Rising Michigan Democrat says she was 'going to punch someone' over party's 'annoying' economic gaslighting
Michigan Democratic Sen. Elissa Slotkin called out her own party on Wednesday for spending years claiming the economy wasn't bad under the Biden administration.
Though she defended voting in favor of many of former President Joe Biden's economic policies as a congresswoman, Slotkin told the New York Times' "The Opinions" podcast that Democrats largely fumbled by ignoring people's struggles.
"So we did pass a bunch of things, but we also spent a good year plus after the pandemic explaining to people that the economy was not as bad as they thought," Slotkin said. "Saying things like: This Harvard economist says that G.D.P. is the highest, bah, bah, bah."
Dem Senator Says It's No 'Secret To Anyone' That Trump Has Party On Its Heels
She remarked, "I was going to punch someone if they quoted me one more Harvard economist when I could tell you with certainty that in my part of the world, people's wages were not keeping pace with inflation. Period."
Slotkin went on to say that the Democratic Party made voters feel "stupid" by ignoring their issues because the economy looked good "on a piece of paper in a spreadsheet in Boston."
Read On The Fox News App
"That was annoying and was our fault," she said.
Slotkin, who was elected to the Senate last year, rose to national prominence after giving the Democratic response to President Donald Trump's congressional address in March. Since then, she has been equally critical of her own party for its focus on identity politics.
Click Here For More Coverage Of Media And Culture
In April, Politico previewed a speech she gave in Lansing where she called on the Democratic Party to "f---ing retake the flag" and stop being "weak and woke."
Though that report got attention, Slotkin clarified to the New York Times that the words "weak" and "woke" were not from her but from focus groups describing the Democratic Party.
"Just to correct the record, the 'weak' and 'woke' were the two words when there were focus groups done in Michigan in February. The two most common words to describe the Democratic Party in Michigan were 'weak' and 'woke.' So just to be accurate, that wasn't me who said those two words. It was me repeating what the perception is of the party," Slotkin said.Original article source: Rising Michigan Democrat says she was 'going to punch someone' over party's 'annoying' economic gaslighting
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
34 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Failed Sotheby's auction of $70M bust leaves art insiders speechless — are collectibles no longer covetable?
What was meant to be a quick sale of a rare antique turned into a sobering reminder of the hidden risks of so-called alternative assets. Grande tête mince, a bronze sculpture by Alberto Giacometti, failed to meet expectations at a recent Sotheby's auction. Industry insiders and art experts estimated that the sculpture was worth $70 million, however the auction failed after the highest bid maxed out at $64.25 million, according to the New York Times. Thanks to Jeff Bezos, you can now become a landlord for as little as $100 — and no, you don't have to deal with tenants or fix freezers. Here's how I'm 49 years old and have nothing saved for retirement — what should I do? Don't panic. Here are 5 of the easiest ways you can catch up (and fast) Nervous about the stock market in 2025? Find out how you can access this $1B private real estate fund (with as little as $10) This high-profile flop highlights some of the risks of storing wealth in collectibles. On average, ultrawealthy families across the world have allocated roughly 13.4% of their assets to artwork and collectibles, according to Deloitte. However, the market is notoriously opaque and illiquid, which means many of these collectible items might not be worth as much as their owners believe. Investors looking for an asset that isn't exposed to the same market dynamics as stocks and bonds have better options than art. Here are three alternative assets that could be more attractive than ancient sculptures or oil on canvas. Gold has been around longer than any piece of ancient art and its collectors include central banks and sovereign nations. The market for this precious metal is also much more transparent and robust. Gold's reputation as an uncorrelated, safe haven has been cemented in recent months. As President Donald Trump's ongoing trade war whips up volatility in stocks, bonds and cryptocurrencies, the price of gold has surged roughly 25% over the past six months. Adding some exposure to this hard asset could be a good idea if you're worried about economic growth, inflation or interest rate volatility over the medium to long term. Read more: Want an extra $1,300,000 when you retire? Dave Ramsey says — and that 'anyone' can do it Tangible land and property has strikingly different dynamics than either stocks or bonds. According to an analysis by J.P. Morgan , direct real estate as an asset class tends to have low or even negative correlation with the S&P 500. To be clear, J.P. Morgan focused on direct real estate deals. An analysis by Guggenheim Investments found that real estate investment trusts (REITs) had higher correlation with the S&P 500. That means if you're a homeowner or landlord with direct ownership, you're less exposed to the stock market's volatility. You could also consider a crowdfunding platform to get access to niche real estate deals. Infrastructure assets such as toll roads, bridges, cell phone towers and airports have many of the same dynamics as real estate. However, these assets are more rare and could have great earnings potential. According to KKR, private infrastructure assets across the world performed better than stocks and bonds in 2022, when inflation and interest rates were rapidly rising. That makes these assets an ideal 'shock absorber' for a typical investor's portfolio. If you're looking to add some exposure to this niche asset class, consider the iShares U.S. Infrastructure ETF or the SPDR S&P Global Infrastructure ETF. You could also take a closer look at infrastructure stocks such as wireless infrastructure manager American Tower, pipeline owner Enbridge or electric vehicle charging operator ChargePoint Holdings. Pipelines and cell towers might not be as exciting as rare exotic artwork, but they're likely to be more lucrative and less volatile. Here are 5 'must have' items that Americans (almost) always overpay for — and very quickly regret. How many are hurting you? Rich, young Americans are ditching the stormy stock market — here are the alternative assets they're banking on instead Robert Kiyosaki warns of a 'Greater Depression' coming to the US — with millions of Americans going poor. But he says these 2 'easy-money' assets will bring in 'great wealth'. How to get in now This is how American car dealers use the '4-square method' to make big profits off you — and how you can ensure you pay a fair price for all your vehicle costs Like what you read? Join 200,000+ readers and get the best of Moneywise straight to your inbox every week. This article provides information only and should not be construed as advice. It is provided without warranty of any kind.
Epoch Times
39 minutes ago
- Epoch Times
Whitmer Says Trump Dropped Talk of Pardoning Men Convicted in Kidnap Plot
Michigan's Gov. Gretchen Whitmer said that President Donald Trump reaffirmed to her that he would not be pardoning the two men who were imprisoned for leading a plot to kidnap her in 2020. The Democratic governor disclosed on Michigan public radio on May 29 that about a month ago, the president asked her how she felt about him possibly pardoning the men, Barry Croft Jr. and Adam Fox.
Fox News
39 minutes ago
- Fox News
DOUG SCHOEN: I'm a Harvard grad. Here's my take what Trump's doing right and wrong
The ongoing fight between the Trump administration and Harvard University has – unfortunately – taken on a life of its own. I say unfortunately, not because I believe the reforms President Donald Trump is demanding are wholly out of bounds – they are not, by any means. Rather, I say this because, as an alum of both Harvard undergrad and law school – and a longtime donor – the rampant antisemitism on campus, as well as the university's imperiousness, I cannot fault the White House for acting. Indeed, there is a legitimate argument to be made that Harvard must be reined in. That being said, there are concerns unique to Harvard that separate it from other universities. These concerns range from its handling of antisemitism, its silencing of voices who do not conform to far-left orthodoxy, as well as who it has hired. Notably, the concerns surrounding Harvard did not originate with its handling of antisemitism in the wake of Hamas' October 7th attack on Israel. It has long been the epicenter of Diversity, Education, and Inclusion (DEI) efforts in the U.S., to the point where the Supreme Court was forced to strike down its admissions criteria for being unfair to Asian students in June 2023. And yet, within just the past month, two serious incidents underscore how much further Harvard has to go in order to reform and redeem itself. First, the Harvard Law Review awarded a $65,000 grant to Ibraham Bharmal, after the Harvard Law School student was charged with assaulting an Israeli student, an incident caught on video. In effect, Harvard not only tolerated Bharmal's antisemitism, but rewarded it with a taxpayer-funded grant after he assaulted another student solely because of his nationality and Jewish identity. Second, Harvard recently revoked the tenure of Francesca Gino, a professor of business administration - who ironically is "well known for studying honesty" as Pilar Arias noted – after a four-year long fight over Gino's repeated falsification of data. To be clear, this is not to say that I agree with every action Trump has taken against Harvard. For example, blanket bans on accepting foreign students is excessive, but vetting their social media is inherently reasonable. Universities routinely do this for American students; thus it stands to reason Harvard should have the same – or even stricter – policy for foreigners. To that end, Harvard professor Steven Pinker recently published a piece in the New York Times which does a tremendous job at capturing the issues Harvard must address and the best ways to do so. Pinker, who makes his frustration towards the school's handling of antisemitism, free speech, hiring practices, and more very clear, makes one more key point: while Harvard has its "serious ailments," the reaction must also be calibrated. In other words, while Harvard should not have unfettered access to billions of dollars of taxpayer money, there is a real risk that across-the-board cuts harm America's scientific prowess without producing the – very necessary – reforms Trump is demanding. There is ample opportunity for a more targeted approach that can force Harvard to make these necessary changes without destroying the school's leadership in many vital fields. For instance, grants to social sciences can be canceled without touching money that funds medical or scientific research into cancer or other diseases. And while I agree with Pinker on that and other points he makes, perhaps the most important thing he points out is that the only thing thus far that has spurred Harvard to take any steps towards change has been Trump. As Pinker puts it, "The uncomfortable fact is that many of these reforms followed Mr. Trump's inauguration and overlap with his demands." Of course, it should not take the President of the United States to bring American universities inline with their own codes of conduct. Nor should it take the power of the White House to force Harvard to crackdown on the scourge of antisemitism and anti-American extremism that has overrun its campus. And yet, this is where we now find ourselves. It is my hope, as an alum, and as an American, that the Trump administration and Harvard come to a solution whereby the university realizes it cannot continue to permit – or reward – students who so blatantly violate the code of conduct, either of the university or of the United States.
