Hollywood’s glitterati may dominate headlines, but today we mourn a quieter star as Adelia “Ada” Zeidler, sister of actor George Clooney, has left us at 65.
Born and raised in Kentucky, Ada carved her own path far from the Tinseltown spotlight. She dedicated years to shaping young minds as an elementary art teacher at Augusta Independent School. Her talent with a brush wasn’t just personal—it was a gift she shared generously.
Breitbart reported that during her high school years, Ada’s academic prowess earned her the prestigious title of National Merit Scholar. That’s the kind of brainpower the progressive elite often overlooks when it’s not tied to a coastal zip code.
Ada’s love for the written word connected her with like-minded souls in a local book club. She wasn’t chasing trending hashtags or virtue-signaling manifestos—just good, old-fashioned stories that bind communities.
As a member of the Augusta Art Guild, she contributed to her hometown’s cultural fabric. She even served as grand marshal of Augusta’s Annual White Christmas Parade, a nod to her standing in a place that values tradition over Hollywood hype.
Despite her brother’s global fame, Ada largely avoided the public eye, focusing on family and local impact. Reports from TMZ note she preferred the classroom to the red carpet. That’s a choice more folks should respect in an age of oversharing.
Still, she showed up for big moments, like attending George Clooney’s 2014 wedding to Amal Alamuddin in Venice. It’s a reminder that family ties trump fame’s fleeting allure every time.
George Clooney himself spoke of her with raw admiration in a statement to People.com: “My sister, Ada, was my hero.” He added, “She faced down cancer with courage and humor.” Now, isn’t that a testament to grit the woke crowd could never script?
Continuing his tribute, Clooney said, “I’ve never met anyone so brave.” He concluded, “Amal and I will miss her terribly.” That kind of loss cuts deeper than any box office flop.
Ada’s obituary paints a fuller picture of her legacy: “A talented artist, she shared her skills as an elementary art teacher at Augusta Independent School for several years.” It’s a quiet heroism—molding future generations without fanfare—that deserves more applause than any awards show.
The obituary also notes, “Her love for reading connected her with other readers in a local book club.” In a world obsessed with digital clout, isn’t it refreshing to honor someone who cherished real connection over clicks?
Ada leaves behind her brother George, parents Nick and Nina, husband Kenny, and children Nick and Allison. That’s a circle of love stronger than any celebrity entourage.
Her passing in Kentucky, where she lived and taught, underscores a life rooted in values too often dismissed by urban tastemakers. She wasn’t chasing progressive applause; she was building something lasting at home.
As we reflect on Ada Zeidler’s life, let’s celebrate the unsung heroes who teach, create, and connect without a spotlight. Her story reminds us that true impact doesn’t need a press release—just a heart for others. Maybe that’s a lesson even Hollywood could stand to learn.
President Donald Trump unleashed a fiery critique of Obamacare, branding it a cash cow for insurance giants during a charged speech in Rocky Mount, North Carolina, on Friday night, Breitbart reported.
In a nutshell, Trump blasted the health care law for inflating costs, announced plans to confront insurance companies directly, and highlighted ongoing political skirmishes over subsidies and government funding.
Earlier that Friday, Trump didn’t mince words, signaling his intent to haul insurance executives into a meeting to demand lower prices.
Whether at Mar-a-Lago in Florida or in Washington, D.C., he’s eyeing a showdown the first week he returns to the White House.
“I’m going to call a meeting of the insurance companies. I’m going to see if they get their price down, to put it very bluntly,” Trump declared.
That’s a bold promise, but let’s be real—insurance companies aren’t exactly known for rolling over when profits are on the line, and this meeting could be more theater than breakthrough unless serious leverage is applied.
During his evening address in Rocky Mount, Trump tore into what he calls the “Unaffordable Care Act,” arguing it’s a system rigged to fatten corporate wallets while leaving everyday Americans with skyrocketing premiums.
“The current Unaffordable Care Act, commonly known as Barack Hussein Obamacare, was created to make insurance companies rich. It was bad health care at much too high a cost, and you see now that the steep increase in premiums — it’s being demanded by the Democrats,” Trump charged.
Here’s the rub: if premiums are indeed soaring under this framework, as Trump claims, it’s hard to argue that the system isn’t failing the very people it was meant to help, though some might counter that subsidies have cushioned the blow for many.
Meanwhile, the political arena is a battlefield, with House Republicans pushing legislation to the Senate aimed at slashing health care costs.
On the flip side, Democrats are angling to extend COVID-era Obamacare subsidies, a fight that played out during a 43-day government shutdown starting in October and could flare up again.
Trump, ever the strategist, warned that Democrats might force another shutdown by the end of January—possibly on January 30—if their demands for extended subsidies aren’t met, painting them as pawns of big insurance.
Beyond the political chess game, Trump floated a vision where health care funds go straight to citizens, empowering them to shop for plans at better rates.
He also dropped news of nine fresh deals with pharmaceutical companies to slash prescription prices, adding to a tally of agreements struck since late September—a win for consumers if the savings actually materialize at the pharmacy counter.
Ultimately, Trump’s latest salvo against Obamacare and his push for direct negotiations with insurers signal a renewed focus on health care reform, though the road ahead looks rocky with partisan gridlock and corporate interests in the mix; still, for many frustrated with rising costs, his willingness to shake the table offers a glimmer of hope.
Mayor-elect Zohran Mamdani just dropped a bombshell by naming Julie Su, a polarizing figure from the Biden administration, to a freshly minted role as deputy mayor for economic justice, according to the New York Post.
On Friday, Mamdani rolled out Su’s appointment alongside Leila Bozorg as deputy mayor for housing and planning, signaling a sharp left turn for New York City’s future policies.
Let’s unpack Su’s baggage first, because it’s heavier than a rush-hour subway car. She served as acting secretary of labor under President Joe Biden but couldn’t muster enough votes for full Senate confirmation, with even moderate Democrats and Republicans balking at her progressive leanings.
During her time as California’s labor secretary, Su oversaw a disaster of epic proportions at the Employment Development Department. A jaw-dropping $30 billion was lost to unemployment fraud, according to the Los Angeles Times, while millions of Californians faced payment delays or wrongful denials, per a non-partisan report.
Now, Mamdani seems to think this track record qualifies Su to oversee worker protection policies in NYC, including agencies like the Taxi and Limousine Commission and the Department of Consumer and Worker Protections. One can’t help but wonder if “economic justice” will mean more red tape than relief for struggling New Yorkers.
Su’s defenders, like Sen. Bernie Sanders, paint her as a champion of the working class, but critics aren’t buying it. Her 2005 paper arguing that corporate definitions fuel economic injustice only fuels concerns that her agenda might prioritize ideology over practicality.
Speaking of Mamdani, he’s brushing off Su’s rocky history like it’s a minor inconvenience. “I’m aware of the deputy mayor’s record, and I’m very excited to have her,” he said on Friday, doubling down on his enthusiasm for her labor advocacy.
That optimism might be misplaced when you consider the opposition Su faced in Washington. Senators like Joe Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema rejected her nomination over her progressive stances, and business groups weren’t exactly sending her fan mail either.
Even Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-La.), chair of the Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee, didn’t mince words about Su’s tenure. “Throughout her tenure at the Department of Labor, she prioritized partisan activism over American workers and their families,” Cassidy stated, slyly adding, “Julie Su is a perfect fit for the Mamdani administration.” Ouch—that’s a backhanded compliment if ever there was one.
Su’s new gig will involve enforcing policies like a recent City Council bill safeguarding Uber drivers from unfair terminations, which Mamdani touted as a blueprint for her work. But at what cost to the gig economy, which already struggles under heavy regulation?
Democratic operative Ken Frydman offered a colorful take, likening Su’s role to a union-friendly “Robin Hood” who might “take from the rich and give to the poor.” While witty, it raises a fair question: will this focus on wealth redistribution deepen the city’s budget woes?
Meanwhile, Mamdani’s other pick, Leila Bozorg, steps into the housing and planning deputy mayor role with her own set of credentials. She’s credited for work on the “City of Yes” housing initiative under Mayor Eric Adams, though some City Hall insiders grumble that Dan Garodnick, the true architect of that zoning overhaul, was snubbed for the position.
Not everyone’s sold on Bozorg’s qualifications either, with one insider noting she didn’t “drive the bus” on “City of Yes” despite being involved. Still, Mamdani’s team seems confident in her ability to tackle the city’s housing crisis.
Dean Fuleihan, named as Mamdani’s first deputy mayor, rounds out the trio of appointments, edging out Garodnick for that top spot. It’s clear this administration is setting a bold, progressive tone, but whether it resonates with everyday New Yorkers remains to be seen.
For now, Su’s appointment is the lightning rod, drawing both praise from labor advocates and sharp criticism from those wary of her past mismanagement. As the city braces for this new chapter, one thing is certain: Mamdani’s vision of “economic justice” will be a battleground, and taxpayers might just be caught in the crossfire.
Hold onto your helmets, folks -- Ohio University just sacked its first-year football head coach, Brian Smith, for a playbook of personal fouls that would make even the most lenient referee blow the whistle.
The university dropped the hammer on Smith after a review uncovered serious misconduct, including an inappropriate relationship with an undergraduate student and violations of alcohol policies on campus, as the New York Post reports.
Let’s rewind to the start of this messy game: Smith was first placed on leave early this month, signaling trouble on the horizon for the Bobcats’ leader.
Before the axe fell, university officials had already issued a stern warning to Smith about his behavior, particularly regarding alcohol use in the workplace.
A letter from an administrator detailed how Smith admitted to keeping alcohol in his office desk and sipping after hours, a clear violation of campus rules.
Ohio University’s policy is crystal clear -- staff can’t possess or consume alcohol on duty or in the workplace, no exceptions, no excuses.
Adding fuel to the fire, President Lori Stewart Gonzalez noted that Smith “smelled strongly of alcohol and appeared intoxicated” during a public event, a claim that paints a troubling picture of leadership.
Smith, for his part, argued that these incidents didn’t impair his professional duties, claiming no one was under the influence during these after-hours toasts.
But let’s be real -- when you’re steering a university football program, optics matter, and stashing bourbon in your desk doesn’t exactly scream “role model” for student-athletes.
Then came the bombshell: an affair with an undergraduate student, allegedly conducted on campus at a university inn, as outlined in a letter from President Gonzalez.
This wasn’t just a personal misstep; it was a direct violation of the trust and responsibility entrusted to a coach who’s supposed to guide young adults, not exploit them.
University officials didn’t mince words, stating the firing followed “an administrative review of allegations that Smith violated the terms of his employment agreement by engaging in serious professional misconduct."
With Smith out, associate head coach John Hauser has stepped in as interim coach, tasked with leading the Bobcats in an upcoming bowl game against UNLV.
Hauser inherits a team that, under Smith, posted a respectable 8-4 record this season, a bittersweet note in an otherwise sour saga.
While the scoreboard shows success, the sideline drama reminds us that character counts just as much as wins, especially in a culture that’s too quick to excuse bad behavior under the guise of “personal freedom.” Ohio University’s decision to terminate Smith sends a message that accountability isn’t just a buzzword -- it’s a standard, even if it stings for fans who admired Smith’s on-field results. In a world obsessed with bending rules for the progressive agenda, it’s refreshing to see an institution hold the line on basic decency, though one can’t help but feel for the players caught in this crossfire.
Hold onto your wallets, folks—Obamacare’s enhanced subsidies are teetering on the edge of a cliff, and some House Republicans are ready to throw verbal punches at their own party leaders for letting it happen.
As the clock ticks toward the year-end expiration of these subsidies, moderate GOP lawmakers like Rep. Mike Lawler of New York are locked in a bitter feud with congressional leadership on both sides over a failure to secure a vote on extending the benefits.
Over the weekend, negotiations between GOP moderates and party brass fizzled out when leadership demanded that any extension—projected to cost a whopping $350 billion over a decade—come with matching spending cuts.
On Tuesday, Speaker Mike Johnson dropped the hammer, announcing there’d be no vote on extending the subsidies, leaving moderates like Lawler fuming at the inaction.
Lawler didn’t hold back, blasting both Republican and Democratic leaders for playing political games while constituents face the threat of skyrocketing insurance premiums.
“I am pissed for the American people. This is absolute bullshit,” Lawler declared, capturing the raw frustration of those in swing districts who fear a voter backlash if costs spike.
Alongside Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick of Pennsylvania, Lawler warns that letting these subsidies lapse could hammer middle-class families in competitive districts with higher insurance bills.
Critics of Obamacare, however, argue the program’s structure was never meant to include these temporary boosts, enacted without GOP support in 2021, and note that insurer profits have ballooned while premiums outpace employer-based plans.
Johnson defended the decision, claiming negotiations were conducted in “good faith” but failed to produce a workable solution for a dozen swing-district Republicans pushing for a vote.
Undeterred, moderates took action on Wednesday, with Fitzpatrick and Democratic Rep. Jared Golden of Maine filing a discharge petition to force a House vote on a two-year extension, gaining support from about a dozen Republicans including Lawler.
Yet, the petition needs 218 signatures to succeed, and it’s nowhere near that magic number, while House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries pushes a separate three-year extension plan most GOP members reject.
Lawler accused Democrats of weaponizing the issue for political gain, pointing fingers at Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer for tabling a doomed three-year proposal earlier this month.
“The Democratic leader will not release his members to sign those two discharge petitions. Why? Because he doesn’t want to actually solve the problem,” Lawler charged, calling out what he sees as cynical maneuvering.
Meanwhile, GOP leadership is forging ahead with a Wednesday vote on the Lower Health Care Premiums for All Americans Act, a bill focusing on transparency and cost-sharing reforms but ignoring the expiring subsidies altogether.
As the deadlock drags on, Lawler hasn’t ruled out joining the Democratic-led petition for a longer extension, hinting that every option remains under consideration in this messy Capitol Hill showdown.
Hold onto your hats, folks—Elon Musk is diving headfirst into the Republican ring with a hefty checkbook for the 2026 midterms.
In a striking pivot, Musk is bankrolling House and Senate Republican campaigns, mending fences with President Donald Trump after a messy public spat earlier this year, and signaling a full-throttle commitment to GOP causes with plans for more donations down the line, Breitbart reported.
This saga kicked off with a rough patch in May when Musk walked away from his role in the administration’s Department of Government Efficiency, a move that seemed to widen the rift with Trump.
By June, the tension boiled over into a very public fallout, with Musk and Trump seemingly at odds over core political visions.
Undeterred, Musk flirted with launching a third-party effort earlier in 2025, a venture that raised eyebrows among traditional conservative circles.
Yet, as summer turned to fall, whispers of reconciliation began, especially after Musk reportedly dined with Vice President JD Vance, hinting at a shift back toward GOP allegiance.
The turning point came in late September when Musk and Trump appeared side by side at a memorial for Turning Point USA founder Charlie Kirk, who tragically lost his life to assassination on September 10.
At the event, both the White House and Musk shared a poignant photo on X, captioned “For Charlie,” symbolizing a united front in honor of a fallen conservative voice.
Kirk himself had hoped for such a reunion, saying back in July, “I think Elon and Trump will reconcile,” a prediction that now seems eerily prophetic (Turning Point USA).
Kirk’s earlier words carry weight, as he noted, “It might seem as if this is irreconcilable, but President Trump has a rather dramatic and telling track record of being able to reconcile and work with people that were otherwise considered to be sworn enemies of MAGA” (Turning Point USA).
His optimism about political feuds cooling off appears to have played out, with sources now confirming that Musk and Trump occasionally speak, a far cry from the icy silence of mid-year.
While some might scoff at such on-again, off-again alliances, it’s hard to deny that politics often thrives on pragmatic handshakes rather than permanent grudges.
Now, Musk is carving out a fresh identity as a major Republican donor, funneling significant funds into campaigns and super PACs with the aim of securing congressional seats in 2026, per sources cited by Axios.
Though exact figures won’t surface until next month’s campaign finance reports, insiders suggest Musk’s contributions are substantial, with more planned throughout the election cycle—a clear sign he’s not just testing the waters but diving in deep.
Perhaps Musk has realized that fighting the progressive agenda requires aligning with a team that, while imperfect, shares a distaste for overreaching government and cultural overreach; it’s a calculated play, and one that could reshape the GOP’s financial firepower.
Hold onto your hats, folks—Rep. Ilhan Omar is sounding the alarm over a troubling encounter between her son and ICE agents in Minnesota.
This past weekend, Omar’s U.S.-born son was stopped by federal agents outside a Target store, an incident that has sparked fierce debate over racial profiling amid a broader immigration enforcement surge in the state, Fox News reported.
Let’s rewind to earlier this month when President Donald Trump stirred the pot with sharp criticism of Omar and Somali communities in Minnesota, calling her “very bad for our country” as reported to journalists.
Fast forward to Friday, when ICE announced a sweeping operation called Metro Surge, nabbing over 400 unauthorized migrants in Minnesota, with the agency claiming the focus was on serious offenders like violent criminals.
Trump doubled down that day, defending ICE’s actions in the state while continuing his verbal barrage against Omar and certain migrant groups, which many see as fanning the flames of division.
Then came Saturday, when Omar’s son found himself in ICE’s crosshairs during a routine stop at a store, only released after flashing his passport to prove his citizenship.
Omar didn’t hold back, accusing ICE of targeting “young men who look Somali,” as she told WCCO-TV in an interview the following day.
That’s a serious charge, and while concerns about profiling deserve a fair hearing, one has to wonder if every stop is a conspiracy or if enforcement is just doing its tough, thankless job.
Omar also revealed her son carries his passport out of fear of being mistaken for an unauthorized migrant, a precaution that speaks volumes about the tension in some communities right now.
Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz jumped into the fray, backing Omar’s claims by stating, “This isn’t a targeted operation to find violent criminals, it’s racial profiling,” in a pointed critique of ICE’s methods.
Walz’s take raises eyebrows—sure, profiling is a real concern, but dismissing an operation that netted hundreds of lawbreakers as mere bias seems a tad convenient for the progressive playbook.
Walz also noted that Omar’s son was fully compliant during the stop, and he’s penned a letter to Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem demanding a rethink of these enforcement tactics after reports of U.S. citizens being detained.
The Department of Homeland Security isn’t taking this lying down, with spokesperson Tricia McLaughlin asserting that only Americans “who assault and obstruct law enforcement have been arrested” in response to Walz’s concerns.
That’s a stark rebuttal, suggesting the feds aren’t randomly harassing folks but reacting to specific behavior—though the optics of stopping citizens going about their day still stinks of overreach to many.
Walz’s letter also flagged broader issues, pointing to eroded trust between Minnesota communities and federal authorities, alongside worries about due process violations during these high-profile sweeps.
Hold onto your hats, folks—former FBI agent and whistleblower Steve Friend has been booted from the bureau once more for crossing a line with threatening comments about Director Kash Patel.
This saga, steeped in controversy, centers on Friend’s recent ouster after a podcast outburst, his history of clashing with FBI brass over the January 6 Capitol attack probe, and a swift fallout with even his former allies.
Let’s rewind to the start: Friend first made waves by alleging that ex-FBI Director Chris Wray unjustly sidelined him for spotlighting flaws in the investigation of the January 6, 2021, Capitol riot, which saw around 1,600 defendants prosecuted.
Suspended in August 2022 and resigning by February 2023, Friend’s return to the FBI payroll in October 2025 was short-lived.
He hadn’t even cleared a background check or started duties at the Jacksonville field office before trouble brewed again.
Then came the spark—during an appearance on The Kyle Seraphin Show podcast, hosted by ex-FBI agent Kyle Seraphin, Friend peddled a conspiracy theory about Patel falsely arresting a suspect tied to the D.C. pipe bombing as a cover-up.
Worse, he veered into dangerous territory with veiled threats about “God’s wrath” aimed at someone in “executive leadership,” a clear jab at Patel with a reference to the Hindu god Vishnu.
“You better pray to Gaia or Vishnu or whatever your maker is, that real Steve Friend is never in a position to be an instrument of God’s wrath, because I will be merciful: I won’t give you a trial and a hanging,” Friend declared on the podcast.
“I’ll allow you to breathe every breath that your body will have for the rest of its natural life inside of a box, and then when it ultimately fades to black, that’s when real wrath begins,” he continued. Talk about a verbal grenade—those words didn’t just raise eyebrows; they triggered alarms at FBI headquarters.
A video snippet of this tirade, shared on X by retired FBI supervisory special agent John Nantz, caught the bureau’s attention, prompting a mandatory in-person meeting at the Jacksonville office soon after.
Friend’s remarks weren’t just reckless—they violated FBI rules against unauthorized public commentary on bureau matters, a policy he’d been warned about after rejoining the payroll.
His own legal team at Empower Oversight dropped him as a client on the day of his podcast outburst, noting he risked “further adverse administrative action by the FBI.”
This isn’t Friend’s first misstep; he previously broke protocol by speaking to outlets like the Russian network RT while still technically on the FBI roster during his suspension.
Here’s the irony: before taking the helm at the FBI, Patel was a financial and moral supporter of Friend through his foundation, backing claims of wrongful treatment under the prior administration.
Yet, upon reviewing personnel files as director, Patel reportedly had reservations about the reasons behind Friend’s initial suspension, though the FBI stays silent on specifics. It’s a bitter twist—yesterday’s ally becoming today’s target, and conservatives must wonder if Friend’s fervor outpaced his judgment in this messy fallout.
House Oversight Chairman James Comer just dropped a bombshell reminder to Bill and Hillary Clinton: show up for your depositions next week or face the heat of contempt of Congress proceedings.
Comer is pressing the former president and former secretary of state to testify behind closed doors about their alleged connections to Jeffrey Epstein, with dates set for Dec. 17 and Dec. 18, following subpoenas issued back in August, Just The News reported.
This saga started months ago when Comer first subpoenaed the Clintons, seeking clarity on their ties to the disgraced financier whose crimes have haunted political circles for years.
Since those subpoenas landed in August, Comer claims the Clintons have been dodging, delaying, and outright ignoring efforts by committee staff to nail down their testimony dates.
If they skip next week’s sessions or fail to reschedule for early January, Comer has made it crystal clear that the Oversight Committee will initiate contempt proceedings to hold them accountable.
“It has been more than four months since Bill and Hillary Clinton were subpoenaed to sit for depositions related to our investigation into Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell’s horrific crimes,” Comer stated.
“Throughout that time, the former President and former Secretary of State have delayed, obstructed, and largely ignored the Committee staff’s efforts to schedule their testimony,” he added, painting a picture of stonewalling that’s hard to ignore.
Now, let’s unpack that: if true, this isn’t just a scheduling snafu—it’s a deliberate sidestep of congressional oversight, which raises eyebrows about what might be lurking behind the curtain.
To be fair, the Clintons haven’t been accused of any wrongdoing in this matter, and they’re not alone in facing scrutiny over Epstein’s shadow.
Other Democrats subpoenaed in this probe have written to Comer’s committee, insisting they knew nothing about Epstein or his actions.
Comer, however, isn’t buying blanket denials, noting that such claims could amount to perjury if later disproven in court—a polite but pointed warning to keep the record straight.
One has to wonder: if there’s truly nothing to hide, why the apparent reluctance to sit down and clear the air once and for all?
Comer’s latest statement doubles down on accountability, with a stark ultimatum: “If the Clintons fail to appear for their depositions next week or schedule a date for early January, the Oversight Committee will begin contempt of Congress proceedings to hold them accountable.”
That’s not just a nudge; it’s a neon sign flashing that the committee means business, and the Clintons’ next move could set a precedent for how far congressional oversight can push against political heavyweights.
While some might see this as political theater, it’s worth remembering that transparency isn’t a partisan issue—it’s the bedrock of trust in governance, and dodging subpoenas only fuels skepticism about elite privilege.
Hold onto your wallets, folks—President Donald Trump and Vice President JD Vance are hitting the road to tackle the affordability crisis head-on.
With a nationwide tour promoting their economic policies, Trump and Vance are addressing voter frustrations over high costs while pushing back against Democratic narratives on the issue, the Daily Caller reported.
This campaign kicked off with Trump speaking in Wilkes-Barre, Pennsylvania, on Tuesday, where he didn’t mince words about the economic mess he claims to have inherited.
Trump insists he took over record-high inflation and prices from the previous administration, yet now boasts that costs for energy and beef are tumbling while the stock market soars.
“I inherited a MESS from the Biden Administration — The Worst Inflation in History, and the Highest Prices our Country has ever seen,” Trump posted on TruthSocial on Thursday.
Give credit where it’s due—he’s swinging hard, but persistent negative polls on his economic handling seem to irk him more than a progressive agenda at a school board meeting.
Meanwhile, Vance is slated to speak in Allentown, Pennsylvania, next Tuesday, following his recent candid remarks during a fireside chat with Breitbart News on November 20.
Unlike Trump’s combative style, Vance strikes a softer note, admitting that many Americans still feel the pinch of unaffordability and asking for patience as the administration’s plans unfold.
“The thing I’d ask for the American people is a little bit of patience,” Vance said in the Breitbart chat, acknowledging that economic recovery takes time.
While Trump grades himself an “A-plus-plus-plus-plus-plus-plus” on the economy in a Politico interview published Tuesday, Vance validates voter impatience with a nod to their real-world challenges.
Both leaders point fingers at Democrats for creating the affordability mess, with Trump even calling the issue a “hoax” started by the opposition and amplified by the media.
Yet, the White House insists there’s no daylight between the two, emphasizing that both recognize ongoing progress and the effectiveness of their economic strategies.
With Democrats gaining ground by hammering affordability in recent campaigns, the pressure is on for the GOP to reclaim the narrative on this voter hot-button issue.
Kevin Hassett, a White House economic adviser, echoes the sentiment that while gains have been made, the work isn’t done—especially when folks are still wincing at grocery store receipts.
Trump and Vance may differ in delivery, but their tour signals a united front against Democratic critiques, aiming to convince Americans that better days are not just promises but policies in motion.