Ex-Democratic leader warns party is 'dying' as key issues leave voters wanting 'new way forward'
"It is a dying party. It will go the way of the Whigs in a century past," she said while appearing on "Fox & Friends First."
"The new way forward is an America-first party, the Republican Party under Donald Trump… This is really a new party, and it's one that recognizes that borders matter, citizenship matters, safety for all [matters]. We care about the content of one's character much more than we care about the color of our skin, and across the board… we are there together to say, 'Stop the nonsense. Speak common sense.'"
Former Democrat Hill Staffers Challenge The Aging Establishment In Congress: Report
Romero said many former Democrats – Tulsi Gabbard, Leo Terrell, RFK, Jr. and herself included – tried to be voices for reform within the party, but saw the writing on the wall and ultimately resigned themselves to leaving altogether.
Her comments lambasting Democrats came after Pennsylvania Democratic Sen. John Fetterman bucked his party over the border and antisemitism during a Fox Nation-hosted debate with his Republican colleague Sen. Dave McCormick on Monday.
Read On The Fox News App
"Antisemitism [is] out of control… Building tent cities on a campus and terrorizing and intimidating Jewish students – that's not free speech, and now we've lost the argument in parts of my party," he conceded.
Biden Cover-up Scandal Could Usher In New Era Of Republican Dominance
"Our party did not handle the border appropriately. Look at the numbers: 267,000, 300,000 people showing up at our border. Now that's unacceptable and that's a national security issue and that is chaos."
Romero applauded the Keystone State lawmakers for showcasing a commitment to working across the aisle in a way she wishes more politicians would consider.
"Sadly, Democrats are still caught in that web, the ideology of identity politics, and it [working across the aisle] has not yet taken root," she said.Click Here To Join Fox Nation
"They still stand up and scream that everybody's a Nazi, everybody's racist. Or still defend open borders, deny the rampant antisemitism, and refuse to stand up for America first. But hopefully, with the Fetterman-McCormick discussion debate, I hope it really sends a message across the country that this is what the American people want – for our elected officials to grow up, to listen to each other, and work with each other for Americans."Original article source: Ex-Democratic leader warns party is 'dying' as key issues leave voters wanting 'new way forward'
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles

USA Today
a few seconds ago
- USA Today
California redistricting vote begins with overwhelming support, Newsom pollster says
Newsom has called for a Nov. 4 special election on the new maps. The California state legislature, where Democrats have a supermajority, would first need to vote to put the measure before the voters. WASHINGTON ― California Gov. Gavin Newsom's redistricting proposal aimed at creating five new Democratic congressional seats begins with overwhelming support ahead of a planned November referendum when voters would decide its fate, according to a survey conducted by his longtime pollster. The proposal is backed by 57% of California voters and opposed by 35%, the poll taken by Democratic pollster David Binder found, according to a report by Axios. Another 8% of voters in the heavily Democratic state said they were undecided. Newsom has portrayed his mid-term redistricting push as necessary to offset Texas Gov. Greg Abbott's pursuit to create five new Republican congressional districts in Texas. President Donald Trump has publicly lobbied for the gerrymandering in Texas to boost Republican chances in the 2026 midterm elections. Newsom last week called for a Nov. 4 special election on the new maps. The California state legislature, where Democrats have a supermajority, would first need to vote to put the measure before the voters. The poll found 84% of California's Democratic voters support the redistricting plan while 79% of the state's Republicans oppose it. The 57% in overall support for the redistricting plan is a jump from the 51% who said they backed redrawing California's congressional maps in a July poll. California currently has 43 congressional seats held by Democrats and nine by Republicans. The creation of five new Democratic-friendly districts could sway California's delegation to a 48-5 advantage for Democrats. Yet the move comes with risk for Democrats because it might create several competitive seats that Republicans could target. "I know they say, 'Don't mess with Texas,'" Newsom, widely considered a potential presidential candidate in 2028, quipped at a Democratic rally kicking off the redistricting campaign last week. "Well, don't mess with the great Golden State." California has an independent redistricting commission that is designed to limit partisan influence on the map-drawing process, but Newsom said the measure would allow a new process to draw maps that would go into effect for House elections in 2026, 2028, and 2030, before ceding power back to the commission to draw maps ahead of 2032. Redistricting in all states is required by federal law every 10 years following the release of new U.S. Census Bureau figures; however, Trump pushed Texas Republicans to jumpstart the process in the middle of the decade, setting off a cross-country redistricting fight. Redistricting efforts are also ongoing in Florida and Ohio that could benefit Republicans, while Republican-controlled Indiana and Missouri are also discussing redrawing their maps. Control of the U.S. House of Representatives at stake, with Republicans currently holding a 219-212 majority. Contributing: Erin Mansfield of USA TODAY Reach Joey Garrison on X @joeygarrison.


Gizmodo
a few seconds ago
- Gizmodo
John Deere Hit With Layoffs Amidst Trump's Idiotic Tariffs
Donald Trump's tariff policies are generating billions of dollars for the federal government by sucking it out of American businesses via import duties. Some companies seem to be feeling downstream impacts from the government's unconventional new policies, and it may even be resulting in job losses for the sort of companies that sell to Trump's base. John Deere, the tractor seller, recently announced a raft of layoffs, but right before doing that, it held an unfortunate earnings call during which executives revealed that the company had seen a downturn in profits. Some of that downturn, the call seemed to suggest, could be credited to the climate of uncertainty created by the administration's tariff regime. The Des Moines Register reports: In its earnings report, the company noted that President Donald Trump's tariffs have added to the woes of farm-equipment makers who already were grappling with slow demand. Farmers are opting to rent machinery instead of buying. 'Tariff uncertainty and deflated commodity prices have made farmers increasingly cautious in spending decisions and more hesitant to accept higher machinery prices,' said CFRA Research analyst Jonathan Sakraida. The New Republic reports that, during the company's recent earnings call, Cory Reed, president of John Deere's Worldwide Agriculture and Turf Division, noted that the tariffs were a factor in buying decisions. 'If you have customers that are concerned about what their end markets are going to look like in a tariff environment, they're waiting to see the outcomes of what these trade deals look like,' Reed said. In other words, once again, demographics that Trump claimed he would help (factory workers and farmers) seem to be getting shafted by his policies. The layoffs at John Deere, which were announced on Aug. 18th, will impact 71 workers at its foundry in Iowa and another 167 workers at various locations in Illinois, the Register writes. While the side effects of Trump's tariff regime haven't been quite as apocalyptic as some analysts initially imagined, the economy isn't doing great, and small business owners are clearly feeling the pain from the new economic order. Indeed, recent lawsuits filed by small businesses against the Trump administration have thrown into question the very legal basis of his policies. As we pointed out earlier this month, if the tariffs are deemed illegal in a court of law, it's likely that the government will have to pay back all of that tariff revenue to the businesses it came from. This would be a terrible humiliation for the White House, a logistical nightmare, and a financial disaster for the federal government. Somehow, it's still sorta funny to imagine it happening.


The Hill
a few seconds ago
- The Hill
Repealing EPA's endangerment finding will cause a public health nightmare
As America faces increasing health threats from wildfire smoke, summer heat waves and rising cases of asthma and other respiratory illnesses, the last thing we need is to reverse laws that protect U.S. air quality. Yet, that's precisely what the Trump administration intends to do by proposing a repeal of a central scientific finding that serves as the basis for the Clean Air Act — legislation that has saved millions of American lives and been responsible for monumental advancements both to our environment and public health. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Lee Zeldin announced last month the agency plans to end a long-held 'endangerment finding' that asserts carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases present a risk to human health. If that happens, it will neutralize the federal government's ability to combat climate change and enforce laws intended to protect America's wellbeing. One of those laws is the Clean Air Act. Enacted in 1970, it has been one of the most successful public health policies in U.S. history. It's credited with reducing six of the most common air pollutants in the U.S. by nearly 80 percent while saving over 230,000 early deaths and avoiding over 120,000 emergency room visits every year. It has reduced chronic bronchitis, infant mortality and prevented millions of cases of asthma exacerbation as well. These statistics aren't conjecture: They're sourced directly from the EPA's own website, the same agency now leading the charge to turn the clock back on these remarkable achievements. Zeldin's announcement claims that the reversal of the endangerment finding will 'undo the underpinning of $1 trillion in costly regulations.' But the positive U.S. economic impact from the Clean Air Act alone far exceeds this figure. By reducing hospital visits, sick days and treatment of costly respiratory-related disease, the EPA estimates the Clean Air Act has created $2 trillion in U.S. economic benefit as of 2020 — twice the amount Zeldin asserts the endangerment finding's repeal would create. Further, clean energy has proven itself to be a source of strong job creation. The Department of Energy found that jobs in renewable energy grew more than twice as fast as the vibrant 2023 U.S labor market. And the science couldn't be clearer: Clean air is critical to public health. 'Decades of research have shown that air pollutants such as ozone and particulate matter increase the amount and seriousness of lung and heart disease and other health problems,' the EPA states. Worse, those pollutants are disproportionately burdened by communities of color. A 2024 Milken Institute of Public Health study found that marginalized communities have eight times the number of pediatric asthma cases and a 30 percent higher chance of dying early from pollution exposure. That same study attributed this inequality to the close proximity many minority communities share with industrial manufacturing facilities. Imagine what those numbers would be if the endangerment finding is reversed and the U.S. can no longer enforce Clean Air Act provisions. Zeldin referred to the EPA action as 'driving a dagger into the heart of the climate change religion,' and that it would be 'the largest deregulatory action in the history of America.' But doing so will only cause greater sickness in America and inundate an already stressed U.S. health care system. Increased exposure to air pollution will result in higher numbers of emergency room visits, increased rates of chronic illness and heightened health care costs. The medical and environmental advocacy community agree greater exposure to carbon dioxide and greenhouse gas is a bad idea. Groups such as the American Lung Association, American Public Health Association, American Thoracic Society, World Wildlife Fund, along with nursing organizations and medical societies all stand in strong opposition to the EPA's proposed action. Zeldin's proposal follows another questionable deregulatory move by the EPA in recent weeks to reintroduce dicamba, a weed killer used on soybeans and cotton. Use of the pesticide was halted by a federal court last year. A 2020 study in the International Journal of Epidemiology found that exposure to dicamba was reportedly 'linked to some cancers, including liver cancer and a type of leukemia affecting the blood and bone marrow.' But the EPA has argued it 'has not identified any human health or dietary risks of concern.' The U.S. government's job is to protect America's citizens. The Clean Air Act has saved millions of lives, safeguarded our skies and proven that environmental laws and economic progress can peacefully coexist. Repealing the endangerment finding will set America on a dangerous path and put the health and welfare of every American at risk.