Ruthless Co-Host Josh Holmes On Dem. Party: Rudderless…Without Any Substantive Ideas To Improve The Lives Of The American People
It's a problem for everything, but it's also just entirely indicative of where the Democratic party is. It is rudderless. It is without any substantive ideas to improve the lives of the American people. And so what they rely upon is this bizarre sort of culture echo chamber that brings in things like criticizing Sidney Sweeney for being in ads for a pair of jeans. They don't they don't stand for anything other than they have to be outraged by something and you've seen Some rank-and-file Democrats express exasperation in many ways and that it's an increasingly violent base That is demanding that they their people fight harder
Christine Bragg
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
San Francisco Chronicle
12 minutes ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
In his push for fairness in college admissions, Trump has been silent on legacy preferences
WASHINGTON (AP) — As President Donald Trump attempts to reshape college admissions, he's promising a new era of fairness, with an emphasis on merit and test scores and a blind eye toward diversity. Yet the Republican president's critics — and some allies — are questioning his silence on admissions policies that give applicants a boost because of their wealth or family ties. While he has pressed colleges to eliminate any possible consideration of a student's race, he has made no mention of legacy admissions, an edge given to the children of alumni, or similar preferences for the relatives of donors. Trump often rails against systems he describes as 'rigged,' but he has overlooked a glaring instance in higher education, said Richard Kahlenberg, a researcher at the Progressive Policy Institute think tank who has written about admissions. 'It's hard to think of a more flagrant way in which the system is rigged than legacy preferences,' Kahlenberg said. 'Rarely is a system of hereditary privilege so openly practiced without any sense of shame.' In recent weeks, Trump has taken several actions to scrub any vestiges of race from admissions decisions, suggesting that some schools are ignoring a 2023 Supreme Court decision striking down affirmative action. His administration negotiated settlements with Brown and Columbia universities that included provisions to share admissions data. Last week, Trump issued a call for colleges nationwide to submit data to prove they do not consider race in admissions. Some are urging Trump to go further. Sen. Todd Young, R-Ind., applauded the settlement with Brown requiring the university to turn a blind eye toward race — even in application essays. But 'restoring meritocracy warrants more,' said Young, who cosponsored legislation in 2023 aiming to end legacy admissions. 'Federally accredited institutions should eliminate ALL preferences grounded in arbitrary circumstances of ancestry that students have no control over, such as legacy status,' Young said on social media. Many selective colleges consider family ties Sometimes called 'affirmative action for the rich,' the practice of legacy admissions remains widespread among elite colleges even as it faces mounting bipartisan opposition. Virginia's Republican governor signed a bill last year barring legacy admissions at public institutions, following similar measures in Colorado, California and elsewhere. Some Republicans in Congress have worked with Democrats on proposals to end it nationwide. Roughly 500 universities consider legacy status when evaluating applicants, including more than half of the nation's 100 most selective U.S. schools, according to 2023 disclosures to the federal government. A few have abandoned the policy, but it remains in place at all eight Ivy League schools. Stanford University said in July it will continue considering legacy status, even after a California law barred it at institutions that receive state financial aid. Stanford opted to withdraw from the state's student financial aid program rather than end the practice. The university said it will replace the funding with internal money — even as it begins layoffs to close a $140 million budget deficit. Stanford officials declined to comment. Last year, as part of a state transparency law, the school reported that about 14% of its new students were relatives of alumni or donors. A push for merit, but no mention of legacy admissions The executive action signed by Trump last week requires universities to turn over more information about students who apply to and are accepted to their campuses. Taxpayers 'deserve confidence in the fairness and integrity' of decisions, his memorandum said, adding that more information is needed to ensure colleges are heeding the Supreme Court's decision. A week earlier, the Justice Department issued a memo clarifying what it considers illegal discrimination in admissions. It takes issue not only with overt racial considerations but also 'proxies' for race, including 'geographic targeting' or personal essays asking about obstacles applicants have overcome. Similar language requiring 'merit-based' admissions policies was included in the government's resolutions with Brown and Columbia universities. None of the actions made any mention of legacy admissions. Trump's silence caught the attention of the nonprofit Lawyers for Civil Rights, which has an open complaint with the Education Department alleging that Harvard University's use of donor and alumni preferences amounts to illegal racial discrimination. The group's 2023 complaint says the practice overwhelmingly benefits white students. If the Trump administration wants to make admissions a meritocracy, it should start by ending legacy preferences, said Oren Sellstrom, litigation director for the group. 'These deeply unmeritocratic preferences simply reward students based on who their parents are. It's hard to imagine anything more unfair or contrary to basic merit principles,' he said. Few Americans support legacy or donor preferences Colleges defend the practice by saying it builds community and encourages families to become donors. Some backers say it increasingly helps nonwhite students as campuses become more diverse. Then-President Joe Biden, a Democrat, urged colleges to rethink legacy preferences in the wake of the Supreme Court decision, saying it expanded 'privilege instead of opportunity.' Some feared it would drive up white enrollment as affirmative action ended. Georgetown University reviewed the policy but kept it in place this year after concluding the pool of legacy applicants had a similar makeup to the wider admissions pool. An AP-NORC poll in 2023 found that most Americans have a dim view of legacy and donor preferences, with few saying either should play a strong role in decisions. Universities are required to tell the federal government whether they consider legacy status, but they don't have to divulge how far it tips the scale or how many legacy students they admit. Among the 20 most selective universities that say they employ the practice, none would tell The Associated Press what percentage of their incoming class has a family connection to alumni or donors. Trump's blitz to root out racial preferences has hinged on the argument that it undermines merit. New scrutiny is needed to ensure colleges are following the Supreme Court's order and 'recruiting and training capable future doctors, engineers, scientists' and other workers, he said in his executive action. That argument sends the message that minority students are 'intellectually suspect until proven otherwise,' said Justin Driver, a Yale law professor with a forthcoming book on affirmative action. He worries Trump's latest actions will intimidate colleges into limiting minority enrollment to avoid raising the suspicion of the government. 'I believe that the United States confronts a lot of problems today,' Driver said. 'Too many Black students on first-rate college campuses is not among them.'
USA Today
12 minutes ago
- USA Today
From bromance to bitterness, Trump-Putin relationship full of twists and turns
After a summer of phone calls and public outbursts against Russia's leader, President Donald Trump will meet in Alaska with Vladimir Putin. WASHINGTON − After a summer of phone calls and public outbursts against Vladimir Putin, President Donald Trump is ready to take their relationship offline. Each will fly more than 4,000 miles to a United States military base in Anchorage, Alaska, for a summit Trump hopes will be a prelude to ending Russia's war on Ukraine. It won't be easy after a summer of increased Russian attacks and mounting threats by Trump against Russia's economy. 'If it's a bad meeting, it'll end very quickly,' Trump told reporters on Aug. 14. 'And if it's a good meeting, we're going to end up getting peace.' More: It was sold in 1867, but some Russians want Alaska back from the US The presidents will meet one-on-one, followed by a Russian-American lunch. European leaders and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy have conducted days of panicked diplomacy in the lead-up to the high-stakes summit, which they were not invited to attend. Trump has said repeatedly that territorial concessions will be necessary to end the war. But he says he won't cut a deal when he sits down with Putin that forces Ukraine to give up land. Instead, he says, he'll 'feel out' Putin and see if there's an agreement to be had. More: Why is Alaska the 'most strategic place' for Trump-Putin meeting? It will be their seventh time meeting as the leaders of their respective countries; the first six of those happened during Trump's first term. Trump has also contradicted himself over the years about when he first met the Russian leader. Here's a look at the two leaders' journey from bromance to 'bulls----,' tracing how the Trump-Putin relationship started and stopped: 'Stablemates' Trump pondered whether Putin could become his 'new best friend' in a social media post on June 18, 2013, before the Miss Universe pageant in Moscow. The real estate mogul told NBC : 'I do have a relationship, and I can tell you that he's very interested in what we're doing here today.' But the news outlet later reported that a meeting between the two never came to fruition. Trump then claimed during a presidential primary debate in 2015 that they got to know one another as 'stablemates' on an episode of CBS' '60 Minutes' that Trump taped in New York − and Putin taped in Moscow. More: Putin-Trump 'bromance' broadens post-sanctions 'I got to know him very well because we were both on '60 Minutes.' We were stablemates,' Trump said. Nevertheless, Trump would go on to say on the campaign trail, in February 2016, that he had 'no relationship' with Putin. "I'm saying that I'd possibly have a good relationship. He's been very nice to me," Trump said on April 28, 2016. Dmitry Peskov, a longtime spokesman for the Russian president, said in August 2016 that Putin had never had 'any contacts with Trump.' Trump rejects Russian meddling in 2016 At a news conference on July 27, 2016, Trump asked Russia 'to find' deleted emails of his Democratic opponent, Hillary Clinton, during comments about allegations of Russian hacking. 'I will tell you this, Russia: If you're listening, I hope you're able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing,' Trump said. At the same news conference, Trump said: 'I never met Putin, I don't know who Putin is.' 'I've never spoken to him. I don't know anything about him other than he will respect me,' Trump said. Trump routinely dismissed reporting that Russia had hacked the Democratic National Committee throughout the general election – and beyond. He said during a presidential debate with Hillary Clinton on Sept. 27, 2016: 'I don't think anybody knows it was Russia that broke into the DNC. She's saying Russia, Russia, Russia. Maybe it was. I mean, it could be Russia. But it could also be China. But it could also be lots of other people. It also could be someone sitting on their bed that weighs 400 pounds, OK?' Trump at his second debate with Clinton on Oct. 27, 2016, said, 'Maybe there is no hacking." 'But they always blame Russia. And the reason they blame Russia, because they think they're trying to tarnish me with Russia. I know nothing about Russia,' Trump said. But he acknowledged, on Jan. 11, 2017, as president-elect that Putin's government was involved. 'As far as hacking, I think it was Russia. But I think we also get hacked by other countries and other people.' Trump's complicated relationship with Putin his first term The Justice Department appointed a special counsel on May 17, 2017, to investigate alleged ties between Trump campaign officials and Moscow as part of a probe into Russian meddling in the U.S. election. Acting Attorney General Rod Rosenstein tapped former FBI director Robert Mueller to lead the investigation. "As I have stated many times, a thorough investigation will confirm what we already know: There was no collusion between my campaign and any foreign entity," Trump said in response. Trump's first in-person meeting with Putin took place nearly two months later in Hamburg, Germany, on July 7, 2017. They met again in Helsinki, Finland, at a July 16, 2018 summit. At a joint news conference with Putin in Helsinki, Trump emphasized that there was 'no collusion' between his campaign and Russia. He said the allegations 'had a negative impact upon the relationship of the two largest nuclear powers in the world.' At that press conference Trump notably, rejected the intelligence community's assessment that Russia hacked the DNC. 'I have President Putin. He just said it's not Russia,' Trump said. 'I will say this: I don't see any reason why it would be.' The following year, the Department of Justice released a redacted version of Mueller's report on April 18, 2019. The investigation did not find evidence that Trump's campaign coordinated with Russia to meddle in the election. More: Trump said he'd end Ukraine war in 24 hours. Now his patience with Putin is wearing thin. Roughly two months later, Trump met with Putin during another G20 Summit. 'We have had a very, very good relationship. And we look forward to spending some pretty good time together,' Trump said at a meeting with Putin in Osaka, Japan, on June 28, 2019. Trump's relationship with Putin, and Zelenskyy was complicated in his first term. He was impeached on Dec. 18, 2019, by the House of Representatives for a July phone call, in which he was asked Zelenskyy to investigate Joe and Hunter Biden. He was acquitted by the Senate on Feb. 5, 2020 and lost the presidential election that year to Biden. Trump says he'd solve Ukraine war in one day Trump's relationship with Putin came under scrutiny again during the 2024 presidential campaign, this time over concerns that he'd abandon Ukraine and would not defend America's allies from Russian aggression. At a Conservative Political Action Conference appearance on March 4, 2023, Trump said that if he were elected, he'd resolve the war in one day. 'I'll meet with Putin, I'll meet with Zelenskyy. They both have weaknesses, and they both have strengths. And within 24 hours, that war will be settled. It will be over. It will be absolutely over,' Trump said at a CNN town hall on May 10, 2023. Trump told Biden at their debate on June 27, 2024, that if he won, he'd have the Ukraine war settled before he was inaugurated. Trump also pledged during his only debate with Vice President Kamala Harris, on Sept. 10, 2024, that he would end the Ukraine war before he took office, if elected. On Jan. 7, said he'd resolve the war within his first six months in office. Trump's relationship with Putin takes a dive Trump said he was considering sanctions on Russia on his second day in office, in response to a question from USA TODAY. Of a possible meeting with Putin, Trump told reporters: "Anytime they want." Trump spoke to Putin for the first time since returning to office on Feb. 12, 2025. It was the first time any American president had spoken to Putin since his February 24, 2022, invasion of Ukraine. The president berated Zelenskyy on live TV a little more than two weeks later in the Oval Office. But by April 24, 2025, it was Putin who he was blasting in a Truth Social post. 'I am not happy with the Russian strikes on KYIV. Not necessary, and very bad timing. Vladimir, STOP!' Trump wrote. After meeting with Zelenskyy in the Vatican while both men were in town for Pope Francis' funeral, Trump openly questioned whether Putin was deceiving him about ending the war. 'It makes me think that maybe he doesn't want to stop the war, he's just tapping me along, and has to be dealt with differently, through 'Banking' or 'Secondary Sanctions?' Too many people are dying!!!' Trump wrote on April 26, 2025. Trump told reporters the next month that he'd be willing to fly to Turkey to participate in direct talks between Putin and Zelenskyy. But after Putin declined to attend, Trump indicated on May 15. 2025 on Air Force One that the war would not be resolved until he and Putin held their own summit. 'Look, nothing's going to happen until Putin and I get together, OK?" Trump said. Days later, on May 19, 2025, the president held a two-hour call with Putin that left Trump feeling optimistic. He said Russia and Ukraine would 'immediately' begin negotiations toward a ceasefire. Yet, after Russia continued aerial attacks on Kyiv, Trump lit into Putin on May 25, 2025. 'I'm not happy with what Putin is doing. He's killing a lot of people, and I don't know what the hell happened to Putin. I've known him a long time. Always gotten along with him, but he's sending rockets into cities and killing people, and I don't like it at all,' Trump said. That same day Trump said on Truth Social that Putin had 'gone absolutely CRAZY.' Trump's last known conversation with Putin took place on July 3, 2025. Trump told reporters it did not yield progress. At a Cabinet meeting on July 8, Trump exploded. 'We get a lot of bulls---- thrown at us by Putin,' he said. Six days later, at meeting with NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte, Trump gave Russia 50 days to make a peace deal with Ukraine or face secondary tariffs and new sanctions. Trump later changed the deadline to Aug. 8 and put a higher tariff on India, which he linked to that country's purchase of Russian oil. But instead of announcing additional sanctions that day, Trump said an Alaskan summit with Putin had been planned. Strained relations with Putin, 25% chance of success As he prepared for the summit, Trump said on Aug. 13 that he did not expect Putin to quit attacks on civilian infrastructure, just because he'd asked him to. "I've had that conversation with him. I've had a lot of good conversations with him. Then I go home and I see that a rocket hit a nursing home, or a rocket hit an apartment building, and people are laying dead in the street," Trump told reporters. He blamed past allegations of Russian collusion for his inability to deter Putin and suggested Mueller's investigation was the beginning of the end of his positive relationship with Putin. "I knew him very well. I got along with him great, actually. I had to go through the Russia, Russia hoax. And it was actually, it was a strain on the relationship," Trump said. Trump said in an Aug. 14 radio interview with Fox News that he thought the summit had a 25% chance of success. 'This meeting sets up the second meeting. The second meeting is going to be very, very important because that's going to be a meeting where they make a deal," he said. Of the talks with Putin, he said: 'It's like a chess game.'
New York Post
12 minutes ago
- New York Post
Hillary Clinton admits she would nominate Trump for Nobel Peace Prize if he helps end war in Ukraine
President Trump got teased Friday with a Nobel Peace Prize nomination from the most unlikely source — one of his most bitter rivals, Hillary Clinton. Trump's failed Democratic opponent told the 'Raging Moderates' podcast that she would willingly nominate him for the illustrious prize if he can bring an end to the war in Ukraine without allowing President Vladimir Putin to take territory from its neighbor. 'Honestly, if he could bring about the end to this terrible war, if he could end it without putting Ukraine in a position where it had to concede its territory to the aggressor, could really stand up to Putin — something we haven't seen, but maybe this is the opportunity — if President Trump were the architect of that, I'd nominate him for a Nobel Peace Prize,' Clinton told podcast interviewer Jessica Tarlov in an interview released Friday. 3 if President Trump were the architect' of ending the war 'I'd nominate him for a Nobel Peace Prize,' Hillary Clinton said. Raging Moderates Podcast 3 Clinton hopes that Trump 'could really stand up to Putin.' Getty Images 3 A girl stands with activists in front of the U.S. embassy ahead of the meeting between Trump and Vladimir Putin to raise awareness about the plight of thousands of POWs and Russia's attacks, in Kyiv on August 15, 2025. REUTERS 'Because my goal here is to not allow capitulation to Putin,' she added. The unexpected offer emerged as Trump was already en route to Alaska for the landmark talks with his Russian counterpart, where he hopes to bring about an end to the three-year conflict in Ukraine. He has expressed a desire to be nominated for a Nobel Peace Prize in the past, following in the footsteps of his predecessor Barack Obama.
