This Elderly Trump Voter's Reason For Renouncing Trump Is Going Viral
Related:
That call is going viral:
CSPAN/RpsAgainstTrump/Twitter: @RpsAgainstTrump
"Mr. Trump, I am so very disappointed in you. I voted for you, and you have just turned us into a bunch of hateful, mean, horrible people. You know, I know we've got too many immigrants in this country, but my goodness, we don't have to be mean to them. That's not what this country is built on," she said. "I probably won't be here for the next election, but my goodness, I'll never, ever vote Republican, and I've been voting for 80 years. I don't know, this country is just going in the wrong direction, and it just saddens my heart."
Now, let's look at reactions...
Related:
You have a bunch of people in agreement: "100% AGREED! I feel the same exact way!"
"It hurts to see what Trump is doing to America," another person said.
Related:
And this person commented: "Welcome to the light."
Other people are asking, "This is who Trump has been. How did you miss that?"
"She knew what Trump was, and if she didn't, that's on her," another person tweeted.
Related:
This person replied: "It's almost like we warned them?"
And this person said, "She is getting exactly what she voted for."
Thoughts, feelings, etc.?
Also in In the News:
Also in In the News:
Also in In the News:
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
27 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Trump's chief intervened to save RFK Jr.'s top vaccine aide
White House Chief of Staff Susie Wiles was behind President Donald Trump's highly unusual decision last week to rehire a vaccine regulator he'd just fired at the urging of MAGA influencer Laura Loomer. Wiles' intervention in getting Vinay Prasad's job back, as described by two senior administration officials granted anonymity to discuss sensitive details, followed pleas from both Prasad's boss, Food and Drug Administration Commissioner Marty Makary, and Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. They insisted that Prasad is part of Kennedy's broader 'make America healthy again' movement and integral to the Trump coalition. 'After Vinay left, Marty and Bobby worked very, very, very hard through Susie Wiles, the president's chief of staff, to tell the president that Vinay was not anti-Trump,' one of the senior administration officials said. 'The MAHA movement is an expansion of the MAGA, sort of, you know, big tent.' Trump's reversal demonstrated the limits of Loomer's influence and marked a fragile win for Kennedy in pursuing his plans to overhaul U.S. regulation of vaccines and drugs — and confirmation that the White House still sees Kennedy as a useful political ally as the midterm elections approach. Trump had forced Prasad out of his FDA job less than two weeks earlier after the Cambridge, Massachusetts, pharmaceutical manufacturer Sarepta Therapeutics, joined by GOP allies and Loomer, sought his ouster. Prasad in July had pushed the FDA to ask Sarepta to stop selling its Duchenne muscular dystrophy drug Elevidys due to safety concerns, according to one of the senior administration officials. Sarepta spokesperson Tracy Sorrentino wrote in an email that the company will 'continue working with the FDA, its leadership and review teams, as we have always done." In arguing Prasad was disloyal to Trump, Loomer had pointed to social media posts he made during the pandemic, in which Prasad said that he was once a Bernie Sanders supporter. Prasad's rehiring isn't the end of the war between Kennedy and his allies, and Loomer and corporations – from pharma to food manufacturers – that see Kennedy as a threat. Loomer, for instance, has only amped up her critique, most recently telling POLITICO that she planned to go after more Kennedy aides. Loomer remains close to Trump and he has occasionally, though not always, followed her advice on personnel decisions. Loomer did not respond immediately to a request for comment. The FDA referred questions to the White House. 'Secretary Kennedy and the entire HHS team are doing a terrific job as they deliver on President Trump's mandate to Make America Healthy Again," White House spokesperson Kush Desai said. "Scores of prominent restaurant chains and food brands dropping artificial ingredients from our food supply and historic reforms at the FDA to fast track lifesaving drugs and treatments prove that the entire HHS team is delivering for the American people.' According to the officials, Makary and Kennedy persuaded the White House to review statements by Prasad that Loomer said showed disloyalty, arguing they were taken out of context. 'I think it really is something good about the president that he's willing to change his mind when persuaded,' one of the senior administration officials said. But the victory could prove pyrrhic if Prasad's ability to set policy is diminished. Before his firing, Makary had named him not only the head of the FDA's Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, which oversees regulation of vaccines and gene therapies like Elevidys, but also the agency's chief medical and scientific officer. Makary, like Prasad, was a leading critic of the Biden administration's response to the Covid pandemic. Prasad, a University of Chicago-trained hematologist and oncologist, was previously a professor of epidemiology and biostatistics at the University of California, San Francisco. Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.), the author of a 2018 law Trump signed that permits patients greater access to experimental therapies, told POLITICO he texted Trump days ahead of Prasad's ouster to raise concerns of the Duchenne muscular dystrophy patient community about the FDA's efforts to restrict Elevidys. The company initially refused to comply with the agency's July 18 request that it halt shipment. It agreed on July 21 to stop shipping the medicine by the end of business the next day to maintain a 'productive and positive working relationship with FDA.' The agency then allowed the company to resume distribution to ambulatory patients on July 28, a day before Prasad's ouster. Those patients are a subset of people with the condition, which weakens muscles and leads to the loss of the ability to walk, typically by age 12. Most die before they reach 30. Johnson's Right to Try Act, which Trump repeatedly touted on the campaign trail as a signature achievement of his first term, aims to allow patients with life-threatening diseases to try experimental medicines without FDA involvement. The agency has a separate longstanding program known as compassionate use that allows such patients to access experimental treatments when other options do not exist. 'I have never met or spoken to Dr. Prasad,' Johnson said when asked about Prasad's return. 'I hope all the new appointees within HHS and its subsidiary agencies restore integrity to scientific research, fully respect both the letter and spirit of the Right to Try Act, and carefully listen to and empathize with the patients who are impacted by their decisions.' Former FDA officials said they expect the power struggle between Republicans who support pharma and Kennedy to continue. Loomer, meanwhile, says she now wants Trump to dismiss Stefanie Spear, Kennedy's principal deputy chief of staff and senior counselor, and Casey Means, Trump's nominee to be surgeon general. Casey Means is a close Kennedy ally and sister of Kennedy adviser Calley Means. 'I think she wants to split the MAHA and MAGA coalition,' one of the senior officials said of Loomer. 'She wants to split them in two.' Tim Röhn is a member of the Axel Springer Global Network.
USA Today
28 minutes ago
- USA Today
Mexico, under pressure from Trump, sends 26 cartel members to US
MEXICO CITY, Aug 12 (Reuters) - Mexico sent more than two dozen suspected cartel members to the U.S. on Tuesday, amid rising pressure from President Donald Trump on Mexico to dismantle the country's powerful drug organizations. Authorities shipped 26 prisoners wanted in the U.S. for ties to drug-trafficking groups, Mexico's attorney general's office and security ministry said in a joint statement. Mexico said the U.S. Department of Justice had requested their extradition and that it would not seek the death penalty for the accused cartel members. The transfer is the second of its kind this year. In February, Mexican authorities sent 29 alleged cartel leaders to the U.S., sparking a debate about the political and legal grounds for such a move. More: State Department updates Mexico travel advisory for Americans That Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum permitted yet another large-scale extradition of Mexican nationals underscores the balancing act she faces as she seeks to appease Trump while also avoiding unilateral U.S. military action in Mexico. In a statement, the U.S. Embassy said among those extradited were key figures in the Jalisco New Generation Cartel and the Sinaloa Cartel, which are Mexico's two dominant organized crime groups. 'This transfer is yet another example of what is possible when two governments unite against violence and impunity," U.S. Ambassador to Mexico Ronald Johnson said in a statement. "These fugitives will now face justice in American courts, and the citizens of both our nations will be safer.' More: Mexican President rules out Trump's reported military plan against Mexico's drug cartels Trump has tied tariffs on Mexico to the deadly fentanyl trade, claiming the country hasn't tackled drug cartels aggressively enough. Last week, he directed the Pentagon to prepare operations against Mexican drug gangs that have been designated global terrorist organizations. Sheinbaum has said the U.S. and Mexico are nearing a security agreement to expand cooperation in the fight against cartels. But she has flatly rejected suggestions by the Trump administration that it could carry out unilateral military operations in Mexico. (Additional reporting by Mrinmay Dey in Bengaluru; Editing by Chris Reese, Cassandra Garrison and Lincoln Feast.)
USA Today
28 minutes ago
- USA Today
The key to success at Trump-Putin Alaska summit on Ukraine? Low expectations.
Russia's progress has limited the risk of escalation and increased Moscow's willingness to continue fighting. Trump keeps trying to find a way to end the war, but time is not on Ukraine's side. The war in Ukraine is stuck, and has been stuck for years. Despite the media frenzy over the upcoming U.S.-Russia summit in Alaska, there is little reason to expect a breakthrough, barring a dramatic change in the U.S., Russian or Ukrainian positions. When President Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin meet on Friday, Aug. 15, observers should keep expectations low. Any progress would be welcome. Since February 2022, the conflict has been a slow, grinding war of attrition in which Russia has gradually seized more and more Ukrainian territory. Russia's military progress dampened its incentives to escalate the conflict, an early source of U.S. concern. For example, in the fall of 2022, the high-water mark for Ukraine on the battlefield, U.S. intelligence estimated that there was a 50% chance Russia would reach for nuclear weapons if its forces in southern Ukraine were facing collapse. Were Russia losing today, the risks for Americans would be higher. Putin's will vs. Trump's way While Russia's progress has limited the risk of escalation, it has also increased Moscow's willingness to continue fighting. Since beginning his second term, Trump has tried to find a way to end the war, but the Kremlin has not shown much willingness to moderate its demands. Putin has insisted on Ukraine renouncing aspirations to join NATO or allow NATO forces on its territory; conceding Russian sovereignty over the four provinces it annexed in 2022; the demilitarization of Ukraine; and the 'denazification' of the country, by which it means dramatic reforms to how it governs itself domestically. Putin has also rejected a temporary ceasefire that doesn't engage on these issues. Opinion alerts: Get columns from your favorite columnists + expert analysis on top issues, delivered straight to your device through the USA TODAY app. Don't have the app? Download it for free from your app store. The debate over the what to do next often obscures more than it reveals. One hears reference to Ukrainian victory or Russian defeat without defining what those terms mean or what their implications would be. Does Ukrainian victory or Russian defeat mean Kyiv regaining all territory inside its internationally recognized borders? That isn't going to happen. Could Ukraine losing territory but keeping its sovereignty and military ‒ without NATO membership ‒ be portrayed as success? Many security scholars believe that such armed neutrality is the best that can be achieved for Ukraine. Opinion: I was the US ambassador to Ukraine. Here's why I resigned. Don't forget Zelenskyy's intransigence This is where Ukraine's intransigence comes in. Even though Ukrainian public support for continuing the war has cratered, President Volodymyr Zelenskyy is using the Ukrainian Constitution as a firewall against concessions. As amended in 2019, it both prohibits the Ukrainian government from ceding any territory and somewhat clumsily commits it to pursue membership in NATO. In rejecting Trump's suggestion that there be land swaps as part of a settlement, Zelenskyy pointed at the constitution's provision against giving up territory, arguing that 'no one will step back from this, nor will anyone be able to.' The Ukrainian president's willingness and ability to end the war probably has less to do with high-minded constitutional principles and more to do with his own political survival. At this point, the war has produced total destruction in Ukraine, the evisceration of its territory, and all the ruinous human and economic costs of the war ‒ but without any U.S. security guarantees. Zelenskyy knows this would be a disastrous legacy, so he has a powerful incentive to obtain something he can portray as a benefit of the war. Gen. Wesley Clark: Trump needs to push Putin hard to end war in Ukraine – now | Opinion The question is whether Kyiv's position on the battlefield can sustain Zelenskyy's intransigence on the political issues, with or without more U.S. support. There are worrying signs that it cannot. Ukraine faces an array of manpower issues along the 600-mile front. Key towns seem to be in jeopardy. Time is not on Ukraine's side. As always, the Europeans are doing everything in their power to keep the United States at the center of the war in Ukraine ‒ and as the central provider of regional security. They called a virtual meeting with Zelenskyy and Trump two days before the Putin summit, and proposed a plan for Ukraine that would involve potential NATO membership in exchange for Kyiv conceding that it lost territory. After the meeting on Aug. 13, French President Emmanuel Macron and European Council President António Costa indicated Trump committed that the United States would participate in security guarantees for Ukraine. However, Trump has previously resisted European pleas for U.S. security guarantees to Ukraine, and make no mistake: That is just what NATO membership would be. With two consecutive U.S. administrations revealing that Washington does not perceive an interest in Ukraine worth fighting Russia over, such a commitment would be inherently incredible. In the coming days, avoiding any traps laid by the Europeans, the Ukrainians or congressional hawks is essential. From a U.S. perspective, patience and low expectations are the right course for talks with Russia. Above all, Trump must avoid backing into a reboot of the Biden administration's Ukraine policy, which involved an endless flow of weapons and hoping for a miracle. America's resources for and interests in the war in Ukraine are limited. Trump's policy should reflect that. Justin Logan (@justintlogan) is director of defense and foreign policy studies at the Cato Institute. You can read diverse opinions from our USA TODAY columnists and other writers on the Opinion front page, on X, formerly Twitter, @usatodayopinion and in our Opinion newsletter.
