Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Ted Cruz’s “Darkest Before Dawn” Melodrama Misses the Message of the Midterms

Opinion

​U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX)

U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) on October 23, 2026 in Locust Grove, Georgia.

(Photo by Abbey Cutrer/Getty Images)

Texas Senator Ted Cruz wants you to believe Texas has just plunged into deep, inescapable darkness. Cruz took to his podcast and social media to deliver a characteristically apocalyptic sermon. “It is dark right now,” Cruz lamented, “but it is always darkest before the dawn.

”It is a remarkably self-indulgent framing. Senator Cruz is projecting his own partisan melancholy onto an electorate that didn’t lose a game—they cast a ballot. What Cruz views as a grim twilight is, for millions of Texans, a breath of fresh air and a long-overdue dawn. By treating a democratic election like a tragedy, Cruz reveals a fundamental disconnect from the very people he is elected to represent.


Political pundits are already pointing out that this "day-after" rhetoric is less about state leadership and more about personal ambition, signaling that Cruz is already jockeying for another run at the presidency in 2028. But if this theatrical doom-mongering is his opening salvo, he is off to a disastrous start—one that will ultimately alienate moderate voters and leave him without a serious seat at the GOP nomination table.

Texas voters sent a clear, unvarnished message at the ballot box. They expressed profound exhaustion with escalating cost-of-living struggles, economic anxieties, and the relentless strain of international conflict. But instead of acknowledging the will of the people with humility and committing to work across the aisle with newly elected Democrats to fix these pressing issues, Cruz did what he always does: he retreated into the trenches of division.

Rather than offering a hand in partnership, Cruz immediately began plotting a comeback rooted in the same polarizing rhetoric the Trump administration championed. He pursued this strategy at his own immense political peril. The midterms were, as he said, "Watergate-level repudiation," not just of specific policies, but of an exhausting, hyper-partisan style of governance. Texans are tired of a political culture that treats governance as a blood sport and neighbors as enemies.

Cruz’s defensive posture raises a fundamental question about the nature of representation in our republic. Isn’t Donald Trump supposed to be the president of all Americans, including the millions who did not vote for him? And isn’t Ted Cruz supposed to be a senator for all of Texas, not just the ones wearing red hats?

True leadership requires recognizing that your mandate extends beyond your base. When the electorate demands change, a statesman listens; a politician merely recalibrates his grievances. By doubling down on the Trumpian doctrine of permanent polarization, Cruz is misreading the room entirely.

We, The People, are tired of the partisan politics that paralyze our government. The midterm results were a declaration of independence from manufactured culture wars and tribal gridlock. If Senator Cruz truly wants to see the "morning" he promised, he needs to open his eyes to the reality of the state he represents. Texas isn’t in the dark, Senator. It’s just moving on without you.

Hugo Balta is the executive editor of The Fulcrum and the publisher of the Latino News Network.


Read More

The White House
The white house with green lawn and trees
Photo by Josh on Unsplash

The Politics of Gratitude: Why Washington Punishes the Loyalty It Cannot Price

On a Sunday night in August, Senator Jon Ossoff told a campaign rally in Atlanta that President Trump would rather build his ballroom and “travel with Natalie” than do his job. He never used her last name. He did not need to. Natalie Harp, the White House aide known to colleagues as Trump’s “human printer” for trailing him with a portable printer and transcribing his social-media dictation, had become a punchline before most Americans knew who she was.

The backlash arrived within hours. White House officials accused Ossoff of insinuating an affair; Republican Rep. Brandon Gill noted that Harp survived bone cancer only because the Right to Try Act, which Trump signed in 2018, let her seek an experimental treatment outside the normal approval process, and dismissed any other reading of the moment as unfair. Weeks earlier, Harp had been at the center of a far more consequential story: in July, she was one of a handful of aides, alongside the defense secretary and two senior staffers, chosen to accompany Trump on a covert switch of aircraft as he left a security summit in Turkey after officials detected a credible Iranian threat, while most of the traveling delegation stayed behind on a decoy plane. That is the real proximity Ossoff's line was needling. Then came a detail that complicated the story further: Trump had personally given Harp and several other aides cash gifts of $45,000 apiece, which a former federal ethics official called troublesome, since money on that scale can leave a recipient feeling indebted to whoever signs the check.

Keep Reading Show less
A map labeling Lake Ontario as "Lake America" is displayed behind U.S. President Donald Trump.

A map labeling Lake Ontario as "Lake America" is displayed as U.S. President Donald Trump signs an executive order during an event in the Oval Office of the White House on August 27, 2026 in Washington, DC.

Andrew Harnik/Getty Images

Cartography of Convenience: Why Rushed Renaming Erodes Public Trust

In tough economic times, governments often reach for the easiest kind of progress: a new name on an old sign. Wage stagnation, inflation, crumbling roads, and rising rents are hard problems that take years and real money to fix. Renaming a street, a lake, or a strait is not. It costs a fraction as much and lets officials point to something they “did.” A new name never fixes a pothole or lowers a grocery bill. This year offered an unusually rich catalogue of the habit, reaching from a city council in Texas to a wartime waterway in the Persian Gulf.

A Concept Borrowed From the Cremation Ground

Indian philosophy has an old idea called shmashana vairagya, describing the sudden clarity a person feels standing at a cremation ground, when ordinary ambitions look small. The feeling fades once the mourner goes home. Public policy has its own version of this cycle. In the raw hours after a tragedy, a scandal, or a surge of national feeling, officials decide, sometimes within a single social media post, what belongs on a map or a sign forever. The emotion passes in hours. The bill, when there is one, stays for years.

Keep Reading Show less
Donald Trump

U.S. President Donald Trump on February 6, 2026.

(Photo by Samuel Corum/Getty Images)

A Demagogue in the White House: Will the Guardrails Hold?

A demagogue does not seize all power at once. He takes it piece by piece.

In Trump’s second administration, those pieces accumulated in plain sight. The president generated so much disruption and noise that Americans struggled to keep pace. Each new controversy displaced the last, obscuring a more consequential story: the steady accumulation of presidential power.

Keep Reading Show less
​Chinese President Xi Jinping (L) and U.S. President Donald Trump followed by Chinese first lady Peng Liyuan and U.S. first lady Melania Trump arrive for a state dinner at the White House.

Chinese President Xi Jinping (L) and U.S. President Donald Trump followed by Chinese first lady Peng Liyuan and U.S. first lady Melania Trump arrive for a state dinner in the East Room of the White House on September 24, 2026 in Washington, DC.

Kevin Dietsch/Getty Images

When Leaders Disagree, Ceremony Plays an Important Role

When Chinese President Xi Jinping arrived at the White House on 24 September, the U.S. welcomed him with an elaborate display of ceremony. The Army Herald Trumpets sounded a fanfare, the Chinese and American national anthems were played, and the Old Guard Fife and Drum Corps performed. A military review was followed by a flyover involving a B-2 bomber and four F-22 fighter jets, according to the White House. It was an extraordinary production for two countries that still disagree on some of the most important issues in international politics.

Talks between President Donald Trump and Xi touched on trade, artificial intelligence and Taiwan. The visit was marked by warm words and some signs of cooperation, but it did not erase the fundamental competition between the United States and China. So why was all this ceremony staged? It is tempting to dismiss political pomp as mere window dressing: an expensive historical relic surrounding the serious business taking place behind closed doors. As a music historian, however, I think this misunderstands what ceremony does. Ceremony can become particularly valuable when words alone are not enough.

Keep Reading Show less