicholas Patti

June 1, 2024, Raleigh, NC—The following classic rock song lyric tells the story of Donald Trump’s hush money trial guilty verdict while running for president as the presumptive Republican party candidate:

…The jig is up, the news is out,

They finally found me.

The renegade

Who had it made

Retrieved for a bounty,

Nevermore to go astray,

The judge will have revenge today,

On a wanted man.

—“Renegade,” Styx, 1978

In which song lyric, former President Donald Trump stars as the renegade, Judge Juan M. Merchan stars as the judge, and Trump’s sentencing date of July 11 is the day the judge will have his revenge on Donald Trump, the wanted man.

This narrative is exactly the one coming out of the Trump campaign and Trump himself in his speeches at this time. President Trump is wanted for challenging President Biden for the high office, and all of President Trump’s personal legal problems, including this conviction by a jury in Manhattan on felony charges, are the result of a political witch-hunt personally directed by current President Joe Biden from the White House in Washington.

We should note a very basic, critical reading of the song text, literary critic-style, as it applies to former President Donald Trump, as well. Note that in the song, the “renegade,” aka Donald Trump, is the hero, the protagonist. The judge, representing law-and-order, is the antagonist, the anti-hero, or the villain. President Trump certainly portrays the real-life judge, Judge Juan Merchan, as the villain, or anti-hero, as well. In accusing current President Biden of targeting Trump, politically, with the legal system in this case, as in all others, President Trump casts current President Biden as a starring anti-hero, or villain, as well. In this way, former President Trump flips the script on current President Biden. President Trump, the now-convicted felon, becomes the hero, the good guy, while his opponent, current President Biden, becomes the anti-hero, or villain. Thus, although convicted, himself, of hiding a hush money payment to a porn star actress for political gain in a former presidential election, President Trump accuses President Biden and our country’s legal system of corruption.

Oh well. My only advice to former President Trump at this time is to listen to the old adage: “the road to ruin is paved with good intentions.” In this case, former President Trump’s good intention is to return to the White House via the presidential election this November. The road to ruin for President Trump would be to anger the judge at sentencing that leads former President Trump to see the inside of a jail cell for whatever term, instead of, or in addition to, winning back the White House. Former President Trump may think twice of playing the victim in this case from a vengeful jury and judge to the extent that former President Trump makes a convincing case to the judge, come his sentencing hearing on July 11, for the judge to throw the book at him, landing former President Trump in jail, wholly unnecessarily so.

I, for one, hope President Trump avoids any jail time on these 34 felony counts that he was just convicted of. What, in essence, is Donald Trump convicted of? Essentially, he is convicted of being a wealthy man and celebrity, himself, who allegedly slept with a porn star actress, Stormy Daniels, in 2006, and maybe a Playboy Playmate or two, Karen McDougal, and then paying one of these sex models hush money, in this case Stormy Daniels, and then concealing the payment to make himself look good in the middle of a presidential election, 2016, which he subsequently won (“Guilty,” News & Observer, Raleigh, NC, digital edition, 5/31/2024). I say, big deal. So what?

I agree with President Trump, in one of his courtside chats, as seen live over the past few weeks during the trial, viewed on CNN this May, in which he said, “I did nothing wrong” (approximate quote). Personally, I do not feel that sleeping with a Playboy Playmate, or a young porn star actress, is terribly wrong. The most you should get for that is a starring role on “Ain’t Misbehavin’” (fictional). In fact, President Trump had a day on “Access Hollywood,” years ago, I believe it was said, and more recently, currently, he had a starring role on various 24-hour cable news channels in Stormy Daniels testimony in this trial as to his participation in their mutual sex scene (which President Trump still wholly denies ever happened) (“Guilty,” News & Observer, Raleigh, NC, digital edition, 5/31/2024; CNN; Fox News). This time, the courtroom testimony was not directly televised, either. This, simply, is not criminal.

At another point in one of his courtside chats during this trial, President Trump pondered, “Mother Teresa could not beat these charges” (approximate quote). President Trump is not claiming to be Mother Teresa in this scenario. He is claiming to be a regular American man with a sex drive who was running for president. We do not require our presidents in this country to be Mother Teresa, witness President Bill Clinton in the 1990s, also, and his White House intern, Monica Lewinsky. President Clinton remained in office. Are these presidents acting in an immoral manner? Grow up! We do not require our Presidents to be Mother Teresa—oh wait, in President Trump’s case, now, in this case in Manhattan, maybe we do. President Trump was convicted of his misconduct, after all.

What else did President Trump do, as charged in this case? He falsified business records to make himself look good to the electorate, thus practicing fraud on the voting population in 2016. Please. I remember that election. The Stormy Daniels case was all over the news at the time. Then, it disappeared. Everyone in America already knew who Donald Trump was. This came as no surprise to anyone. The fact that the story did not explode any worse than it did, that candidate Trump, at the time, did, in fact, contain the damage, is simply not criminal.

“I paid legal fees to a lawyer. Michael Cohen was my lawyer,” President Trump said (approximate quote), in another instance of courtside chat during this trial (viewed on CNN). That is, in fact, true. I think it is garbage that Trump needed to note that it was a hush money repayment to this lawyer. I do not think he is required to go into that level of detail into what the payment to his lawyer was for. The fact is that Michael Cohen fronted the money for the payment, then President Trump reimbursed Michael Cohen. It was, in fact, a payment from Trump to his lawyer. The point of the prosecution is what the payment was for: a re-imbursement of a hush money payment, not a “legal service.” Michael Cohen was Donald Trump’s attorney acting as a fixer, and as such, was paid by Donald Trump for his service, including and specifically, the hush money payment. I do not think President Trump should have been required to specify what Michael Cohen was doing with the money President Trump paid him: the fact is he paid him, his lawyer and fixer, the money, and noted it as such.

This act influenced the election. One, the hush money payment itself is not illegal. The concealment in the business records is the crime Trump is accused and convicted of committing, in concert with Trump’s effort to influence, i.e., “defraud,” the electorate. I am not concerned with the way Trump noted his payment to Michael Cohen in his business record, as I pointed out in the prior paragraph.

Also, I am not concerned that President Trump attempted to look good to the electorate in the middle of a presidential election (2016). I think Trump’s attorney, Todd Blanche, said as much. It is the job of a candidate to try to look good, to present his best face forward, to the electorate in an election for higher office. You would expect the same of any presidential candidate.

I have addressed all aspects of the crime President Trump was convicted of. President Trump was convicted of 34 felony counts of falsification of records. I do not think President Trump should have been convicted. The Wall Street Journal editorial board points out that the statute of limitations for the misdemeanor charge of falsification of records had already expired before this trial (5/31/2024, p. A14). Only when combining the falsification with the intent to influence the 2016 election do these charges rise to the level of a felony, and can be prosecuted at this time. For this, a jury of twelve good New Yorkers found former President Donald J. Trump guilty on all counts.

Great. What is essentially non-criminal activity is elevated to the level of a felony, on 34 counts. I find this quite ridiculous, actually. Nonetheless, I respect the courts of New York State and New York City. President Trump has the right to appeal. The felony conviction is now a legal fact for President Trump, as any conviction is a fact for any criminal defendant, upon conviction.

The good thing is that both campaigns, President Biden’s and President Trump’s, point to the election this November as the determinant of the winner of the Oval Office for the next term, and not this trial and conviction of President Trump. All media sources say being a convicted felon does not disqualify President Trump from serving a second term as President. The election, therefore, is still on, just as before.

The main difference is with President Trump’s image and reputation, his name. There is simply no way around the fact that President Trump’s newfound status as a convicted felon will tarnish President Trump’s brand, and potentially, hurt his chances with undecided or with law-and-order voters.

That is on the one hand. On the other hand, perhaps Donald Trump’s supporters, his base, will be inspired by this trial and the unfortunate outcome for President Trump. If he inspires his base to work even harder to turn out loyal Republican voters, then this conviction could, in fact, help President Trump in this election. That is unlikely, but his base is inspired, and the future course of this campaign and election is unknown.

The difficulty for President Trump at this time is to campaign vigorously, once again, without angering the judge from this current trial, who has yet to sentence President Trump. Many pundits say that while a jail sentence is possible, up to four years, in fact, usually white collar criminals for this crime and lowest level of a felony do not, in fact, have to serve any jail time (ABC News Special Coverage, ABC World News Tonight, 5/30/2024; National Public Radio (NPR), “Live special coverage,” 5/30/2024). Trump may get off with a sentence of only probation, perhaps, and still, yet never have to see the inside of a jail cell for these crimes. That would certainly benefit President Trump, and leave him yet the time and freedom necessary to campaign for President this year. I think something along these lines would be best for our former President, and for our country. It is inconvenient for our country that President Trump’s personal legal problems hit us as a country in the middle of a presidential election. Our country, I think, would be better served with less chaos during this presidential election, not more chaos.

That said, I do not wish to make any excuses for former President Trump. Whenever someone is convicted of a crime for their behavior, I think it is not the time to blame “the system.” Rather, it is time for someone, anyone, if guilty of the behavior, which has been ruled criminal in a legitimate jury trial anywhere in the United States of America, at the point of conviction it is high time to begin to take responsibility for his or her actions, and not to blame everyone else. President Trump would do well to follow this advice, especially regarding his sentencing. Perhaps, President Trump should move on from playing the victim, and return to normal, negative campaigning about President Biden, once again. Remind the American people that they like President Trump better, that he is more of a regular guy than President Biden may appear to be.

Take all of this as free, non-partisan advice for President Trump. For me, this conviction is just one more reason for me, believe it or not, NOT to vote for President Trump. My mind was not changed by this trial. For purely political and philosophical reasons, I did not plan to vote for President Trump. I had already planned to vote for President Biden. Guess what. After this trial, conviction or not, I still plan to vote for President Biden. I am politically progressive. President Biden is closer to my politics. President Biden is doing a fine job up there in the White House, I believe, and there is no reason to change it up now.

Now that President Trump is a convicted felon, I feel no reason now to vote for him. In my mind, this unfortunate status, even if derived from a questionable criminal conviction, is another reason NOT to vote for him.

I do not suspect that, if handled well by the Trump campaign, I do not think this conviction will turn off many voters. In 2016, no one cared about candidate Trump’s various extravagances. He won that election in a fair campaign and vote. In 2020, by the way, I think President Biden won in a fair election, also. I hope that 2024 will be a free and fair election, as well. Whether this 2024 presidential election will in fact be a free and fair election, I think, remains to be seen. As a country, we are operating under our American system of jurisprudence. Local judges retain authority, in this way, over our national election. It remains to be seen whether, in the end, we can determine that this year’s election was, in fact, free and fair.

In any case, I suspect this criminal conviction may affect the voting decisions of a smaller portion of the electorate. There are polls. They vary. It is not worth delving through the poll numbers here. I think most people already know both presidential candidates, Biden and Trump. This conviction of Trump may make some difference to the electorate, namely, to independents and law-and-order voters, but I suspect, in balance, it will not make that much of a difference, overall.

I happen to support the voting rights of felons, by the way, even though President Trump is now an example of one. How odd it is that he will probably not be allowed to vote in this presidential election in the State of Florida, on this basis, but he can be elected, still, and serve in the highest office of this country, nonetheless.

I hope in all of his criminal convictions and charges, in New York and around this country, that President Trump does not have to go to jail. I do not plan to vote for President Trump, however, and I still hope that President Biden wins the election. RFK, Jr., becomes more of an alternative to both candidates, as well, out of this criminal conviction of President Trump.

RFKImage — Presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.

My main advice to President Trump is, at this time, before his sentencing for this New York felony conviction, my advice is, stay outta jail.

—Nicholas Patti

Raleigh, NC

USA

Source list:

This blog: post, 4/1/2023.

News and Observer, Raleigh, NC, 5/31/2024, digital edition:

“Guilty,” ExtraExtra section, digital edition; “Ex-president, felon and candidate: 5 takeaways from Trump’s conviction,” ExtraExtra section, digital edition; “Trump conviction: What now?” ExtraExtra section, digital edition; “Biden fundraises off Trump’s conviction,” ExtraExtra section, digital edition; “Trump verdict adds twist to 2024 race: A convicted felon,” ExtraExtra section, digital edition; “Trump’s other criminal cases: How they compare,” ExtraExtra section, digital edition; “Trump’s guilty verdict prompts sharp reactions from lawmakers,” ExtraExtra section, digital edition; “What NC lawmakers say about Trump’s guilty verdict,” ExtraExtra section, digital edition; Headline, “Triangle Now” section, digital edition, 5/31/2024.

Wall Street Journal, editorial, New York, NY, 5/31/2024, print edition, p. A14.

CNN, 5/29/2024, 5/30/2024, 5/31/2024, throughout trial in 5/2024.

ABC News Special Coverage, ABC World News Tonight, 5/30/2024.

Fox News, during trial, 5/2024.

WRAL News, NBC affiliate, Raleigh, NC, 7 pm local news broadcast, 5/30/2024.

National Public Radio (NPR), “live special coverage,” 5/30/2024, heard over WUNC, 91.5, Chapel Hill, NC; NPR News, during trial, 5/2024.

Image credits:

Google search, 6/1/2024.

My Poetry Book

Read and enjoy these poems that range from suburban Charlotte, NC, to homelessness in New York City to a look-back at life under former President Trump’s administration, pre-pandemic, in the poem, “News Junkie.” I have since moved to the Raleigh, NC area. Note that my price per item includes taxes and shipping and handling for the order.

$15.00