Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Democrats need a shot in the arm

Democrats need a shot in the arm
Getty Images

Lynn Schmidt is a syndicated columnist and Editorial Board member with the St. Louis Post-Dispatch.

Democrats need a shot in the arm. No, not a vaccine, rather a dose of energy and enthusiasm.


If one considers Donald Trump, who is almost certainly going to be the 2024 GOP nominee and is certainly a threat to our democratic republic, then you know that the fate of our democracy remains in the hands of the Democratic Party. While President Biden defeated Trump in 2020, Biden is not going into 2024 with the strength needed to do it again.

A July New York Times/Siena Poll showed a tie between Biden and Trump, each with 43%, when respondents were asked if the 2024 presidential election were held today, who would you vote for. That the two men are tied should give all Americans who think Trump’s behavior after the 2020 election was disqualifying, great pause.

In the same poll when Democratic voters were asked if the Democratic Party should renominate Joe Biden as the party's candidate for president in 2024, 50% of Democrats said they should nominate someone else.

Even though Biden’s legislative successes are piling up the data shows that the economy is improving, Biden approval ratings are not. They remain steady at 40% and not getting better over time. Many blame this weak opinion of the president on his age, polarization, an even more unpopular vice-president, or a combination of all three.

I propose an additional theory: Biden seems unable to inspire the American people.

Could an aspirational leader, a younger Democrat, someone with political talent galvanize the electorate to find common ground, change the direction from the wrong track towards the right, and break up our hyperpolarized quagmire? It certainly seems quite feasible.

One such skillful politician, a Democratic backbencher, is former New Orleans Mayor Mitch Landrieu. Landrieu deserves to be brought up from the minors to the big leagues and be allowed to show the country what he’s got.

Landrieu served as the 61st Mayor of New Orleans from 2010 to 2018 during which time he played a key role in helping the city rebound from the devastation of Hurricane Katrina in 2005. He previously served as Lieutenant Governor of Louisiana from 2004 to 2010. In 2021 President Biden named Landrieu a Senior Advisor and Infrastructure Coordinator who is responsible for coordinating and implementing the bipartisan infrastructure law.

Beyond his impressive executive skills and resume, Landrieu may be most widely known for a speech he gave in May of 2017 when he removed the last of the city’s several Confederate monuments. Landrieu’s rhetoric was hopeful and nonjudgmental. Here are a couple, potent stanzas from the speech.

“And I knew that taking down the monuments was going to be tough, but you elected me to do the right thing, not the easy thing and this is what that looks like. So relocating these Confederate monuments is not about taking something away from someone else. This is not about politics, this is not about blame or retaliation. This is not a naïve quest to solve all our problems at once.”

“This is however about showing the whole world that we as a city and as a people are able to acknowledge, understand, reconcile and most importantly, choose a better future for ourselves making straight what has been crooked and making right what was wrong. Otherwise, we will continue to pay a price with discord, with division and yes with violence.”

Landrieu’s words offered a promising future while not alienating those who disagree with him. They also illustrate his commitment to public service and his leadership style. It is also worth noting that he used the word “truth” 13 times in the speech.

Many presidents have brought the country together during crises with their moving oratory. Washington’s Farewell Address, Lincoln’s Gettysburg Address, Franklin D. Roosevelt’s Inaugural Address, Reagan’s Berlin Wall Speech, and George W. Bush’s Post-9/11 Speech comes to mind.

The country should be grateful to Biden for his leadership out of the pandemic and restoring normalcy to our civic discord. But it is important that the Democratic Party look towards the future and elevate a younger voice; an energetic leader with good communication skills, and an inspiring vision. Someone who can inspire a broad coalition plus add new voters. Someone like Landrieu.

The same poll as mentioned above shows there is about 14% of the electorate that is up for grabs. This section of the electorate tended towards Biden in 2020 but now are recoiling at the idea of voting for either Trump or Biden again and are even unsure of whether they should even vote at all in 2024. This group is up for the taking, for a leader with skills, talent, and vision.

A resounding win by a bold and visionary leader is what our nation needs to address the serious problems facing our nation.

Read More

news app
New platforms help overcome biased news reporting
Tero Vesalainen/Getty Images

The Selective Sanctity of Death: When Empathy Depends on Skin Color

Rampant calls to avoid sharing the video of Charlie Kirk’s death have been swift and emphatic across social media. “We need to keep our souls clean,” journalists plead. “Where are social media’s content moderators?” “How did we get so desensitized?” The moral outrage is palpable; the demands for human dignity urgent and clear.

But as a Black woman who has been forced to witness the constant virality of Black death, I must ask: where was this widespread anger for George Floyd? For Philando Castile? For Daunte Wright? For Tyre Nichols?

Keep ReadingShow less
Following Jefferson: Promoting Inter-Generational Understanding Through Constitution-Making
Mount Rushmore
Photo by John Bakator on Unsplash

Following Jefferson: Promoting Inter-Generational Understanding Through Constitution-Making

No one can denounce the New York Yankee fan for boasting that her favorite ballclub has won more World Series championships than any other. At 27 titles, the Bronx Bombers claim more than twice their closest competitor.

No one can question admirers of the late, great Chick Corea, or the equally astonishing Alison Krauss, for their virtually unrivaled Grammy victories. At 27 gold statues, only Beyoncé and Quincy Jones have more in the popular categories.

Keep ReadingShow less
A close up of the Immigration and Customs Enforcement badge.

Trump’s mass deportations promise security but deliver economic pain, family separation, and chaos. Here’s why this policy is failing America.

Getty Images, Tennessee Witney

The Cruel Arithmetic of Trump’s Immigration Crackdown

As summer 2025 winds down, the Trump administration’s deportation machine is operating at full throttle—removing over one million people in six months and fulfilling a campaign promise to launch the “largest deportation operation in American history.” For supporters, this is a victory lap for law and order. For the rest of the lot, it’s a costly illusion—one that trades complexity for spectacle and security for chaos.

Let’s dispense with the fantasy first. The administration insists that mass deportations will save billions, reduce crime, and protect American jobs. But like most political magic tricks, the numbers vanish under scrutiny. The Economic Policy Institute warns that this policy could destroy millions of jobs—not just for immigrants but for U.S.-born workers in sectors like construction, elder care, and child care. That’s not just a fiscal cliff—it is fewer teachers, fewer caregivers, and fewer homes built. It is inflation with a human face. In fact, child care alone could shrink by over 15%, leaving working parents stranded and employers scrambling.

Meanwhile, the Peterson Institute projects a drop in GDP and employment, while the Penn Wharton School’s Budget Model estimates that deporting unauthorized workers over a decade would slash Social Security revenue and inflate deficits by nearly $900 billion. That’s not a typo. It’s a fiscal cliff dressed up as border security.

And then there’s food. Deporting farmworkers doesn’t just leave fields fallow—it drives up prices. Analysts predict a 10% spike in food costs, compounding inflation and squeezing families already living paycheck to paycheck. In California, where immigrant renters are disproportionately affected, eviction rates are climbing. The Urban Institute warns that deportations are deepening the housing crisis by gutting the construction workforce. So much for protecting American livelihoods.

But the real cost isn’t measured in dollars. It’s measured in broken families, empty classrooms, and quiet despair. The administration has deployed 10,000 armed service members to the border and ramped up “self-deportation” tactics—policies so harsh they force people to leave voluntarily. The result: Children skipping meals because their parents fear applying for food assistance; Cancer patients deported mid-treatment; and LGBTQ+ youth losing access to mental health care. The Human Rights Watch calls it a “crueler world for immigrants.” That’s putting it mildly.

This isn’t targeted enforcement. It’s a dragnet. Green card holders, long-term residents, and asylum seekers are swept up alongside undocumented workers. Viral videos show ICE raids at schools, hospitals, and churches. Lawsuits are piling up. And the chilling effect is real: immigrant communities are retreating from public life, afraid to report crimes or seek help. That’s not safety. That’s silence. Legal scholars warn that the administration’s tactics—raids at schools, churches, and hospitals—may violate Fourth Amendment protections and due process norms.

Even the administration’s security claims are shaky. Yes, border crossings are down—by about 60%, thanks to policies like “Remain in Mexico.” But deportation numbers haven’t met the promised scale. The Migration Policy Institute notes that monthly averages hover around 14,500, far below the millions touted. And the root causes of undocumented immigration—like visa overstays, which account for 60% of cases—remain untouched.

Crime reduction? Also murky. FBI data shows declines in some areas, but experts attribute this more to economic trends than immigration enforcement. In fact, fear in immigrant communities may be making things worse. When people won’t talk to the police, crimes go unreported. That’s not justice. That’s dysfunction.

Public opinion is catching up. In February, 59% of Americans supported mass deportations. By July, that number had cratered. Gallup reports a 25-point drop in favor of immigration cuts. The Pew Research Center finds that 75% of Democrats—and a growing number of independents—think the policy goes too far. Even Trump-friendly voices like Joe Rogan are balking, calling raids on “construction workers and gardeners” a betrayal of common sense.

On social media, the backlash is swift. Users on X (formerly Twitter) call the policy “ineffective,” “manipulative,” and “theater.” And they’re not wrong. This isn’t about solving immigration. It’s about staging a show—one where fear plays the villain and facts are the understudy.

The White House insists this is what voters wanted. But a narrow electoral win isn’t a blank check for policies that harm the economy and fray the social fabric. Alternatives exist: Targeted enforcement focused on violent offenders; visa reform to address overstays; and legal pathways to fill labor gaps. These aren’t radical ideas—they’re pragmatic ones. And they don’t require tearing families apart to work.

Trump’s deportation blitz is a mirage. It promises safety but delivers instability. It claims to protect jobs but undermines the very sectors that keep the country running. It speaks the language of law and order but acts with the recklessness of a demolition crew. Alternatives exist—and they work. Cities that focus on community policing and legal pathways report higher public safety and stronger economies. Reform doesn’t require cruelty. It requires courage.

Keep ReadingShow less
Multi-colored speech bubbles overlapping.

Stanford’s Strengthening Democracy Challenge shows a key way to reduce political violence: reveal that most Americans reject it.

Getty Images, MirageC

In the Aftermath of Assassinations, Let’s Show That Americans Overwhelmingly Disapprove of Political Violence

In the aftermath of Charlie Kirk’s assassination—and the assassination of Minnesota state legislator Melissa Hortman only three months ago—questions inevitably arise about how to reduce the likelihood of similar heinous actions.

Results from arguably the most important study focused on the U.S. context, the Strengthening Democracy Challenge run by Stanford University, point to one straightforward answer: show people that very few in the other party support political violence. This approach has been shown to reduce support for political violence.

Keep ReadingShow less