'You Sold Us Out!': Elise Stefanik Drowned Out by Booing Crowd
The congresswoman received a particularly hostile reception from her constituents during a ceremony in Plattsburg Monday evening. More than half of the attendees at the event, intended to mark the renaming of the Clinton County Government Center, were actually protesters, according to the local NBC affiliate NBC 5.
The crowd jeered at Stefanik both times she approached the podium, calling the staunch MAGA supporter a 'traitor,' while others chanted 'shame.'
'You sold us out,' cried one protester.
'You're a Nazi,' shouted another.
Yet another protester yelled on repeat that Stefanik needed to 'unseal the Epstein files.'
Stefanik chided the protesters, claiming that the renaming ceremony for her 'dear friend' was the wrong time and place to attack her—but her constituents disagreed. Instead, they argued that Stefanik had been so absent in their district that they were left with no other choice.
'Well, Elise has not shown up in our district for months and months,' protester Mavis Agnew told NBC 5. 'She won't hold a town hall, she won't take questions. She's never in her office. People show up at her office constantly, door's closed. Her representatives, her employees won't talk to her.... So this was her first appearance, the first opportunity we had to let her know we're unhappy.'
But Stefanik wasn't willing to recognize that her support for Donald Trump's agenda was the basis for her hometown hatred.
'It is a disgusting disgrace that this is what the far left does, rather than understanding that his family has been through a tremendous amount. It was about honoring his legacy,' Stefanik told NBC5 after the event, referring to John Zurlo, for whom the center was renamed.
Stefanik isn't the only Trumpian legislator who has gotten scorched during the summer recess for voting against the needs of their constituents. Earlier this month, Nebraska Representative Mike Flood was excoriated during a town hall for failing to protect SNAP benefits, veterans' programs, and health care access, which combined with voters' simmering resentment for Flood's lagging on the release of the Epstein files.
Solve the daily Crossword
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Inside Trump world's reaction to the Zelenskyy reset
For Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, Monday began with a diplomatic whirlwind. It ended with a great sigh of relief. Hours of meetings in Washington — Zelenskyy with President Donald Trump, Trump with a coterie of Europe's most powerful leaders, all of the above together in the Oval Office — culminated in a 'breakthrough,' in the words of NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte: Trump expressed a willingness to participate in security guarantees for Ukraine. On the international stage, that alone amounts to a new dawn not only for the relationship between the U.S. and Ukraine, but also Zelenskyy's relationship with Trump, and America's with some of its closest transatlantic allies. On the home front, it could be a bit more complicated. While there are no specifics yet on what exactly U.S. security guarantees might look like for Ukraine — Zelenskyy suggested those would be ironed out within 10 days — even the vague allusion to them hints that MAGA may be careening toward another foreign policy divide. In public, there are a few topline takeaways from yesterday. The biggest are the security guarantees, and the reality that Zelenskyy and Russian President Vladimir Putin are hurtling toward a bilateral meeting; German Chancellor Friedrich Merz said that summit could happen within the next two weeks. After that, Trump intends to join Zelenskyy and Putin for a trilateral meeting with the aim of ending Russia's war on Ukraine, he announced on social media. '[T]he optimism of your president is to be taken seriously,' French President Emmanuel Macron told NBC News. 'So if he considers he can get a deal done, this is great news, and we have to do whatever we can to have a great deal.' In private, there are more interesting details. Here's what Trump world insiders are talking in private about yesterday's cascade of diplomatic meetings — and how it perhaps recontextualizes parts of last Friday's Trump-Putin summit in Alaska. 1. The Trump-Zelenskyy reset is real. From the moment Trump complimented Zelenskyy on his suit — all the way through to Vice President JD Vance's more easy rapport with the Ukrainian president and the many 'thanks' Zelenskyy offered — it was a totally different mood than the disastrous February meeting. 'The vibe between the president and Zelenskyy was terrific,' a senior administration official told POLITICO. 'What happened in that first Oval meeting is well gone.' This official described the ensuing talks as 'really productive.' 2. The Europeans proved difference-makers. The goal of convening the Europeans was 'to say 'We're in charge; you'll sign on to anything we say,'' the senior administration official told POLITICO. And the White House was mostly pleased by what they saw. 'The Europeans were positive today, but they are tedious,' the official said. 'But they were really good. And if you just were an observer of the two hours today, you'd say, 'Wow, that's like a family — a happy family.' But they all have their own little thing that they want to have happen. And it really is more of a European war than an American war, but none of them has stepped up.' Was it unwieldy to have them all in a meeting together? Yes. 'They're heads of state,' the official continued. 'They're used to being in charge. And when you put seven of them in one room, you get what you would think. But it wasn't bad.' 3. Trump offered to go straight to a trilateral meeting. The senior administration official told POLITICO that when Trump called Putin to offer his presence at a meeting between Zelenskyy and the Russian leader, Putin said, 'You don't have to come. I want to see him one on one.' Trump's team 'started working on that,' the official said. 'Steve Witkoff has the assignment to get it figured [out].' 4. Alaska paved the way for the 'security guarantees' discussion. If there was any concern within the administration about how the Putin meeting in Anchorage went down, Monday all but evaporated it. 'After Alaska, we were excited that Putin was at least talking and there were signs we could negotiate,' a second senior administration official told POLITICO. One of those signs came on the topic of security guarantees: Putin was 'engaging on a conversation about security guarantees instead of, 'Nyet, nyet, nyet,' this second official said. 'If Alaska was not successful and Putin didn't give us a little bit of an opening, we wouldn't have [had] the Europeans at the White House.' Of Putin: 'He'll drive a hard bargain, but that opening is huge.' 5. Those security guarantees could be a sticking point internationally. It remains unclear just how big a commitment the U.S. has on the line here. 'We haven't even started [that discussion] other than a commitment,' the first senior administration official told POLITICO. 'The question is, 'Who participates to what percentage?' But the president did commit that we would be a part of it. No specifics. And then he said he would also help it get organized. And he alone could sell that to Putin. I don't think Putin would pay any attention to the others, and I'm not sure the others would do it without him.' 6. And those same guarantees could be a problem for Trump domestically. Does the administration have a red line when it comes to committing U.S. troops to keep a peace in Ukraine? 'I don't think there's a red line,' the first senior official told POLITICO. 'So I think it just kind of remains to be seen. [President Trump] would like the Europeans to step up. But I think if the last piece of the puzzle was for a period of time to be a part of a peacekeeping force, I think he would do it.' Meanwhile, as European leaders arrived at the White House, MAGA coalition minder Steve Bannon took to his influential 'War Room' podcast to warn about the U.S. security guarantees in Ukraine. 'I'm just lost how the United States offering an Article 5 commitment for a security guarantee to Ukraine is a win for the United States,' Bannon said on his show Monday morning. 'President Trump has done more than enough to bring the parties together,' Bannon told POLITICO late Monday night. 'Once again, this is a European problem; we have all the leverage here. If we don't fund this, it stops happening. The only way this goes forward — the only way this continues every day — is American money and American arms. The Europeans don't have enough either military hardware and/or financial wherewithal.' Bannon said he hopes Trump 'eventually stops listening to the [Sens.] Lindsey Grahams and Tom Cottons and the Mitch McConnells, and realizes that there can't be any guarantee here from the United States, because that's going to inextricably link us to this conflict.' In a Truth Social post on Monday about the next steps, Trump said 'Vice President JD Vance, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, and Special Envoy Steve Witkoff, are coordinating with Russia and Ukraine.' That callout was striking. 'That's the first time JD and Marco have been dragged into a big foreign policy issue together,' the second senior administration official told POLITICO. 'If it's JD and Marco and Witkoff, who gets the credit and who gets the blame if it fails? This could be the first test of 2028.' Like this content? Consider signing up for POLITICO's Playbook newsletter.
CNN
an hour ago
- CNN
Analysis: Gavin Newsom is owning the MAGAs. How far can he take it?
Donald TrumpFacebookTweetLink Follow For months, the Democratic Party has been a massive vacuum. Its base has been crying out for someone to go toe-to-toe with MAGA and President Donald Trump and to rescue it from its post-2024 funk. Democratic motivation to participate in the midterms has been off the charts. But leaders who are able to seize on that have been all but absent. Until Gavin Newsom. Through happenstance and his oft-demonstrated political guile, the California governor is quickly raising his national profile. And you could forgive Democrats for seeing him as the potential future national leader they've been begging for. But whether that's good for the Democratic Party is another matter entirely. Newsom presents a riddle for Democrats. He often shows a kind of real and rare political talent – like he's doing right now – that may make his party wonder what could be if he put it all together. But he's also basically a caricature of the kind of candidate Republicans would want to run against. He's a California governor and former San Francisco mayor who practically oozes the word 'liberal.' The last two months-plus have put him on the map. First came a showdown with Trump over the president's decision to send the National Guard and Marines to Los Angeles amid protests over the administration's deportations. Given it's the first time in 60 years that a president has done so without gubernatorial approval, Newsom is now in the position of fighting a major Trump power grab – and an apparently unpopular one – in a high-profile court case. But perhaps Newsom's biggest opportunity has come in recent weeks. He's become the face of Democrats' efforts to fight back against another MAGA/Trump power grab: their extraordinary effort to re-gerrymander Texas in the GOP's favor ahead of the 2026 midterm elections. Newsom has promised that California will do the same for Democrats in retaliation, and this week he cued up a potential special election to make it happen. As with the fight over Trump's militarization of US soil, Newsom appears to benefit from where he stands. California is simply Democrats' best opportunity to fight back and offset the GOP's power play in Texas, because it's where Democrats could feasibly draw more districts in their favor. But Newsom has also seized on that opening with aplomb, as CNN's Edward-Isaac Dovere documented this week. Whether Newsom's redistricting gambit works is a major, unanswered question given California voters need to sign off. But if it does, he'll have been the rare Democrat to successfully get down and dirty in fighting back against Trump – something the base increasingly wants. Newsom has also raised his profile in recent days with an effort to mock Trump's style on social media. Liberals have eaten it up, particularly when Republicans and Fox News hosts make clear the joke has gone over their head. Trump and his allies have gotten great mileage out of 'owning the libs'; Newsom, more so than perhaps any Democratic politician in recent memory, is showing you can 'own the MAGAs,' too. (Newsom has also talked with right-wing influencers on his podcast, including Charlie Kirk and Steve Bannon. Those moves have rubbed some on the left the wrong way, but they also suggest a politician who is willing and capable of engaging directly with the other side.) All of which should be encouraging for Democrats. At least one of their own is showing some wherewithal in charting a path forward, which has been sorely lacking with others. But that's different from saying the Democratic Party needs Newsom as its leader. On that, the jury very much remains out. And Democrats might be wary of Newsom filling too much of their vacuum. The governor remains unknown to many Americans. But among those who have offered views of him, he's been consistently underwater – and usually substantially so. A CNN poll last year, when Democrats were considering alternatives to then-President Joe Biden in the 2024 election, showed Americans viewed Newsom unfavorably 31%-21%. A Fox News poll with fewer undecideds showed his split at a negative 44%-35% among registered voters. Perhaps tellingly, both polls showed Newsom underwater with the vast majority of demographics, from young to old, from less-educated to more-educated, from rural to urban. Even young people and voters of color – two traditional Democratic constituencies – were lukewarm on him, at best. He didn't seem to have a real base. Fast forward to today, and things don't appear to be much better for Newsom – or at least, they didn't before the redistricting fight really kicked off. A Gallup poll conducted in mid July showed Americans viewed Newsom unfavorably by 11 points, 41%-30%. Those numbers are hardly unheard of; Newsom had plenty of company in being double-digits underwater, including Trump, Biden and several key Trump administration figures like Vice President JD Vance. But other Democratic-aligned politicians were better off. Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont was plus-11, and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York was only 4 points underwater. Unlike those two, Newsom engendered a lot more opposition among Republicans (minus-58) than he did support among Democrats (plus-42). And he was about as unpopular among independents (minus-15) as Biden (minus-18). All of these numbers could shift if and when Newsom truly breaks through on the national stage. But you could see a situation in which Newsom's stock in the 2028 presidential primary continues to rise in the absence of other Democrats being able to take the fight to Trump like he has. And that could leave the party with some difficult choices about its path forward.
Axios
an hour ago
- Axios
MAGA isolationists brace for details of Ukraine security guarantees
MAGA is anxious for clarity on U.S. security guarantees for Ukraine, torn between trusting President Trump's peace efforts and the movement's deep-rooted aversion to foreign interventionism. Why it matters: As an essential precondition for ending the war, Ukraine wants written, binding assurances that its allies — namely Europe, but preferably the U.S. — will defend it from future Russian attacks. The details of those security guarantees will be negotiated in the coming weeks, but could potentially involve European peacekeepers in Ukraine backed by U.S. air power. As leader of the "America First" movement, Trump must navigate a delicate balance: offering enough security to satisfy Kyiv without making military commitments that could fracture his base. What they're saying: "These are tripwires. This is where things go from regional conflicts to world wars," MAGA godfather Steve Bannon said on his "War Room" podcast, blasting U.S. security guarantees as a recipe for decades-long involvement in Ukraine. Driving the news: In his recent burst of diplomacy — beginning with Friday's summit with Russian President Vladimir Putin — Trump has repeatedly stressed that Ukraine will not join NATO and that no U.S. troops will be on the ground in Ukraine. "You have my assurance, you know, I'm president," Trump told Fox News Tuesday morning when pressed on how he could ensure that U.S. troops wouldn't be patrolling the Ukraine-Russia border after he leaves office. Yes, but: White House envoy Steve Witkoff suggested Sunday that the U.S. guarantee could resemble "Article Five-like protection" — the core NATO principle that an attack on one ally is treated as an attack on all. That would open the door to direct U.S. intervention if Russia were to attack the peacekeeping mission of a NATO ally in Ukraine. Trump also told Fox that the U.S. "will help by air" — presumably meaning American pilots would be involved in the mission, and thus vulnerable to a potential Russian attack. How it's playing: Breitbart News Editor-in-Chief Alex Marlow told Axios that there's "no reason to be a Panican at this point" — Trump's jab at Republicans who panic in response to media alarmism. But he warned that U.S. involvement could escalate quickly, and that questions remain about the potential for the U.S. to get sucked into a shooting war with Russia. "We know full well what happens if those [European] troops get attacked: all those nations will expect American forces to get involved. That's when things get complicated," Marlow said. Libby Emmons, the editor-in-chief of The Post Millennial and Human Events, said "there aren't enough answers yet as to what those guarantees will look like or what it means for U.S. involvement." But so far, she told Axios, the sentiment among MAGA is one of "cautious optimism." "The base is always willing to give Trump the benefit of the doubt, but it makes people anxious," added conservative commentator Ryan Girdusky. Zoom out: Trump still retains a deep well of goodwill from his base as he pushes to end to the yearslong war in Ukraine. While one MAGAworld operative acknowledged the "uncertainty" in negotiatoins, the movement finds it "reassuring" to hear confirmation from Trump that Ukraine won't join NATO. Past fissures between Trump and his base have almost always healed — either through policy pivots or the simple passage of time binding together two parties reluctant to part ways.
