Commentary Culture Investigations

Wikimedia Commons

The gloating at Politico over the 2026 midterm election results is not only fully underway but has already extended to what they see will be a likely Democrat victory in the 2028 presidential election as you  can see in this Friday wishcast by Aaron Pellish, Lauren Fedor, and Lisa Kashinsky, “The midterms blew open the 2028 map. Republicans are panicking.” However, there is something rather odd about their story. No prospective Democrat candidates are even named. Could it be that if any of them are named it would quickly deflate their balloon filled with Hopium?Let us now join Politico in their somewhat premature celebrations of what they believe will likely happen in 2028 sans any mention of real life candidates:Brutal red-state losses are raising alarm among Republicans about the 2028 presidential battlefield.Democrats’ midterm blowout is upending the political calculus for future presidential campaigns, more than a dozen strategists on both sides told POLITICO. Republicans are stressing the ramifications of a major tranche of once-reliably Republican Electoral College votes being in jeopardy, while Democrats are weighing how much surprise wins on red turf should reshape their electoral strategy.Politico’s GloatFest continues until they hit a brief encounter with hard, cold election reality, which can happen when you talk to geniuses who worked on Kamala’s defeat:Democrats know that recreating their historically large estimated 14-point national popular vote blowout isn’t likely in the 2028 presidential election, and that Trump’s historic unpopularity was a major factor in the midterms.“It’s not fait accompli that any of those voters that came over will stay with us, in the same way that they didn’t stay with Donald Trump after this last cycle, or they didn’t stay with Joe Biden after 2020,” said Dan Kanninen, former battleground states director for former Vice President Kamala Harris’ 2024 campaign. But the electoral map suddenly looks a lot different to strategists than it did a few days ago.After this brief reflection, Politico returns to joyfully drooling over the 2028 presidential election. So why was NO Democrat presidential candidate mentioned (other than invoking Kamala Harris’ name as a job description position for Kanninen above)? Could it be that they know that if names of the leading candidates were conjured up it would kill the joy they are now feeling.Kamala Harris? The contender who managed to lose in all the 2024 battleground states?Gavin Newsom? Well, he was a leading candidate until he vowed to Jake Tapper and all the creek trout surrounding them that he would not be a 2028 presidential candidate if Kamala runs again. Does that mean he won’t run or will Newsom reinforce his reputation for mendaciousness by running again.Pete Buttigieg? Would most Americans vote for a breast feeder who turned out to be the worst Secretary of Transportation in history?AOC? She had a chance to show her foreign policy chops but ended up hilariously humiliating herself at the Munich Security Conference.So it is easy and fun for Politico to gloat over the Democrat prospects for victory in the 2028 presidential race until you actually put a real face in the mix which explains the complete absence of any candidates in their story.

But after the midterm disaster, why should anyone expect Trumpism to suddenly become popular?

PBS host Christiane Amanpour welcomed Pulitzer Prize-winning author Barbara Kingsolver to Friday’s episode of Amanpour and Company to not only promote her new book but also to engage in the type of election analysis that says that Tuesday was not just a good night for Democrats; it was a victory for democracy itself.Amanpour began, “I have to start by asking you, because your books have been, you know, not just massive hits but also, you know, political about the American condition in various different forms, cultural certainly. What is your reaction to the incredible tsunami by the Democrats this week in the midterm elections?”Kingsolver replied by claiming, “It’s a really happy morning to wake up in the United States of America.” PBS with the type of election analysis that says democracy itself won on Tuesday. Christiane Amanpour asks Pulitzer Prize winning author Barbara Kingsolver, “What is your reaction to the incredible tsunami by the Democrats this week in the midterm elections?”Kingsolver says… pic.twitter.com/63Y6NPE1LH— Alex Christy (@alexchristy17) November 7, 2026 For Kingsolver, the fact that Democrats won in Texas is not just a big deal for the blue team but a win for all lowercase-D democrats as well, “And I’m going to say that for several reasons. One is that we saw that money cannot buy elections. Texas is a really good example, where I think Elon Musk spent $500 million to try to buy that election, and that election was won by integrity. That’s Texas.”Kingsolver is trying to claim that if voters had agreed with Elon Musk that would’ve been undemocratic, which is not how democracy actually works. Voters are allowed to agree with Musk like they did in 2024 and still believe the U.S. has a functioning democracy. The fact that two years later they disagreed with him does not mean democracy has been fixed because Musk’s preferred candidate winning in the previous election cycle does not mean it was broken in the first place.As it was, Kingsolver added, “The same has happened in a lot of rural parts of this country, which gives me a lot of hope. I’m a rural person. I represent, in my writing, rural America. And I think that we’ve gotten a bad rap. I think that we’ve shown our true colors today.”If people were to take Kingsolver’s argument to its logical conclusion that democracy wins when Elon Musk or any other GOP big donor loses, then they would have to conclude that no future Republican win can ever be viewed as good for democracy. Who’s the undemocratic one now?Here is a transcript for the November 6 show:PBS Amanpour and Company11/6/2026CHRISTIANE AMANPOUR: I have to start by asking you, because your books have been, you know, not just massive hits but also, you know, political about the American condition in various different forms, cultural certainly. What is your reaction to the incredible tsunami by the Democrats this week in the midterm elections?BARBARA KINGSOLVER: It’s a really happy morning to wake up in the United States of America. And I’m going to say that for several reasons. One is that we saw that money cannot buy elections. Texas is a really good example, where I think Elon Musk spent $500 million to try to buy that election, and that election was won by integrity. That’s Texas. The same has happened in a lot of rural parts of this country, which gives me a lot of hope. I’m a rural person. I represent, in my writing, rural America. And I think that we’ve gotten a bad rap. I think that we’ve shown our true colors today.

On Election Night Tuesday, the PBS News Hour continued its cozy Democrat-coddling tradition of hosting Rep. Nancy Pelosi, just as it has since 2016, as proudly noted by co-anchor Amna Nawaz. Now known as Speaker Emerita and headed toward political retirement, Pelosi has been a guest on the News Hour six straight election nights, beginning in 2016, including both mid-term and presidential election years.Co-anchor Nawaz engaged in something closer to a friendly chat than any kind of journalistic enterprise in PBS’s latest Pelosi-Palooza, mouthing three versions of “you’re right” in response to bland statements from Pelosi during the latest interview.Amna Nawaz: This election cycle has been compared to the midterms of 2006, when Democrats won back control of Congress and, in an historic first, elected Nancy Pelosi to be the first female speaker of the House. That was 20 years ago. Today, Speaker Emerita Nancy Pelosi is in the final months of her political career. And like she’s done every Election Night since 2016, Speaker Pelosi joins us now. Madam Speaker, welcome back. Thank you for continuing this tradition with us. I want to begin, of course, with your predictions. How big a majority do you think Democrats can win in the House tonight? And will you win control of the Senate?Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-CA): Well, thank you, Amna, for the opportunity to share some thoughts with you once again on election night. One thing I will say, following up on your previous guests, be not afraid to voters. Just go out and vote. Hakeem Jeffries has worked very hard to do three things, one, to win the election, two, to protect the election, and, three, to show the people what will happen once we do. So, your vote is protected, go vote….Nawaz: Always good to underscore that. You’re absolutely right. What will you think will happen tonight now?PBS’s cozy liberal tradition continues: “Speaker Emerita Nancy Pelosi is in the final months of her political career. And like she’s done every Election Night since 2016, Speaker Pelosi joins us now. Madam Speaker, welcome back. Thank you for continuing this tradition with us.” https://t.co/vOEWh11NBI— Clay Waters 🇮🇱 (@claywaters44) November 6, 2026When Pelosi noted how many more Democratic women were in Congress since she arrived, Nawaz repeated her fulsome praise, before asking Pelosi if Haley Stevens endorsement of Rep. Mike Rogers in the Michigan Senate race would hurt Democrat Abdul El-Sayed.Nawaz: We have certainly seen some big changes on that front. You’re absolutely right.Asked what it will be like when she’s watching election results as a retired politician:Pelosi: I will also be teaching at Berkeley, and that’s not about politics. That’s about policy and training young leaders for the future.Nawaz: It is not. You’re right. And we do hope that you can come back and join us again some time very soon. We will have to leave it there for now. Speaker Emerita Nancy Pelosi, always a pleasure to speak with you. Thank you.At least Pelosi had the self-control not to say a version of “Onward to Victory” as in her previous three interviews, as if PBS and the Democrats shared the goal of Democratic victories (which in fact they do).From the November 5, 2024 News Hour:Nawaz: Meanwhile, back here in the studio, we are now joined by a leader in modern politics who hardly needs an introduction. That’s Speaker Emerita and California Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi. Madam Speaker, welcome back. Great to have you with us.Pelosi: Wonderful to be with you. It’s a tradition now. I think this is my fifth time on election night.Geoff Bennett: That’s right. Amna Nawaz: We love having you back every time. Thanks for being a part of this. I know we want to talk about the White House, but I got to start with the House, that you know so well.….Nawaz: You did also mention January 6. And we have talked a lot about the possibility of political violence, about what to expect. Experts we talk to say it’s really the time between Election Day and when the votes are certified or when the race is called, if that takes a few days, that they are most worried about. You have seen former President Trump has come out targeting you specifically as well. He had awful things to say about you at a rally even last night. Are you specifically worried about your own safety? And how do you look at the landscape of whether there could be some kind of violence if it takes time between Election Day and a call being made?Bennett concluded by saying, “Speaker Emerita Nancy Pelosi, thank you so much for joining us and furthering this tradition of having you join us tonight.”Then-PBS News Hour anchor Judy Woodruff interviewed Pelosi on the four earlier Election Night occasions, and her questioning, while sympathetic to Pelosi, was hardball in comparison.From the November 8, 2022 News Hour:Woodruff: President Biden, his approval ratings, I know you know very well, are in the low 40s, on average, some — in some places even lower. Has he been a drag for Democrats this year?Woodruff also took mildly questioning stances in her Pelosi interviews in 2020, 2018, and 2016. Yet no matter the actual interview content, how is it appropriate for a public journalistic outlet to preen over a partisan political figure like Pelosi? PBS defines the liberal elitist media.

And there they go. The “they” here would be the “mainstream” (aka liberal) media. And where they have already started heading is into the jungle of the 2028 presidential election. Before all the midterm election results were in, they fired the starter’s pistol on the next cycle. Idle speculation has begun.Here’s but a sampling of the headlines out there with the 2026 elections barely history by mere days:People: Who Will Run for President in 2028? Rumored Democratic and Republican CandidatesNew York Times:Who Might Run for President in 2028?USA Today: Who could replace Trump in 2028? Poll reveals presidential favoritesThe point is clear. For the media the politics game never stops. Most particularly when it involves presidential politics.In the now very long ago, Pulitzer Prize-winning author and political reporter Theodore H. White penned what turned out to be America’s first real look at the mechanics — the media especially — of a presidential election. White’s book was The Making of the President 1960. And in its day it was a blockbuster bestseller, enough for White to write sequels in 1964, 1968, and 1972.What stands out today, a full 66 years later, is White’s realization of the role the media of the day played in that election. Arguably it was the first presidential election of its time to fully involve the day-by-day, almost hourly, participation of the press and 20th century style technology. They traveled everywhere with both Democrat nominee Senator John F. Kennedy and the GOP’s Vice President Richard Nixon.Today no one blinks at the constant, daily and almost hourly media coverage of major presidential candidates. (Not to mention the seemingly minute-by-minute coverage of an incumbent President!) In today’s world of the Internet, computers, cell phones, television and radio no one blinks. In 1960 this future was only beginning to dawn. JFK brought glamour to the race — or his adoring press manufactured it. Theodore White, taken with what he was observing first hand of the day’s media, wrote this of the media coverage of Nixon, who suffered by the comparison:One noticed, for example, the harshness of the television eye and the electronic cruelty of the camera to his countenance. Sitting one evening in the press ranks a few feet from the candidate in Union Square in San Francisco as he spoke, I noticed that one of the local correspondents had brought a portable television set with him, so that one could observe him at once in person and on the screen. The man on the stand before me in person was a handsome young American-only recently out of the hospital, he was attractively slim, as lithe as Kennedy, a fine and healthy American, almost an athlete. His face as he spoke to this friendly audience was a smiling one-and Nixon has a broad, almost sunny smile when he is with friends. His is a broad open face and the deep eye wells, the heavy brows cast shadow on the face and it glowered on the screen darkly; when he became rhetorically indignant, the television screen showed ferocity; when he turned, his apparently thick brush of hair showed in a glimmering balding widow’s peak; when he smiled and his fine white teeth showed, it was the smile made meaningless by the grin of all the commercial announcers who appear with similar white teeth showing.All of which is to say, White had Nixon under the microscope of the early mass media of the day. Long before reporters – not to mention the audience! – had cell phones to record (or research!) anything or anyone they chose, whether literally in front of them or somewhere else around the literal globe. It is with all of this now ongoing that today’s media is setting up its coverage of the 2028 campaign. From the candidates actual and potential to this or that issue (in the famous words of Clinton acolyte James Carville “It’s the economy, stupid!”) the hard political fact of the day is that the 2028 presidential campaign has now begun. The calendar may well say that we have almost two years before voters crowd into November voting booths or mark absentee ballots, but the 2028 campaign is now on. The midterm results have made the Republican race more uncertain, with Trump’s waning appeal casting a shadow on the vice president.A new President of the United States is already out there somewhere on the presidential campaign trail. Who is that? What party is he (or she?) from? But as Americans start thinking of turkey size and Christmas trees, rest assured of one thing: The opening bell of 2028 has rung. And the media already turned the spotlights on.

CBS Saturday Morning co-host Adriana Diaz joined various Democratic politicians and left-wing activists in celebrating Texas turning blue. Diaz was especially eager to tout Gina Hinojosa’s election as governor, which she claimed “rocked households like an earthquake” due to her being Latina.Diaz claimed, “After midnight on election night, at a Whataburger, Talarico celebrated with the bigger surprise of the night, Gina Hinojosa, the state representative and former school board president who beat incumbent Governor Greg Abbott.”After a clip of Hinojosa at her victory speech hyping, “Tonight one of your own becomes the first governor of Texas from the Rio Grande Valley,” Diaz continued, “She gained 65 percent of the Latino vote and 88 percent of the black vote.” CBS’s Adriana Diaz celebrates with various Democratic politicians and lefty activists after Texas goes blue, “News of the first Hispanic governor of Texas, a state that’s more than 40 percent Latino, rocked households like an earthquake.”She asks one, “Did you ever think you… pic.twitter.com/JPU6pbcbmm— Alex Christy (@alexchristy17) November 7, 2026 Diaz then played a short video from left-wing activist and social media influencer Frida Loreyn, where she gushed, “From a DACA recipient to all my black women, mamacitas, thank you.”CBS didn’t mention that Loreyn was behind the video. A casual viewer would not have known CBS passed off a political activist and influencer as a regular person with a social media account, but that would not be the only time Diaz tried to pull that trick.Diaz then played more videos from Democratic watch parties where attendees reacted to Hinojosa’s win as if their team had just won the Super Bowl, as she explained, “News of the first Hispanic governor of Texas, a state that’s more than 40 percent Latino, rocked households like an earthquake.”Queta Rodriguez is a former Democratic primary candidate for Bexar County commissioner, but Diaz didn’t mention that. Instead, she played a clip of Rodriguez recalling, “We just went wild. I mean it was just — we exploded with emotion.”Diaz then asked her, “Did you ever think you would see a Latina governor of Texas?” Rodriguez replied, “I think I’ve always been hopeful, but I don’t think that I saw that.”Next, Diaz asked State Rep. Ramon Ramero, “Greg Abbott was unapologetically tough on immigration. What does it symbolize now that he is being replaced by a Latina?”Initially, Romero just cheered, “Woo!”Unlike with her interview with Rodriguez or the quick Loreyn clip, Diaz at least managed to mention Romero’s partisan job, “State Representative Ramon Romero has worked alongside Hinojosa at the state capital.”Romero then answered the original question, “Gina Hinojosa being on the ballot and showing to all of these young ladies you can be like—”After Diaz translated some Spanish as “The Texas governor,” Romero continued, “The Texas governor, that — this is like in Texas our Obama moment.”CBS isn’t just happy to note that Texas has gone blue or examine what went wrong for Republicans. It feels the need to help Democrats claim that their win was some history-defining win for racial progress, as if racial progress is synonymous with Democrats winning.Here is a transcript for the November 6 show:CBS Saturday Morning11/7/20268:31 PM ETADRIANA DIAZ: After midnight on election night, at a Whataburger, Talarico celebrated with the bigger surprise of the night, Gina Hinojosa, the state representative and former school board president who beat incumbent Governor Greg Abbott.GINA HINOJOSA: Tonight one of your own becomes the first governor of Texas from the Rio Grande Valley.DIAZ: She gained 65 percent of the Latino vote and 88 percent of the black vote.FRIDA LOREYN: From a DACA recipient to all my black women, mamacitas, thank you.DIAZ: News of the first Hispanic governor of Texas, a state that’s more than 40 percent Latino, rocked households like an earthquake.QUETA RODRIGUEZ: We just went wild. I mean it was just — we exploded with emotion.DIAZ: This was the scene in Queta Rodriguez’s living room.Did you ever think you would see a Latina governor of Texas?RODRIGUEZ: I think I’ve always been hopeful, but I don’t think that I saw that.DIAZ: Greg Abbott was unapologetically tough on immigration. What does it symbolize now that he is being replaced by a Latina?RAMON ROMERO: Woo!DIAZ: State Representative Ramon Romero has worked alongside Hinojosa at the state capital.ROMERO: Gina Hinojosa being on the ballot and showing to all of these young ladies you can be like — [Speaks Spanish].DIAZ: The Texas governor?ROMERO: The Texas governor, that — this is like in Texas our Obama moment.

The 2026 Midterm Elections were quite the wake-up call for Republicans across the country. Voters sent a loud message about their frustrations with the current political landscape.
What went wrong for Republicans? Do the voters really support radical Democrats and the DSA?
Paul Kengor and Grace Reilly discuss their thoughts in the latest episode of The Weekend Spectator. They share why they have not lost hope for the United States, even though we will be facing the consequences of this election in the coming months.
Watch the full episode below to find out more.
READ MORE:
The MAGA Movement Forgot What Populism Is
Elections Have Consequences
The Meaning of the 2026 Election…

No hoodwinking or hornswoggling here.
Support independent journalism and get unlimited access to quality commentary.

Subscribe
Already a subscriber? Login here

Username

Password

Remember Me

 

 

Forgot Password

Much like the left, when it comes to Islam, YOU are always the “bigot” for criticizing or having an opinion about them. But when it’s them criticizing or having an opinion about you, it’s perfectly valid. Never accept blame when you can ascribe it to someone or something else. Islam is treated like a race — attack it, and you’re treated as harshly as if you’re a racist.

Screenshot/YouTube

Toronto Blue Jays outfielder Anthony Santander has figured out the hard way that criticizing Islam, or one of its current favorite sons, is a one-way ticket to being labeled as the dreaded (cue dramatic music)…ISLAMOPHOBE!Santander, according to RedState, posted two Instagram stories following the disastrous 2026 midterm election, where he took American voters to task for electing Senator-elect Abdul El-Sayed.”America voted for Sharia Law last night,” read the first story’s caption, while the other read, “Islam is not peaceful.” For the media, that’s Strike One and Strike Two.The Venezuelan native has since deleted the posts after a mountain of backlash, and the left-leaning Wikipedia even has already made the majority of the content under his “Personal Life” section on his profile entry.In November 2026, following midterm elections in the United States, Santander reposted Islamophobic videos to his Instagram account, which claimed that Muslim elected officials aimed to impose Sharia law in the U.S. and described Islam as “not peaceful” and “driven by war.” The posts were deleted following backlash from fans online.Some Canadian NBA writer/activist — although, what’s the difference at this point — called on the Blue Jays to take action against Santander since a good portion of Canada is now foreign-born.”Islamophobia is never acceptable,” Omer Osman posted, “and I hope the @BlueJays take the appropriate action, considering they have some Muslim employees as well.”I’m all for free speech, but this is extremely disgusting and flat out disrespectful stuff shared by Anthony Santander. Islamophobia is never acceptable, and I hope the @BlueJays take the appropriate action, considering they have some Muslim employees as well. https://t.co/F3VV9cgMLH— Omer Osman (@OmerOsman200) November 5, 2026What?! A Muslim is offended that anyone said anything critical of Islam or anyone associated with it? You don’t say?! Next thing you’re going to tell me is that water is wet. You go too far.Of course, the Blue Jays, being the true Canadians that they are, have publicly chastised Santander, saying that the outfielder’s opinions “do not represent our organization’s values and beliefs.”RedState reported that the Blue Jays are a team that typically capitulates to the social media mob.This wouldn’t be the first time the Jays have moved against a player for sharing the wrong opinion on social media. In May 2023, reliever Anthony Bass posted an Instagram video calling for Christians to boycott Target and Bud Light over their support of the “pride” community.Eleven days later — and just hours before he was slated to catch a ceremonial first pitch on the opening night of Pride Weekend — Toronto designated Bass for assignment. He was released days later.We shall see what happens to Santander going forward, especially considering he sat out the entire 2026 Major League Baseball season following a left labral surgery in February of this year. However, it’ll be difficult for the Blue Jays to get rid of Santander without a substantial payout, considering that in January 2025 he signed a five-year, $92.5 million contract with the club after having a career year in 2024 with the Baltimore Orioles.Remember, for the left, bigotry is a one-way street.For a local report on this story, watch below:  

MS NOW host and congressional correspondent Ali Vitali wondered outside the bubble on Friday to join HBO’s Real Time host Bill Maher and Free Press contributor Coleman Hughes in recapping Tuesday’s midterm election results, which included some discussion about the media’s role in election coverage. During the regular show, Vitali would defend media fearmongering about the administration sending ICE agents to polling places, and during the post-show Overtime segment, tried to portray MS NOW as a balanced network with “a range of perspective.”Hughes was criticizing pre-election media hysteria when he declared, “Not only a shout-out to the Founding Fathers but a bit of a poo-poo on the media that’s constantly trying to terrify us in order to get us to click on whatever the latest, yes, threat to democracy. Okay, challenge right? But when you see that there’s a challenge in democracy, that doesn’t mean democracy is over. That doesn’t mean it’s Weimar Germany, right? And a lot of us have been taken by this the past few years, and what’s good about this election is that actually this system works.” MS NOW host/congressional correspondent Ali Vitali defends the media’s doomsday prophesying, “It’s not fearmongering. It is listening to what the then outgoing, now current president of the United States said and did, and reacting to that in a serious way that does not tell… pic.twitter.com/2JsLi0agkk— Alex Christy (@alexchristy17) November 7, 2026 Vitali defended the media by proclaiming, “Except for the fact — it’s beautiful that the system works. I cover campaigns for a living because there is something so amazing about watching democracy in action and I love when voters teach us something. And also after January 6, 2021, I do not think we can take our democracy for granted. It’s not fearmongering.”She insisted that the industry was simply listening to what the administration was saying, “It is listening to what the then outgoing, now current president of the United States said and did, and reacting to that in a serious way that does not tell people ‘be afraid to vote.’ Certainly that was not the message I would give to people who watch my show when I was on MS NOW, anywhere. But, it’s ‘be vigilant about it. Take it seriously. Know it’s your right and that it’s not the federal government who can send ICE to a polling place or tell you that election results are invalid,’ and that’s the lesson of January 6th.”Except, by her own standard, the media failed. The administration repeatedly denied that ICE agents would be patrolling polling places looking for illegal immigrants. They held out the possibility for a narrow hypothetical where an illegal immigrant would be known to be at a polling location, but Democrats and the media interrupted that to mean the administration was trying to intimidate Latino voters into not voting. Later, during the Overtime segment, BIll Maher and Coleman Hughes were talking about the DSA and education when Maher said, “I think spending $50,000 per year per student, it’s not money. That’s what you always hear from the left. ‘Oh, it’s underfunded.’ It’s not the funding. The… pic.twitter.com/OdRqlJdpTB— Alex Christy (@alexchristy17) November 7, 2026 Later, during the Overtime segment, Maher and Hughes were arguing that the DSA’s electoral rise represents a failure of the public education system. To that end, they also pointed to a recent essay by 1619 Project creator Nicole Hannah Jones where she decided to send her daughter to a public school. Maher recalled, “And I think in this school, where they were learning nothing with no supervision and absentee principals and teachers. I think spending $50,000 per year per student, it’s not money. That’s what you always hear from the left. ‘Oh, it’s underfunded.’ It’s not the funding. The funding isn’t the issue.”Turning to Vitali, Maher asserted, “And I think this is the kind of thing I will never hear on MS NOW.”Vitali tried to defend her colleagues, but it wasn’t convincing, “I think you hear a lot of perspectives on MS NOW. As the person who has interviewed everyone from Speaker Johnson to prominent Democrats. I can promise you there’s a range of perspective.”By “a lot of perspectives,” Vitali means the university-like spectrum of left to far-left. Vitali is also the 5 a.m. host. If her interviewing Mike Johnson 13 months ago when MS NOW was still MSNBC is the best Vitali can come up with, then Maher is right about the network’s deep echo chamber.Here is a transcript for the November 6 show:HBO Real Time with Bill Maher11/6/202610:23 PM ETCOLEMAN HUGHES: Not only a shout-out to the Founding Fathers but a bit of a poo-poo on the media that’s constantly trying to terrify us—BILL MAHER: Yeah.HUGHES: — in order to get us to click on whatever the latest, yes, threat to democracy. Okay, challenge right? But when you see that there’s a challenge in democracy, that doesn’t mean democracy is over. That doesn’t mean it’s Weimar Germany, right? And a lot of us have been taken by this the past few years, and what’s good about this election is that actually this system works.ALI VITALI: Except for the fact — it’s beautiful that the system works. I cover campaigns for a living because there is something so amazing about watching democracy in action—MAHER: Yeah.VITALI: — and I love when voters teach us something. And also after January 6, 2021, I do not think we can take our democracy for granted. It’s not fearmongering. It is listening to what—MAHER: Right.VITALI: — the then outgoing, now current president of the United States said and did, and reacting to that in a serious way that does not tell people “be afraid to vote.” Certainly that was not the message I would give to people who watch my show when I was on MS NOW, anywhere. But, it’s be vigilant about it. Take it seriously. Know it’s your right and that it’s not the federal government who can send ICE to a polling place or tell you that election results are invalid,” and that’s the lesson of January 6th.***HBO Real Time with Bill Maher Overtime11/6/2026BILL MAHER: And I think in this school, where they were learning nothing with no supervision and absentee principals and teachers.COLEMAN HUGHES: Yeah.MAHER: I think spending $50,000 per year per student, it’s not money. That’s what you always hear from the left. “Oh, it’s underfunded.” It’s not the funding. The funding isn’t the issue. And—HUGHES: No, it hasn’t been for a very long time.MAHER: I think this is the kind of thing I will never hear on MS NOW.ALI VITALI: I think you hear a lot of perspectives on MS NOW.MAHER: I don’t think I ever hear that one.VITALI: As the person who has interviewed everyone from Speaker Johnson to prominent Democrats. I can promise you there’s a range of perspective.