Bobby Pulido, left, the Democratic nominee for Texas’ 15th Congressional District, and Benjamin Flores attend a political event in 2025. Photo courtesy of the Benjamin Flores campaign.

What the Heck Even Is the Texas Land Commissioner?

Disclosure: I currently work for the Benjamin Flores campaign and have political or professional relationships with people mentioned in this article. A full disclaimer appears at the end.

Official logo of the Texas General Land Office, the oldest state agency in Texas. Image courtesy of the Texas General Land Office.

If you asked the average Texan to explain what the Texas Land Commissioner does, you would probably get a confused look. That is understandable. The office rarely receives the same attention as governor, attorney general, or U.S. senator.

But it should.

The Texas General Land Office was established in 1836 and is the oldest state agency in Texas. What began as an office responsible for managing the public lands of the Republic of Texas now oversees roughly 13 million acres of state land and mineral interests.

The GLO manages oil, gas, mineral, renewable-energy, and other leases that generate revenue for Texas public schools. It helps administer billions of dollars in disaster-recovery and mitigation funding, protects the Texas coast, preserves state maps and historical records, and oversees programs that provide Texas veterans with land loans, home loans, long-term care, and burial services.

In other words, the Land Commissioner helps influence how Texas funds its schools, treats its veterans, prepares for disasters, protects its coastline, and manages land belonging to the public.

This is not some ceremonial position buried inside the state government. It is one of the most consequential statewide offices that most Texans rarely hear about.

And Benjamin Flores wants to change the way it works.

So, Who Is Benjamin Flores?

Benjamin Flores with his wife, An, and their daughter, Nadia. Photo courtesy of the Benjamin Flores campaign.

Benjamin Flores does not come from the traditional political pipeline.

He immigrated to Texas from Mexico City in 1996 and built a career spanning nearly three decades in cybersecurity, regulatory compliance, and risk management. He later became a rancher and was elected to the Bay City Council, where he gained firsthand experience with the decisions local governments face every day.

Benjamin is also a husband, father, and cancer survivor. He continued running for office while undergoing treatment for leukemia, a fight that has shaped his understanding of perseverance, public service, and how quickly life can change for an ordinary family.

That combination of experience matters because the General Land Office is not responsible for only one issue. It manages land, investments, natural resources, public programs, and billions of dollars in recovery funding. The job requires someone who understands technology, compliance, local government, agriculture, and the consequences of bureaucratic failure.

Benjamin’s argument is straightforward: Texans deserve a Land Commissioner who treats the office as a public responsibility, not merely another rung on the political ladder.

As he recently explained:

“The GLO should serve Texans with transparency, competence, and urgency. I will refocus the agency on that mission.”

Benjamin Flores sits next to Julio Salinas, the Democratic nominee for Texas House District 41. The photo was taken May 8, 2026, in Edinburg, Texas, during a joint video shoot for both campaigns. Photo courtesy of the Benjamin Flores campaign.

Public Land Should Serve Public Schools

When Ben Flores sat down with Julio Salinas, the Democratic nominee for Texas House District 41, their conversation turned to the future of public education in the Rio Grande Valley.

Julio is running on giving Texas teachers a $15,000 pay raise, reversing the state’s private-school voucher program, and putting more public money back into public classrooms. Ben agrees that Texas teachers deserve that raise and that the state must stop expecting educators to do increasingly difficult work without paying them what they are worth.

The two candidates are seeking different offices with different powers. Julio, if elected to the Legislature, could directly vote on teacher salaries and school-finance legislation. The Land Commissioner cannot set teacher pay, but Ben would oversee another part of the equation: how Texas uses its public lands to generate revenue for public education.

Their responsibilities would be different, but their objective would be the same. Texas must start treating public education as an investment rather than an expense to be cut.

For Valley families, that conversation is not theoretical. School districts across the region are already being forced to make painful decisions as enrollment declines and budgets tighten.

Donna ISD closed two elementary schools after enrollment fell from nearly 15,500 students in 2015 to approximately 12,500 during the 2025–26 school year. According to the district superintendent, 95 percent of Donna ISD students come from economically disadvantaged households and 56 percent are English learners.

La Joya ISD has also approved the closure of four campuses and the repurposing of another for the 2026–27 school year.

These are not simply buildings on a spreadsheet. Schools are anchors for neighborhoods, sources of employment, and places where generations of Valley families have grown up. When a campus closes, students may face longer commutes, teachers and staff confront uncertainty, and an entire community loses part of its identity.

The Land Commissioner cannot singlehandedly prevent these closures or repair every problem in Texas school finance. Enrollment, attendance-based funding, local budgets, and decisions made by the Legislature all play major roles. But the commissioner is responsible for ensuring that public land generates the strongest possible long-term return for Texas schools.

The Permanent School Fund holds more than $60 billion in assets and distributes more than $2.4 billion annually to Texas K–12 schools. The Texas Permanent School Fund Corporation manages the investment portfolio, while the General Land Office oversees and leases state lands dedicated to the fund.

State Rep. James Talarico shakes hands with Benjamin Flores at a private fundraiser in 2025. During the event, they discussed private-school vouchers and other issues before the Texas Legislature. Photo courtesy of the Benjamin Flores campaign.

Ben believes those lands should be managed responsibly, transparently, and with Texas students in mind.

“I will expand responsible leasing, strengthen oversight, and use data to maximize long-term returns for public schools. That includes oil, gas, renewable energy, and emerging technologies where they make financial and environmental sense.”

Supporting Valley schools also means protecting the communities around them.

Flooding can close campuses, damage homes, overwhelm drainage systems, block school buses, and prevent students and teachers from safely reaching their classrooms. A child cannot focus on an exam while worrying about whether their family’s home is filling with water.

Rio Grande Valley native state Rep. Gina Hinojosa and Benjamin Flores stand in front of the Texas flag at a private fundraiser in 2025. Photo courtesy of the Benjamin Flores campaign.

Following the 2018 South Texas floods, the GLO administered more than $72 million in federal disaster-recovery funding for Cameron, Hidalgo, and Jim Wells counties. In 2023, the agency approved approximately $12.5 million for 13 local infrastructure projects across the region.

Those projects included drainage improvements developed with PSJA ISD in Alamo, pump rehabilitation in Edinburg, sewer improvements in Donna, detention ponds in Mission, and stormwater projects in Palmview, Mercedes, Progreso, La Feria, and other Valley communities.

This is where school funding, infrastructure, and disaster preparedness meet. Public education does not exist in isolation from the conditions students experience at home or on their way to school.

Ben addressed that responsibility directly:

“Recovery funding must reach rural, coastal, and low-income Texans without years of delay. We will track outcomes by community so the public can see who is being served and where gaps remain.”

The Valley does not need promises made from Austin and forgotten after the cameras leave. It needs state leaders who understand how these responsibilities connect.

Julio’s proposal would put an additional $15,000 into the pockets of Texas teachers. Ben’s approach would ensure that the lands belonging to the people of Texas generate the strongest responsible return possible for the schools those teachers serve.

As Ben put it:

“Revenue generation and conservation can work together when decisions prioritize responsible stewardship over short-term gains.”

Texas has the resources to pay its teachers more, strengthen its schools, and protect communities from flooding. What it has lacked is the political will to make those priorities work together.

Texas Veterans Deserve More Than a Thank You

One of the least understood responsibilities of the Texas Land Commissioner is serving as chair of the Veterans Land Board.

The VLB provides Texas veterans and military families with land loans, home loans, long-term care, and burial services. Its land-loan program allows eligible veterans to borrow up to $200,000, while its home-loan program offers financing of up to $832,750.

The agency also oversees Texas State Veterans Homes and state veterans cemeteries, including the Rio Grande Valley State Veterans Cemetery in Mission. That 75-acre cemetery can ultimately provide a final resting place for more than 25,000 veterans and family members.

These programs can change lives, but only when veterans can actually access them.

A generous benefit buried beneath confusing paperwork, delayed processing, or poor communication is not truly accessible. Veterans who have already served their country should not have to fight another bureaucracy to receive benefits they have earned.

That is why improving the Veterans Land Board is one of Ben’s central priorities.

“My priorities are increasing revenue for public schools through responsible land management, making Veterans Land Board programs faster and easier to access, protecting our coast, and delivering quicker, fairer disaster recovery.”

Ben is not arguing that the Veterans Land Board must be torn down and rebuilt from scratch. He wants the programs it already offers to work more efficiently for the people they were created to serve.

His background in cybersecurity and regulatory compliance is especially relevant here. Modernizing applications and reducing unnecessary delays cannot come at the expense of protecting veterans’ financial, medical, and personal information. Texas needs systems that are easier to navigate and secure enough to deserve the trust of the people using them.

The Land Commissioner should also ensure that every eligible veteran receives equal treatment. Benefits earned through military service should never depend on a veteran’s race, gender, disability, background, identity, or ZIP code.

Texas politicians regularly thank veterans in speeches and campaign advertisements. The more important test is whether state government answers the phone, processes an application, protects personal information, maintains veterans’ homes, and treats families with dignity when they bury someone they love.

For Ben, supporting veterans is not about another slogan. It is about making government work.

Protecting the Coast Means Protecting Texas

Texas has 367 miles of Gulf beaches and more than 3,300 miles of shoreline surrounding its bays and estuaries. Those waters support ports, tourism, fishing, wildlife, energy production, and communities that millions of Texans call home.

They are also disappearing.

According to the General Land Office, the Texas coast erodes by an average of 4.1 feet every year. Some areas lose more than 30 feet annually. When beaches, dunes, and wetlands disappear, homes, businesses, roads, ports, and entire communities become more vulnerable to storms and flooding.

For Ben, coastal protection is not only an environmental issue. It is an economic and public-safety responsibility.

“Climate resilience is Texas’ greatest challenge. Stronger storms, strained water supplies, rising insurance costs, and rapid growth are testing our communities and infrastructure.”

Texas cannot stop hurricanes from forming, but it can make communities better prepared for them. That means restoring dunes and wetlands, supporting living shorelines, improving drainage, strengthening coastal infrastructure, preparing for oil spills, and directing mitigation funding toward projects that reduce future damage.

Waiting until after a disaster is always more expensive than preparing beforehand.

Coastal resilience also requires honest long-term planning. Rising insurance costs and repeated storm damage are already affecting whether families can afford to remain in coastal communities. Ignoring those risks will not make them disappear. It will only leave homeowners, taxpayers, and future generations with a larger bill.

“We need long-term planning, mitigation, and responsible land management. The GLO can help Texas grow without leaving vulnerable communities or future generations to bear the cost.”

Protecting the coast does not mean shutting down the industries that support Texas workers and generate revenue for public schools. It means ensuring that energy development, commercial activity, conservation, and public safety are managed together instead of treating environmental damage as someone else’s future problem.

Ben believes Texas can remain an energy leader while also protecting beaches, wetlands, wildlife, and the families who live along the coast.

The Land Commissioner’s responsibility is not simply to generate as much money as possible today. It is to ensure that the land and coastline belonging to Texans still have value tomorrow.

Public Land Should Not Become a Political Prop

The General Land Office oversees approximately 13 million acres of state land and mineral interests. That gives the Land Commissioner influence over decisions involving energy development, conservation, agriculture, public access, border infrastructure, and agreements with state and federal agencies.

Nowhere is that power more visible than along the Texas-Mexico border.

In October 2024, the GLO acquired a 1,402-acre ranch along the Rio Grande in Starr County. Within 24 hours, the agency authorized the Texas Facilities Commission to begin constructing approximately 1.5 miles of border wall on the property. The land was later offered to the federal government for possible deportation facilities and staging operations.

Whether Texans agree with those decisions or not, they demonstrate that the Land Commissioner is not merely maintaining maps and property records. The person holding this office can make decisions that directly affect border communities, public land, private-property rights, and the relationship between Texas and the federal government.

Ben believes Texas can protect its border without giving any government agency a blank check.

“Texas can protect its border without surrendering control of state lands or sacrificing parks, resources, and private property rights.”

That is not an argument for ignoring security. It is an argument for making security decisions transparently, lawfully, and with respect for the Texans who live on the border.

People in Austin and Washington frequently talk about the border as if it were an empty stage for press conferences. It is not. It is our home. Decisions involving walls, roads, surveillance equipment, law-enforcement access, and land acquisition affect farmers, ranchers, wildlife, water supplies, indigenous history, and families whose roots in South Texas extend across generations.

Ben has promised to review proposals individually instead of automatically approving anything labeled “border security.”

“I will demand transparent agreements, lawful coordination, and review of every proposal. Security decisions must be effective, accountable, and respectful of the lands Texans expect the GLO to protect.”

Texans deserve to know who will control state land, how it will be used, how much a project will cost, and whether the agreement protects the public interest.

Border communities should not learn about decisions affecting their land only after an agreement has already been signed.

Public land belongs to the public. It should never be treated as the personal property of a politician or as scenery for the next campaign advertisement.

The Fight That Made This Campaign Personal

Ben’s campaign has never been an easy one.

He entered the race without the statewide name recognition, political machine, or financial network that usually surrounds candidates for statewide office. He won the Democratic nomination by building a campaign around his experience, his story, and a promise to put Texans first.

Then, after Ben won the primary, his campaign announced that he had been diagnosed with leukemia.

The diagnosis temporarily pulled him away from the campaign trail while he received treatment at MD Anderson in Houston. But Ben remained an active candidate, continued working with his campaign, and made it clear that he had no intention of abandoning the race.

His response came from a lesson his mother gave him when he came to the United States from Mexico City: Nunca seas agachado. Never bow down.

“I did not bow down to challenges of winning my March primary, and I will not bow down to leukemia.”

At the Texas Democratic Convention in Corpus Christi in June 2026, Ben announced that his cancer was in remission.

Remission does not erase what he and his family experienced. It does not eliminate follow-up appointments, uncertainty, or the physical and emotional toll of treatment. But it marked an enormous victory in a fight that became much bigger than politics.

A serious illness does not automatically qualify someone for public office. What it can reveal is how that person responds when life becomes frightening, uncertain, and completely beyond their control.

Ben responded with honesty, determination, and an insistence on continuing the work he started.

Working with Ben during this period has made the campaign personal for me as well. I have watched our schedules change around medical appointments and seen the campaign adapt while Ben remained engaged with his staff and committed to the people who placed their trust in him.

His experience also gives additional meaning to the urgency behind his platform. When Ben talks about government programs working faster, families receiving help without unnecessary delays, and public servants treating people with dignity, those words are not empty campaign language.

He understands that life does not pause while someone waits for an agency to process paperwork.

Ben has already fought one battle many people cannot imagine. He is continuing his recovery while fighting another battle over what kind of leadership Texas deserves.

The Office Texas Forgot

Most Texans will never personally negotiate an energy lease on state land. They may never apply for a Veterans Land Board loan or follow the movement of federal disaster-recovery grants.

But they send their children to public schools. They drive through neighborhoods that flood. They visit Texas beaches. They know veterans who deserve better services. They pay insurance premiums that rise as disasters become more destructive.

That is why the Land Commissioner matters.

The office connects public education, veterans’ benefits, disaster recovery, coastal protection, energy development, border policy, and the stewardship of land belonging to every Texan.

Ben Flores understands those connections.

He has spent nearly three decades working in cybersecurity, compliance, and risk management. He has served in local government, worked in economic development, managed a small ranch, built a family in Texas, and faced leukemia without walking away from the commitments he made.

I will not pretend to be a neutral observer. I work for Ben’s campaign, believe in his candidacy, and want him to become the next Texas Land Commissioner. That relationship is disclosed at the beginning of this article and explained fully below.

But my affiliation does not change what this office controls or what Ben has experienced. It does not change the billions of dollars passing through the GLO, the schools supported by public-land revenue, the veterans depending on its programs, or the families waiting for disaster assistance.

Texas has ignored this office for too long.

Ben Flores is giving Texans a reason to start paying attention.

Sources

• Texas General Land Office: Coastal management

• Texas GLO: Coastal erosion

• Texas GLO: Protecting the coast

• Texas GLO: History and current responsibilities

• Texas GLO: Acquisition of the Starr County border ranch

• Texas GLO: Offer of Starr County land to the federal government

• The Texas Tribune: Ben Flores announces his leukemia is in remission

• Ben Flores campaign website

Full Transparency Disclaimer

I currently serve as Senior Digital Strategy Manager and Campaign Advisor for Benjamin Flores for Texas Land Commissioner and am also employed by the Julio Salinas campaign for Texas House District 41. I have worked for, advised, supported, volunteered with, or maintained political or professional affiliations with individuals, campaigns, and organizations mentioned in this article. Some are also personal friends or colleagues.

This article reflects my personal perspective and does not necessarily represent the official views of the Benjamin Flores campaign, the Julio Salinas campaign, the Hidalgo County Democratic Party, the Hidalgo County Young Democrats, the Texas Young Democrats, the Texas Democratic Party, or the UTRGV College Democrats. Readers should consider these relationships when evaluating my perspective.

Image credit: Carol M. Highsmith’s America, Library of Congress collection. Public Domain. Digitally enhanced by Rawpixel.

Republicans are not afraid that democracy is broken.

They are afraid that democracy might actually work.

Ever since Trump returned to office, we have seen repeated attacks on American democracy. And in no other modern time has a U.S. president pushed the limits of democracy this far.

But you would have to be very naive to think this is just about one man.

It is not just Trump.

It is the entire Republican Party.

For as long as I have been interested in politics, I have watched Republicans use every trick possible to protect power. They gerrymander maps. They restrict voting access. They purge voter rolls. They attack mail-in voting. They make voting harder for working people, disabled voters, young voters, elderly voters, and communities of color.

And when all of that is not enough, they start attacking the Constitution itself.

Gerrymandering Is Not New

Let’s start with gerrymandering.

Normal redistricting is supposed to adjust district lines after population changes. Gerrymandering is when that process gets manipulated so voters do not choose their representatives as much as representatives choose their voters.

And to be clear, gerrymandering can be done by any party. Democrats can do it. Republicans can do it. Anyone with control over the map-drawing process can abuse it.

Gerrymandering did not start with the modern Republican Party. The term goes back to 1812, when Massachusetts Governor Elbridge Gerry signed a redistricting plan that helped his party, the Democratic-Republicans, against the Federalists.

So no, this is not something only one party is capable of doing.

The question is who has power right now, how they are using it, and whether voters are being fairly represented.

And in Texas right now, Republicans control the process, Republicans drew the maps, and Republicans are using redistricting as part of a larger strategy to keep power even when voters become harder to control.

That kind of attack on democracy is nothing new.

But now it is becoming more aggressive.

When regular gerrymandering is not enough, they try mid-decade redistricting.

When mid-decade redistricting is not enough, they go after voter rolls.

When voter roll purges are not enough, they restrict mail-in ballots.

When that is not enough, they remove 24-hour polling locations, attack drive-thru voting, and make the process more confusing on purpose.

Piece by piece, they keep making democracy smaller.

And every time they do it, they pretend it is about “election integrity.”

But let’s be honest.

If your entire political strategy depends on fewer people voting, weaker representation, and politicians choosing their voters, then you are not protecting democracy.

You are scared of it.

Texas Is the Warning Sign

This is why Texas matters so much.

Texas is not separate from this story. Texas is the warning sign.

Republicans in Texas did not wait for the next census. They did not wait for voters to naturally shift. They pushed mid-decade congressional redistricting because they wanted to protect and expand their power.

That is the playbook.

If voters become harder to beat, redraw the lines.

If communities start shifting, split them up.

If Democrats start organizing better, make the districts harder.

If young people start paying attention, make voting more difficult.

If democracy starts working, break the machinery.

This is also why Republicans defend the Electoral College so aggressively.

They know that in modern presidential politics, they do not always need to win the most votes to win power. They can lose the national popular vote and still control the White House.

That is not an accident.

That is the whole point.

They love systems where the majority does not always get to decide.

They love systems where power can be protected even when voters reject them.

They love systems where democracy gets filtered through institutions they can control.

And now some Republicans are going even further.

Now They Are Coming After the 17th Amendment

Members of the Congress give a standing ovation as President Donald Trump delivers the State of the Union address to a joint session of Congress in the House chamber at the U.S. Capitol in Washington, Tuesday, Feb. 24, 2026.

They are going after the 17th Amendment.

That is exactly why some Republicans want to repeal it.

Because repealing the 17th Amendment would take the power to choose U.S. senators away from voters and give it back to state politicians.

Now, is it likely that they successfully repeal the 17th Amendment tomorrow?

No.

But we do not live in normal times anymore.

We live in an America where democracy is hanging by a thread, and every time Republicans test the system, the system bends a little more.

That is why this matters.

Because this is not just some random constitutional theory. This is part of the same pattern.

They defend the Electoral College.

They gerrymander Texas.

They restrict voting access.

They purge voter rolls.

They attack mail-in voting.

They make voting harder.

And now some of them are openly saying voters should not directly elect U.S. senators anymore.

So what is causing Republicans to break democracy?

Simple.

It is progressive Democrats.

Photo collage, left to right from top to bottom: James Talarico, Democratic nominee for U.S. Senate in Texas; Julio Salinas, Democratic nominee for Texas House District 41; Zohran Mamdani, Mayor of New York City; Darializa Avila Chevalier, Democratic nominee for Congress in New York’s 13th District; Brad Lander, former New York City Comptroller and Democratic nominee for Congress in New York’s 12th District; Claire Valdez, New York State Assemblymember and Democratic nominee for Congress in New York’s 7th District; Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont; Graham Platner, Democratic nominee for U.S. Senate in Maine; and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York.

They Are Afraid of the Movement Behind the Candidates

It is not just the candidates themselves.

It is the movement behind them.

In Texas, we have seen progressive Democrats like James Talarico and Julio Salinas rise in a state where we are constantly told Democrats cannot win, and where progressive Democrats are treated like they have even less of a chance.

But then they organize.

They talk to voters.

They build real campaigns.

They use data.

They knock doors.

They show up in communities that the old political machine forgot about.

And they prove that the old rules are not as permanent as people pretend they are.

That scares Republicans.

In Maine, Graham Platner is threatening Susan Collins, someone who has been treated for years like a permanent fixture in the United States Senate.

In New York, Zohran Mamdani’s movement went three for three, helping elect Brad Lander, Claire Valdez, and Darializa Avila Chevalier.

Again and again, the pattern is becoming harder to ignore.

When progressive candidates run on something real, people respond.

That is what Republicans are afraid of.

They are not just afraid of Democratic candidates. They are afraid of a progressive base that is built differently.

It is built through grassroots organizing.

It is built through people knocking doors, making calls, talking to their communities, and taking care of each other.

It is built by people who are tired of watching politicians put donors, corporations, billionaires, foreign conflicts, and political games ahead of the people struggling right here at home.

Progressive politics, at its best, says something very simple:

Our people come first.

Our families come first.

Our workers come first.

Our schools come first.

Our healthcare comes first.

Our communities come first.

Our mothers, fathers, brothers, sisters, friends, and neighbors come first.

That message is powerful because it is not abstract.

It is personal.

It is about rent.

It is about groceries.

It is about wages.

It is about healthcare.

It is about public schools.

It is about whether regular people can survive in a country that keeps asking them to sacrifice while the richest people on earth get protected.

Republicans understand how dangerous that message is.

Because once voters realize they have power, the whole system starts to shake.

That is why they are not just trying to beat progressive Democrats at the ballot box.

They are trying to change the ballot box itself.

They are trying to decide who gets counted, whose district matters, whose vote carries weight, and who gets to choose their elected officials.

That is why Republicans defend the Electoral College.

That is why they gerrymander states like Texas.

That is why they attack voting access.

That is why some of them want to repeal the 17th Amendment and take Senate elections away from the people.

They know that if democracy becomes too direct, too organized, and too responsive to regular people, they could lose control.

And that is the point.

They are not scared because democracy is broken.

They are scared because democracy might finally start working.

Sources

The Library of Congress on the origin of gerrymandering and Elbridge Gerry.

The Brennan Center on gerrymandering, voting restrictions, voter roll efforts, and Texas voting law.

The Texas Tribune on Texas mid-decade congressional redistricting and the new congressional map.

The Constitution Annotated / Congress.gov on the 17th Amendment.

Rep. Keith Self’s congressional office on the resolution to repeal the 17th Amendment.

USAGov and the National Archives on the Electoral College.

Ballotpedia, The Texas Tribune, WBUR/AP, Reuters, and The Guardian on James Talarico, Julio Salinas, Graham Platner, Zohran Mamdani, Brad Lander, Claire Valdez, and Darializa Avila Chevalier.

Last week, I wrote about Flock cameras and how surveillance technology is being sold to the public as “safety.”

This week, I want to talk about the next step:

How do you fight back?

Because the truth is, most people have no idea how much of their information is already sitting inside databases they never signed up for.

Your face.

Your address.

Your phone number.

Your relatives.

Your old addresses.

Your social media photos.

Your workplace.

Your political activity.

Your public records.

All of that can be collected, packaged, searched, sold, or used to identify you.

And no, you cannot completely erase yourself from the internet.

But you can make yourself harder to find.

That starts with removing yourself from facial recognition tools and people-search databases.

In the paid section, I’ll break down the exact steps, websites, and email templates you can use to start removing yourself from facial recognition tools like Clearview AI, PimEyes, and FaceCheck.ID, along with people-search databases that publish your personal information online.

Read more

Photo: Sister Letty Ugboaja. Photo courtesy of Our Lady of Sorrows Church.

This past Sunday, Sister Letty Ugboaja, a Catholic nun connected to Our Lady of Sorrows Church in McAllen, was detained by immigration officials while she was on her way to Sunday Mass.

According to local reports, she was picked up around 9 a.m. while walking to church. The detention immediately sparked outrage across the Rio Grande Valley because Sister Letty was not some public safety threat.

She was a nun.

In McAllen.

Going to worship.

But most importantly, she was part of our Valley community.

Later that same day, Valley representatives announced she was being released and would be coming home. But her release does not answer the most important question:

Why was she detained in the first place?

ICE’s lack of empathy shines in this situation

We have all heard the horror stories about ICE detaining people.

They profile people.

They harass people.

They violate constitutional rights.

They intimidate people for recording public activity.

They have even been involved in shootings that sparked national outrage.

But this?

To me, this situation feels different.

What immigration officer in their right mind detains a nun on her way to Mass?

Answer:

NONE!

Because this is what happens when immigration enforcement becomes less about public safety and more about numbers, fear, and power.

ICE agents are operating inside a system that treats undocumented immigrants like bodies to process, not people with lives, families, faith, or constitutional rights.

That is why people call this a bounty system.

I do not mean that as a legal technical term.

I mean that every arrest feeds the machine. Every detention creates demand for more beds. Every dollar Congress sends ICE expands the system. And when parts of that detention system run through private contractors and for-profit detention companies, we need to stop pretending money has nothing to do with this.

So what do we think ICE is going to do when politicians keep handing them billions of dollars?

Respect due process for every person inside the United States?

Or do everything in their power to detain as many so-called “undocumented immigrants” as possible, even if that means breaking trust, violating rights, and terrorizing communities?

Because that is the question.

And this past Sunday, the answer was ugly.

The real heroes

Image: Official congressional headshots of U.S. Rep. Henry Cuellar and U.S. Rep. Vicente Gonzalez. Cuellar represents Texas’ 28th Congressional District, and Gonzalez represents Texas’ 34th Congressional District.

While this situation was unfolding, staffers from the offices of Congressman Henry Cuellar and Congressman Vicente Gonzalez, along with local political operatives and community members, were working the case and pushing for answers.

That pressure mattered.

Sister Letty was released the same day.

Both congressmen are no strangers to these types of situations. They have been in office for years, they know how federal agencies work, and moments like this show why experience and influence can matter when someone in our community is in danger.

Congressman Cuellar, specifically, serves as the Ranking Member of the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Homeland Security, which means he has direct influence and oversight over the agencies connected to DHS funding.

And in this moment, that mattered.

This is what elected officials and their staff are supposed to do.

Not post empty statements.

Not wait for the story to blow over.

Not hide behind talking points.

Actually work the phones, pressure the agencies, and fight to bring someone home.

We have seen this before

U.S. Rep. Monica De La Cruz accompanies Antonio Gámez-Cuéllar during his release from the El Valle Detention Facility in Raymondville on March 9, 2026. Gámez-Cuéllar, a member of a nationally recognized mariachi band, and his family were detained by ICE last month. Michael Gonzalez for The Texas Tribune

Unfortunately, Valley natives are not strangers to this.

Earlier this year, a McAllen family that included talented mariachi students was detained by ICE after a routine immigration check-in.

These were students.

Musicians.

Young people who had performed at the U.S. Capitol after being invited by Congresswoman Monica De La Cruz.

Then, less than a year later, they were sitting in ICE detention.

Bobby Pulido at a campaign event in February 2026.

After Democratic nominee for Congress Bobby Pulido amplified the situation online, Monica De La Cruz responded and eventually showed up.

And now, with Sister Letty, it happened again.

We all know how Monica operates.

She is a pawn in Trump’s playbook, so when she posts that she is working hard to get Sister Letty out of ICE custody, I have to ask:

Does she actually care about her constituents, or is she just trying to score political points once the public pressure becomes too loud to ignore?

I think we all know the answer.

Why is it that she only seems to lift a finger after her political opponents and the community call out an injustice?

Simple.

Because if she truly cared about stopping this kind of abuse, she would not keep supporting the same political machine that makes it possible.

Earlier this month, the House passed the Secure America Act, a massive immigration enforcement package that sent roughly $70 billion toward ICE, Border Patrol, and DHS enforcement. The vote passed 214-212. Every Republican who voted supported it. Every Democrat who voted opposed it.

Monica De La Cruz voted yes.

Henry Cuellar voted no.

Vicente Gonzalez voted no.

That matters.

Because you cannot fund the machine, defend the machine, campaign with the people who built the machine, and then act shocked when the machine comes for people in your own district.

If Monica was actually doing her job, nuns would not be getting detained in the Valley on their way to Mass.

Families would not be terrified of routine check-ins.

Students would not be separated from their parents.

People would not be forced to wonder whether going to church, school, work, or an immigration appointment could end with them inside a detention facility.

But her voting record says otherwise.

What now?

I wish I could say things are going to get better, but I am seeing the opposite.

Trump has already signed a nearly $70 billion immigration enforcement package into law, locking in funding for ICE and Border Patrol through the rest of his presidency.

We have also seen videos and reports of immigration agents acting hostile toward people who are simply recording in public, even though the First Amendment protects the right to record law enforcement and federal agents doing their jobs in public.

That should scare people.

But this section is not meant to discourage anyone.

It is meant to remind people that when we fight for our own, we can do amazing things.

Yes, Congressmen Cuellar and Gonzalez helped.

Yes, staffers helped.

Yes, local political operatives helped.

But this story would not have moved the way it did if people in the Valley had chosen to stay quiet.

They did not.

They did what the Valley always does.

We show up for our neighbors.

And honestly, that is one of the most beautiful things I have seen in a long time.

I could not be prouder to call myself an RGV native.

Como decimos aquí, raza:

PURO

PINCHE

956

Works Cited

KRGV, “Valley nun released after being detained by ICE while heading to Sunday Mass.”

The Texas Tribune, “Teen mariachis and family from McAllen released from ICE custody.”

Office of the Clerk, U.S. House of Representatives, Roll Call 214, Secure America Act.

The Guardian, “Trump signs $70bn immigration act ensuring ICE funding through 2029.”

American Immigration Council, “ICE’s Warehouse Purchases Herald New Model for Immigration Detention.”

ACLU, “Recording and Documenting Police and Federal Agents.”

Congressman Henry Cuellar official House website, Appropriations page.

A Flock Safety ALPR camera outside a retail store in Aurora, Colorado. Photo by Tony Webster/CC BY 2.0, via Wisconsin Public Radio.

Would you feel safe if a private company and local law enforcement could track where your car goes, which roads you take, what neighborhoods you enter, and then store all of that information in a searchable database?

Would you feel safe knowing your daily routine, your workplace, your church, your doctor’s office, your political events, or even a protest could become part of a digital trail?

Well, that is exactly what Flock cameras do.

They do not just take a picture of a license plate. They create a record of where people move, when they move, and how often they show up in certain places.

And once that information exists, the question becomes simple:

Who gets to access it, how is it being used, and what stops it from being abused?

As a computer scientist, I do not see Flock cameras as some harmless law enforcement tool.

To me, they look more like an invasive surveillance weapon being sold to the public as a public safety tool.

Because let’s be honest: creating an AI-powered surveillance system is not just giving law enforcement another tool. It starts to look like we are building the framework for a surveillance state.

And that leads to a real question:

Would you trade law and order for a surveillance state?

Probably not.

Because imagine living your life constantly looking over your shoulder, knowing an AI-powered camera system can log where your car has been, when it was there, and who can search that information later.

That is not freedom.

That is surveillance.

So who has access to Flock data?

That depends on the contract and the local policy. But generally, access can include approved law enforcement users, local agencies, other police departments through sharing agreements, and even private customers like businesses, HOAs, or apartment complexes that operate their own cameras.

Flock says access is supposed to be controlled by the local customer, with approved users, role-based permissions, and audit logs for searches.

But that still leaves a major problem.

Audit logs are not the same thing as public accountability.

If a police department, city, private business, or neighborhood association can collect this data and share it with other agencies, the average person has no real way of knowing where their movement data is going.

Your license plate scan may not just stay with one local department.

Depending on the policy, it could be searched or shared across a much larger network.

And once federal agencies, outside police departments, or private actors enter the picture, the question becomes even more serious:

Who is watching the watchers?

That is the scariest part.

It is not just the camera itself.

It is the lack of real public oversight over a system this powerful.

Because when you give people access to a surveillance tool like this, it can be misused in a lot of ways.

Subscribe now

People are not opting into this surveillance

And that is another part of this that bothers me.

People are not opting into Flock cameras.

Most people driving past these cameras have no idea their license plate is being scanned, logged, stored, and potentially shared. They are just going to work, school, church, the grocery store, a doctor’s appointment, or a political event.

Now yes, we all understand that when you are in public, you do not have the same privacy as you do inside your home.

But there is a huge difference between being seen in public and having your movements automatically collected into a searchable database.

When you walk down the street, someone might see you.

That is normal.

But that does not mean every place you go should be recorded, stored, analyzed, and made available to law enforcement or private companies.

That is the part people did not consent to.

Public does not mean permissionless.

Just because your car is visible on the road does not mean your daily life should become data for a surveillance system.

How can Flock cameras be misused?

The biggest danger is that Flock cameras do not just help police find a stolen car.

They create a system that can be searched, shared, and abused.

An officer could use it to track an ex, a romantic partner, or someone they are personally interested in.

And this is not just a hypothetical fear.

According to reporting from 404 Media, at least 18 police officers across the United States have been caught using Flock or similar license plate reader systems to stalk exes, romantic partners, or strangers.

In one reported case, an Orange City, Florida police officer allegedly searched his ex-girlfriend’s license plate and her family’s plates more than 100 times.

In another case, a Kansas police chief reportedly used Flock cameras to search his ex-girlfriend and her new boyfriend’s vehicles hundreds of times. He also allegedly used his police vehicle to follow them out of town.

Think about that for a second.

A tool sold to the public as “safety” is already being used by some officers as a personal stalking device.

That is exactly why oversight matters.

Because if someone with access can type in a plate number and see where a person has been, then this is not just a crime-fighting tool.

It is a tracking system.

And in the wrong hands, it becomes dangerous fast.

A department could also use it to monitor who shows up at a protest, a political meeting, a church, a clinic, or an immigrant rights event.

A local agency could share access with other departments, federal agencies, or outside jurisdictions, turning one local camera into part of a much larger surveillance web.

A bad search or false match could lead to someone being pulled over, questioned, detained, or treated like a suspect even when they did nothing wrong.

And private cameras outside stores, apartments, neighborhoods, or businesses could feed into the same system, meaning your daily errands can become part of a law enforcement database.

That is the problem.

It is not just about catching criminals.

It is about building a tool that can track ordinary people first and justify it later.

Once the data exists, it can be used for reasons the public never agreed to.

That is how surveillance expands.

It starts with “public safety.”

Then it becomes “just in case.”

Then it becomes normal.

And by the time people realize what was built around them, the surveillance state is already here.

Subscribe now

And this is not where the conversation ends.

Next week, I am going to explain how you can remove yourself from many of the major facial recognition and people-search databases that quietly collect, store, and sell your information.

Because privacy should not be something only tech companies, police departments, or data brokers get to control.

Regular people deserve to know where their data is going, who is using it, and how to fight back.

Works Cited

404 Media. “Cops Keep Getting Arrested for Using Flock to Stalk People.” 404 Media, 2026.

American Civil Liberties Union. “Flock’s Aggressive Expansions Go Far Beyond Simple Driver Surveillance.” ACLU, 2025.

American Civil Liberties Union. “Automatic License Plate Readers.” ACLU.

Electronic Frontier Foundation. “How Cops Are Using Flock Safety’s ALPR Network to Surveil Protesters and Activists.” EFF, 2025.

Electronic Frontier Foundation. “EFFecting Change: Get the Flock Out of Our City.” EFF, 2026.

Flock Safety. “Flock Evidence Policy.” Flock Safety, 2026.

Flock Safety. “How Does Flock Handle License Plate Data Deletion?” Flock Safety, 2026.

Wisconsin Public Radio. “AI-Powered Police Cameras Face Pushback From Wisconsin Communities.” Wisconsin Public Radio, 2025.

I first got started in politics during the 2024 election cycle, when we had Kamala Harris running for president, Colin Allred running for U.S. Senate, and Michelle Vallejo running for Congress.

When I first got involved, I kept hearing the same thing over and over again:

Use MiniVAN.

At first, I did not fully understand why everyone kept pushing this app. I just knew that if we were canvassing, phone banking, or helping with voter contact, MiniVAN was part of the process.

Eventually, I started to understand that MiniVAN was not just an app.

It was part of a much bigger shift in how campaigns are run.

What Is VAN?

VAN is the voter database that modern Democratic campaigns use to organize their field programs.

In basic terms, VAN helps campaigns know who the voters are, where they live, what precinct they are in, and whether they have already been contacted.

Instead of randomly knocking doors, randomly calling voters, or guessing which neighborhoods matter, VAN helps campaigns organize voter contact in a more strategic way.

That may sound simple, but it is one of the biggest differences between old-school campaigning and modern campaigning.

Because locally, a lot of campaigns still confuse visibility with power.

They think if they have enough signs, enough familiar faces, and enough people making noise, that means they have a real campaign.

But looking powerful is not the same as being organized.

And that is where the old way of campaigning starts to fall apart.

Read more

Here is what makes the Trump administration celebrating Team USA so funny to me.

The official 2026 U.S. Men’s National Team World Cup roster has players who were born outside the United States.

Not one.

Not two.

Six.

Sergiño Dest was born in Almere, Netherlands.

Antonee Robinson was born in Milton Keynes, England.

Gio Reyna was born in Sunderland, England.

Sebastian Berhalter was born in London, England.

Malik Tillman was born in Nuremberg, Germany.

Alejandro Zendejas was born in Ciudad Juárez, Mexico.

And yet every single one of them wears “USA” across their chest.

That is the whole point.

People love to act like being born outside the United States automatically makes someone less American.

That is not how this works.

Some Americans are born here. Some Americans are born abroad. Some Americans are citizens from birth because of American parents. Some Americans are dual nationals. Some Americans grow up between countries, cultures, languages, and identities.

That does not make them less American.

Honestly, it tells the truth about America better than any MAGA speech ever could.

And it is not just the six players born outside the country.

Subscribe now

U.S. Soccer says 13 players on the 2026 roster are dual nationals.

Half the roster.

That means half of Team USA has a connection to more than one country.

That should not scare people.

That should remind people what America actually is.

This team has players with roots in the Netherlands, England, Germany, Mexico, and beyond. It has players from immigrant families. It has players from border communities. It has players whose families crossed oceans, borders, and languages. It has players who could have represented another country but still chose to represent the United States.

And somehow, Trump-world wants to celebrate this team while attacking the very America that created it.

That is the hypocrisy.

Team USA looks like the America they keep attacking.

It is multicultural.

It is immigrant-rooted.

It is full of dual nationals.

It is full of families whose stories do not fit inside one narrow, angry version of America.

And honestly, that is what makes this team so powerful.

Because America has never been one birthplace.

It has never been one language.

It has never been one culture.

It has never been one type of family.

America is border towns.

America is military families overseas.

America is kids of immigrants.

America is dual nationals.

America is people with more than one culture still choosing to wear “USA” across their chest.

So when Trump and his administration celebrate Team USA, they should at least be honest about what they are celebrating.

They are celebrating the exact America they keep demonizing.

They are celebrating the America that is bigger than MAGA.

The America they pretend does not exist until it wins a soccer game.

Team USA is not proof of Trump’s America.

Team USA is proof that America has always been more diverse, more complicated, more immigrant-rooted, and more beautiful than the version he keeps trying to sell.

Sources

U.S. Soccer, official 2026 USMNT World Cup roster.

U.S. Soccer, 2026 roster announcement noting that 13 players on the roster are dual nationals.

U.S. State Department, guidance on U.S. citizenship for children born abroad.

Official theatrical poster for Obsession (2026). The film follows Bear, a hopeless romantic who uses the mysterious “One Wish Willow” to make his crush fall for him, only to discover that getting exactly what he asked for comes at a dark price. Courtesy of Focus Features.

Spoilers, sensitive topics, and gore ahead!

You’ve been warned!

Scroll a little bit more to begin reading the article.

I left a big space so that people won’t accidentally read spoilers.

Final warning

Unless you’ve been living under a rock, you’ve probably already heard about or watched the new movie Obsession.

The film follows Bear, a hopeless romantic who finds the mysterious One Wish Willow at a store and uses it to wish that his crush, Nikki Freeman, would fall in love with him. But what he unleashes is supernatural, terrifying, and far bigger than he could have imagined.

On the surface, Obsession is a horror movie and psychological thriller.

But underneath the blood, jump scares, and supernatural chaos, the entire movie is about consent.

That was one of the first things I noticed while watching it.

Bear does not tell Nikki how he feels and accept the possibility of rejection. He does not give her the chance to choose him freely. Instead, he uses the One Wish Willow to make her fall in love with him.

In other words, he removes her consent.

That is what makes Obsession political.

Not political in the Democrat-versus-Republican way, but political in the way all stories about power are political. The movie is about gender, control, entitlement, and the dangerous idea that wanting someone badly enough somehow gives you a right to them.

But it does not.

A woman does not owe a man love.

A woman does not owe a man affection.

And loneliness does not give anyone the right to control another person.

The fantasy starts to crack

As the movie progresses, Nikki starts acting stranger and stranger.

Nikki Freeman, played by Inde Navarrette, in Obsession. Image courtesy of Focus Features.

At first, the relationship almost looks normal. The film gives us moments where Bear seems happy, like he got exactly what he wanted. Nikki is affectionate. She is present. She is all in.

But then things start to feel off.

Nikki becomes overprotective.

Then obsessive.

Then possessive.

Throughout the movie, she keeps implying that Bear is not really free to leave. One of the clearest examples is when Bear tries to go to work on Nikki’s day off, and she literally duct tapes the door shut to stop him from leaving.

Bear eventually forces the door open, but by that point, the situation has already shifted from romance to control.

And it only gets worse.

One of the major breaking points comes when Nikki prepares food for Bear, and he later realizes that she fed him his own cat. That is the moment where Bear really starts drawing the line. He becomes uncomfortable. He sees that something is wrong. He sees that Nikki is acting supernatural, dangerous, and completely unlike herself.

But what makes the movie even more disturbing is that the real Nikki is still in there.

The real Nikki keeps trying to break through

Throughout the film, there are moments where Nikki seems to snap back into reality, almost like the actual Nikki is fighting to break through whatever the One Wish Willow did to her.

She is not completely gone.

She is trapped.

Her body is there. Her face is there. Her voice is there.

But her agency has been hijacked by this wish, this possession, this supernatural force that Bear brought into her life.

One of the most explicit examples happens when Nikki and Bear are about to have sex. Midway through, the real Nikki suddenly snaps back. She gets scared, jumps away from him, and says, “What the fuck.”

Then, just as quickly, she snaps back into the possessed version of herself.

That scene matters because it makes the consent issue impossible to ignore.

Bear sees it.

He sees that something is wrong. He sees that the real Nikki is still somewhere inside her. He sees that this is not normal love. This is not Nikki freely choosing him.

This is Nikki being controlled by a wish he made because he could not handle the possibility of rejection.

And that is where the movie really exposes Bear.

Bear is not the victim

The wish was already wrong from the beginning.

Bear did not start having a problem when Nikki’s consent was removed. He started having a problem when the version of Nikki he created became inconvenient, scary, and impossible to control.

Bear, played by Michael Johnston, in Obsession. Image courtesy of Focus Features.

That is the real point of the movie.

If Nikki had stayed sweet, loving, and obedient, would Bear have cared that her love was not real?

Would he have questioned the wish if she only became the perfect girlfriend he imagined?

Would he have felt guilty if the fantasy never turned into a nightmare?

That is why Bear is the real villain of Obsession.

The movie makes Nikki look like the monster, but if you actually analyze the story, Nikki is the victim. Her emotions, personality, body, and autonomy are hijacked because Bear cannot handle rejection.

The wish turns her into something terrifying, but Bear is the reason it happened in the first place.

He wanted love without risk.

He wanted intimacy without vulnerability.

He wanted affection without consent.

And the movie shows how horrifying that actually is.

The ending leaves Nikki with the consequences

The wish also makes it clear that it will not stop until the person who made the wish dies.

By the end of the film, Bear tries to end his life to escape the nightmare he created. But before everything ends, possessed Nikki snaps a One Wish Willow and makes Bear fall in love with her.

Bear had already taken a dangerous amount of medication, and he eventually overdoses, leaving Nikki to wake up to the wreckage of what he caused.

That ending matters.

Because even when Bear tries to stop the curse, Nikki is still the one left with the trauma.

She is the one whose body, mind, and life were violated by his wish. She is the one forced to survive the consequences of a choice she never got to make.

And that is what makes the movie so disturbing.

This is not romance. This is control.

Obsession is not just about a supernatural wish gone wrong. It is about what happens when someone confuses love with possession.

It is about how easily desire can become entitlement.

It is about how someone can claim to love a person while only loving the idea of controlling them.

That is why it still baffles me that some people can watch this movie and walk away thinking Bear is the victim.

The entire story revolves around consent. Bear used something supernatural to force Nikki into loving him. He took away her ability to choose.

He did not love the real Nikki.

He loved the fantasy of Nikki.

He loved the version of her that existed for him.

That is not romance.

That is control.

And the craziest part is that Bear actually had a chance to be honest. Nikki straight up asks him if he likes her. He says no. She looks disappointed, walks back into her house, and that could have been the end of it.

He could have accepted rejection.

He could have moved on.

He could have respected her choice.

But instead, he snaps the One Wish Willow.

That is the real horror of Obsession.

Not that Nikki becomes obsessed with Bear.

The horror is that Bear thought love was something he could force into existence.

And honestly, I already know this article is probably going to get pushback.

Because anytime you talk about consent, control, or male entitlement, misogynists will show up to justify the behavior instead of actually sitting with what happened.

They will say Bear was lonely.

They will say he did not know how bad it would get.

They will say he was also a victim.

They will say Nikki became the real monster.

But none of that changes the core issue.

Bear made the wish.

Bear took away Nikki’s choice.

Bear created the nightmare.

And if someone watches a movie where a woman’s consent is literally removed by a supernatural force and still tries to make the man who caused it the real victim, then that says a lot more about them than it does about the movie.

Because at the end of the day, Obsession is not subtle.

It is screaming the point at us.

Love without consent is not love.

It is possession.

P.S. I highly recommend watching Obsession. Even if you do not agree with my entire analysis, it is one of those movies that gives you a lot to think about after the credits roll.

Works Cited

Obsession. Directed by Curry Barker, performances by Michael Johnston and Inde Navarrette, Focus Features, 2026.

Focus Features. “Obsession Official Trailer.” Focus Features, 2026.

Focus Features. “Obsession Cinematographer Looks Beyond the Darkness to What Lies Beneath.” Focus Features, 2026.

IMDb. “Obsession.” IMDb, 2026.

Vanity Fair. “Inside the Killer Wardrobe of Obsession with Costume Designer Blair James.” Vanity Fair, 2026.

Internet Movie Poster Awards. “Obsession Movie Poster.” IMP Awards, 2026.

Image: “Corporate America Flag” / Adbusters Culturejammers HQ, via Public Seminar.

What Can Almost $300 Million in Taxpayer Funds Provide?

Let’s put that number into perspective.

Almost $300 million could provide food assistance for roughly 133,500 people on SNAP for an entire year.

It could fund around 40,500 maximum Pell Grants, helping students afford college, community college, trade school, or career training.

It could cover about 261,000 student-years of free school breakfast and lunch, making sure kids are fed before they are expected to learn.

It could pay the average salary of about 4,000 public school teachers for one year.

It could fund roughly 17,500 Head Start slots for children, pregnant women, and families who need early childhood education and support.

It could cover roughly 12,000 retired workers’ average Social Security benefits for an entire year, based on the Social Security Administration’s April 2026 average retired worker benefit of $2,081.16 per month.

And here in the Rio Grande Valley, that same amount of money could cover roughly 25,000 apartment-years of rent for a two-bedroom apartment in the McAllen-Edinburg-Mission area.

That is the scale of what we are talking about.

One billionaire spent almost $300 million to influence American politics.

Subscribe now

Who? None other than Mr. DOGE Cuts himself: Elon Musk, the richest man in the world and the first trillionaire after SpaceX’s historic IPO.

People Underestimate How Big These Numbers Really Are

$300 million is a lot of money. But honestly, I think people underestimate how massive the jump is from a million to a billion to a trillion.

As a computer scientist, I’ve spent the last seven years coding, studying algorithms, and working through math. So when I see numbers like million, billion, and trillion, I don’t just see words. I see scale.

And for people who are not math majors, programmers, finance people, or data nerds, the easiest way to understand that scale is to convert money into time.

So let’s begin.

One million seconds is about 12 days.

That already sounds like a lot.

Now take a guess: how long is one billion seconds?

A couple of months?

A few years?

Wrong.

One billion seconds is about 32 years.

A million seconds is less than two weeks.

A billion seconds is basically an entire adult life.

Now here is where it gets ridiculous.

How long is one trillion seconds?

If a billion seconds is already three decades, then a trillion seconds has to be a lot, right?

Try 31,700 years.

That is not just a long time. That is older than written history. That is older than most of what we would recognize as civilization.

Researchers studying ancient civilizations have estimated that the average civilization lasted around 336 years. So one trillion seconds is not just one civilization’s lifespan.

It is about 94 average civilizations stacked back to back.

That is the scale of a trillion.

Subscribe now

So when we talk about billionaires becoming trillionaires, we are not talking about normal wealth. We are talking about a level of money so massive that the human brain is not built to understand it.

Want an even crazier fact? The average American is closer in net worth to Jeff Bezos that Bezos is to Musk.

Jeff Bezos, Sundar Pichai, and Elon Musk at Donald Trump’s second presidential inauguration.

Bezos founded Amazon, owns Blue Origin, and personally bought The Washington Post. Pichai does not “own” Google, but he runs Google and its parent company Alphabet, the empire behind Search, YouTube, Android, Chrome, Gmail, Maps, and Google Cloud. Musk controls the world of Tesla, SpaceX, Starlink, X, xAI, Neuralink, and The Boring Company.

The billionaire class sat in some of the most prominent seats in the room, ahead of some of Trump’s own incoming Cabinet picks.

That image says everything about modern American politics: the people who control the platforms, the rockets, the satellites, the media, the search engines, the phones, the data, and the money were sitting in front of the government itself.

Photo: Chip Somodevilla/Pool Photo via AP.

Keep in mind its the Jeff Bezos, one of the richest people in the world.

So when we talk about billionaires becoming trillionaires, we are not talking about normal wealth. We are talking about a level of money so massive that the human brain is not built to understand it.

Want an even crazier fact?

The average American is closer in net worth to Jeff Bezos than Jeff Bezos is to Elon Musk.

Keep in mind, this is Jeff Bezos we are talking about. One of the richest people on Earth. The founder of Amazon. A man worth hundreds of billions of dollars.

And even he is still hundreds of billions of dollars away from Musk.

That is how insane trillionaire-level wealth is.

So how did they accumulate this level of wealth?

Well, they battled the U.S. government, then learned how to use it.

That is the part people miss.

The richest men in America did not become this powerful by simply building cool companies in a free market. They built companies that became deeply tied to the federal government through contracts, subsidies, lobbying, regulation, and political influence.

And once they reached that level of wealth, they used the political system to protect it.

That is where Citizens United comes in.

Back in 2010, the Supreme Court changed American politics forever with its decision in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission.

Citizens United was not passed by Congress. It was not a normal law. It was a Supreme Court decision.

The case started with a conservative nonprofit group called Citizens United, which wanted to distribute a film attacking Hillary Clinton during the 2008 presidential election cycle. At the time, federal campaign finance law limited certain corporate and union-funded election ads close to an election.

Citizens United challenged those rules, arguing that the government was violating its First Amendment rights.

Then, on January 21, 2010, the Supreme Court ruled in a 5-4 decision that corporations, unions, and outside groups could spend unlimited money on independent political expenditures.

In simple English, the Court said political spending is a form of speech.

And if money is speech, then billionaires get the loudest voice in the country.

Citizens United did not directly create super PACs by itself. That came shortly after, through another 2010 case called SpeechNow.org v. FEC, which allowed independent expenditure groups to accept unlimited contributions.

Together, those decisions helped create the modern super PAC system.

That is the system Elon Musk used in 2024.

Musk did not have to hand Donald Trump a personal check for $300 million. He did not have to officially join the campaign. He could operate through outside political groups like America PAC, the super PAC he founded and funded to support Trump and Republican candidates.

That is the genius and the danger of the system.

It keeps the corruption legal.

It puts distance between the billionaire and the candidate while still letting the billionaire shape the election.

And Musk was not just some random donor. He spent nearly $300 million in the 2024 election cycle to help Trump and Republicans. That made him the largest political donor of the cycle.

Meanwhile, these same billionaires are not separate from the government. They are tied to it.

SpaceX became one of the most important private companies in the American space program through NASA and Pentagon contracts. Blue Origin, founded by Jeff Bezos, also received major NASA contracts for lunar lander development.

So while politicians tell working-class Americans that government spending is the problem, the richest men in the world have built huge parts of their empires through government-backed industries.

Space travel is the perfect example.

What used to be a public national project led by NASA has increasingly become a public-private system where companies like SpaceX and Blue Origin compete for billion-dollar government contracts. The taxpayer still funds much of the mission, but private billionaires build the companies, win the contracts, gain the prestige, and watch their wealth explode.

That is not a normal free market.

That is privatized public ambition.

The public takes the risk.

The billionaires take the upside.

And then, after building fortunes connected to public contracts and public policy, they can turn around and spend hundreds of millions of dollars influencing the very government that helped make them rich.

That is the cycle.

Government contracts help build billionaire empires.

Billionaire empires fund political machines.

Political machines protect the system that keeps billionaires powerful.

Subscribe now

That is why Citizens United destroyed American politics.

So how do we fix it?

Simple: overturn it.

The hard part is replacing the Supreme Court’s 6-3 conservative majority, because the same Court that opened the floodgates for billionaire money is not going to be the one to save us from it.

U.S. Supreme Court justices pose for their official group portrait at the Supreme Court in Washington, D.C., on October 7, 2022.

Seated from left: Justice Sonia Sotomayor, appointed by Democratic President Barack Obama; Justice Clarence Thomas, appointed by Republican President George H.W. Bush; Chief Justice John Roberts, appointed by Republican President George W. Bush; Justice Samuel Alito, appointed by Republican President George W. Bush; and Justice Elena Kagan, appointed by Democratic President Barack Obama.

Standing from left: Justice Amy Coney Barrett, appointed by Republican President Donald Trump; Justice Neil Gorsuch, appointed by Republican President Donald Trump; Justice Brett Kavanaugh, appointed by Republican President Donald Trump; and Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, appointed by Democratic President Joe Biden.

Photo: REUTERS/Evelyn Hockstein/File Photo.

This idea is a Hail Mary.

It is the kind of Hail Mary you throw in the fourth quarter of the Super Bowl when you have zero timeouts, 10 seconds left on the clock, and the entire season on the line.

But sometimes, when the system is this broken, a Hail Mary is exactly what the moment requires.

Expand the Supreme Court.

Pack the Court in 2029 after swearing in a Democratic president.

Yes, I know how that sounds. It sounds extreme. It sounds dramatic. It sounds like the kind of thing people in Washington would clutch their pearls over.

But let’s be serious.

What exactly is moderate about a 6-3 conservative Supreme Court majority that has spent years protecting billionaire power, weakening voting rights, gutting campaign finance laws, and handing more influence to the richest people in the country?

What exactly is normal about a political system where billionaires can spend hundreds of millions of dollars to influence elections, then watch the courts protect the same system that made them powerful?

The truth is, the Supreme Court has not always had nine justices. The number of justices has changed multiple times throughout American history before settling at nine in 1869. That means nine is not some sacred number handed down from God. It is a political choice Congress made. And if Congress made that choice before, Congress can make a different choice again.

That does not make the fight easy.

To expand the Court, Democrats would need to win the White House, win the House, and have enough votes in the Senate to pass court expansion. That is a massive political lift.

But Republicans are not exactly walking into 2028 from a position of strength.

Trump’s approval rating is historically weak, with recent polling putting him in the mid-30s. Reuters/Ipsos recently had him at 36% approval, still far below where he began his second term. The Republican base is also not as united as they pretend. There are MAGA loyalists, America First nationalists, old-school Romney Republicans, Reagan conservatives, and business-class Republicans all fighting over what the party even is anymore.

That does not mean Democrats automatically win.

Nothing is automatic.

But it does mean the fight is possible.

And if Democrats win power again, they cannot waste it pretending the system will fix itself. It will not.

Because if we do not deal with this now, the gap between wealth and democracy is only going to get worse. The billionaire class will keep growing richer. Super PACs will keep getting stronger. Dark money will keep flooding elections. And the Supreme Court will keep acting like a shield for the people who already have the most power.

At some point, the machine becomes too big to stop.

That is why court expansion has to be on the table.

Not because it is easy.

Not because it is polite.

But because the alternative is allowing a broken Court to protect a broken system while working-class Americans are told to keep waiting their turn.

We do not need to worship nine justices.

We need a democracy that actually belongs to the people.

Works Cited

Associated Press. “These Tech Billionaires Flanked Trump at Inauguration.” AP News, 20 Jan. 2025, apnews.com/article/trump-inauguration-tech-billionaires-zuckerberg-musk-wealth-0896bfc3f50d941d62cebc3074267ecd. Accessed 15 June 2026.

Brennan Center for Justice. “Citizens United.” Brennan Center for Justice, www.brennancenter.org/topics/money-politics/campaign-finance-courts/citizens-united. Accessed 15 June 2026.

Federal Election Commission. “Citizens United v. FEC.” Federal Election Commission, www.fec.gov/legal-resources/court-cases/citizens-united-v-fec/. Accessed 15 June 2026.

Federal Election Commission. “SpeechNow.org v. FEC.” Federal Election Commission, www.fec.gov/legal-resources/court-cases/speechnoworg-v-fec/. Accessed 15 June 2026.

Federal Student Aid. “2024–2025 Federal Pell Grant Maximum and Minimum Award Amounts.” Federal Student Aid, 31 Jan. 2024, fsapartners.ed.gov/knowledge-center/library/dear-colleague-letters/2024-01-31/2024-2025-federal-pell-grant-maximum-and-minimum-award-amounts-updated-april-5-2024. Accessed 15 June 2026.

Hockstein, Evelyn. “U.S. Supreme Court Justices Pose for Their Group Portrait at the Supreme Court in Washington, U.S., October 7, 2022.” Reuters, 7 Oct. 2022.

Kemp, Luke. “The Lifespans of Ancient Civilizations.” Kottke.org, 9 May 2019, kottke.org/19/05/the-lifespans-of-ancient-civilizations. Accessed 15 June 2026.

Levy, Jessica Ann. “Corporate America Alone Cannot Save Us from Trump.” Public Seminar, 18 Aug. 2017, publicseminar.org/2017/08/corporate-america-alone-cannot-save-us-from-trump/. Accessed 15 June 2026.

Massoglia, Anna. “Dark Money Hit a Record High of $1.9 Billion in 2024 Federal Races.” Brennan Center for Justice, 7 May 2025, www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/dark-money-hit-record-high-19-billion-2024-federal-races. Accessed 15 June 2026.

National Education Association. “Educator Pay and Student Spending: How Does Your State Rank?” NEA, www.nea.org/resource-library/educator-pay-and-student-spending-how-does-your-state-rank. Accessed 15 June 2026.

National Head Start Association. “Head Start Program Facts: Fiscal Year 2024.” HeadStart.gov, 14 Aug. 2025, headstart.gov/program-data/article/head-start-program-facts-fiscal-year-2024. Accessed 15 June 2026.

NASA. “NASA Selects Blue Origin as Second Artemis Lunar Lander Provider.” NASA, 19 May 2023, www.nasa.gov/news-release/nasa-selects-blue-origin-as-second-artemis-lunar-lander-provider/. Accessed 15 June 2026.

Reuters. “Musk, Bezos and Zuckerberg to Attend Trump’s Inauguration.” Reuters, 14 Jan. 2025, www.reuters.com/world/us/musk-zuckerberg-bezos-attend-trump-inauguration-nbc-reports-2025-01-14/. Accessed 15 June 2026.

Reuters. “Musk, Republican Party’s Biggest Donor, Says He Will Cut Political Spending.” Reuters, 20 May 2025, www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/elon-musk-says-he-is-still-committed-being-tesla-ceo-5-years-time-2025-05-20/. Accessed 15 June 2026.

Reuters. “SpaceX IPO Haul Rises to $85.7 Billion after Underwriters Exercise Greenshoe.” Reuters, 15 June 2026, www.reuters.com/business/media-telecom/spacex-ipo-raises-857-billion-underwriters-exercise-greenshoe-option-2026-06-15/. Accessed 15 June 2026.

Reuters. “Trump’s Approval Ticks Up to 36% as Price Angst Eases, Reuters/Ipsos Poll Finds.” Reuters, 15 June 2026, www.reuters.com/world/us/trumps-approval-ticks-up-36-price-angst-eases-reutersipsos-poll-finds-2026-06-15/. Accessed 15 June 2026.

Supreme Court Historical Society. “The Supreme Court: Current Justices.” Supreme Court Historical Society, supremecourthistory.org/supreme-court-justices/. Accessed 15 June 2026.

Supreme Court of the United States. “The Court as an Institution.” Supreme Court of the United States, www.supremecourt.gov/about/institution.aspx. Accessed 15 June 2026.

Thadani, Trisha, Clara Ence Morse, and Maeve Reston. “Elon Musk Donated $288 Million in 2024 Election, Final Tally Shows.” The Washington Post, 31 Jan. 2025, www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2025/01/31/elon-musk-trump-donor-2024-election/. Accessed 15 June 2026.

United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service. “Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP): Key Statistics and Research.” USDA Economic Research Service, 24 July 2025, www.ers.usda.gov/topics/food-nutrition-assistance/supplemental-nutrition-assistance-program-snap/key-statistics-and-research. Accessed 15 June 2026.

United States Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service. “National School Lunch, Special Milk, and School Breakfast Programs: National Average Payments/Maximum Reimbursement Rates.” USDA Food and Nutrition Service, 10 July 2024, www.fns.usda.gov/school-meals/fr-071024. Accessed 15 June 2026.

United States Department of Housing and Urban Development. “FY 2025 Schedule of Metropolitan and Non-Metropolitan Fair Market Rents.” HUD User, 2025, www.huduser.gov/portal/datasets/fmr/fmr2025/FY2025_FMR_Schedule.pdf. Accessed 15 June 2026.

United States Senate. “Supreme Court Nominations: 1789–Present.” United States Senate, www.senate.gov/legislative/nominations/SupremeCourtNominations1789present.htm. Accessed 15 June 2026.

Weiner, Daniel I. “Citizens United, Explained.” Brennan Center for Justice, 12 Dec. 2019, updated 29 Jan. 2025, www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/citizens-united-explained. Accessed 15 June 2026.

The Mexico 26 Home Authentic Jersey, sold by Adidas as part of its FIFA World Cup 26 collection.

Finally, after four years, the World Cup is here again.

Under normal circumstances, I would be proud that the United States is helping host it. I would be proud watching people from across the world come together in our stadiums, our cities, and our communities to celebrate the most global sport on earth.

But this year, that pride feels complicated.

How am I supposed to feel proud of this country hosting beautiful nations from around the world when our own leadership has spent years treating foreigners, immigrants, asylum seekers, and foreign-born people like threats?

Since Donald Trump returned to office, immigration has once again become one of the central pillars of his administration. And behind that agenda is Stephen Miller, Trump’s deputy chief of staff for policy and homeland security adviser, who has long been one of the main architects of Trump’s immigration crackdown.

That matters because this is not just about policy.

This is about culture. This is about who this country welcomes, who this country fears, and who this country chooses to criminalize.

So why are we acting like everything is normal?

Why are we acting like we should simply be proud of hosting the world when so much of our politics is built around telling the world’s people they are not wanted here?

And this is not some abstract debate anymore.

Omar Artan, the Somali referee who became a FIFA official in 2018 after rising through the Somali and African game.
Photo/source: BBC News

Omar Artan, a Somali referee who was set to make history as the first referee from Somalia to officiate at a men’s World Cup, was denied entry into the United States. He had reportedly been issued a visa, arrived at Miami International Airport, was questioned for hours, and then was sent back home.

Think about that.

A referee chosen for the biggest sporting event on earth could not even enter one of the countries hosting that event.

The World Cup is supposed to be about unity, global pride, and the beauty of the sport. But what does that message mean when one of the officials selected to represent the game at its highest level is blocked at the border?

What does it mean to host the world if the world is not actually welcome?

Subscribe now

That is the contradiction at the center of this entire tournament.

America wants the World Cup.

America wants the jerseys, the flags, the food, the music, the tourism, the money, and the global attention.

But too many people in power still do not want the people who come with it.

For Hispanics, this cuts even deeper.

Liam Conejo Ramos, 5, was detained by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers after arriving home from preschool in a Minneapolis suburb. Neighbors and school officials told the Associated Press that federal immigration officers used the preschooler as “bait” by telling him to knock on the door so his mother would answer.

Photo: Ali Daniels/AP via ABC7

I never thought I would see the day when people could spend their workday helping enforce deportation policies against mothers, fathers, children, workers, husbands, and wives, then go home, freshen up, throw on a Mexico jersey, and watch the inaugural game like nothing happened.

As a Hispanic, that is hard to process.

It is weird. It is uncomfortable. And honestly, it feels like a betrayal.

Because to me, that is not pride.

That is convenience.

Videos circulating online appear to show people connected to immigration enforcement wearing Mexico jerseys during the World Cup. And if those clips are what they appear to be, then we need to have a real conversation about what cultural pride actually means.

Because how can someone support or participate in a system that tears apart immigrant families, then turn around and wear the jersey of a country whose people are constantly targeted by that same system?

This image has been edited in black and white. The original photo was published in color.

A federal immigration enforcement agent sprays Rev. David Black of the First Presbyterian Church of Chicago as Black and other protesters demonstrate outside the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement facility in Broadview, Illinois, on September 19, 2025.

Photo: Ashlee Rezin/Chicago Sun-Times/AP/File

How can someone cheer for Mexico on the field while staying silent when Mexican and Latino families are being hunted in real life?

There are people who pick and choose when they want to be proud of being Mexican or Hispanic.

When it benefits them to blend in, to be white-passing, or to distance themselves from Spanish-speaking immigrants, they do it. They act like they do not speak Spanish. They act like they are not part of the same community. They act like the people being targeted have nothing to do with them.

But the second the World Cup starts, suddenly the jersey comes out.

Suddenly the flag comes out.

Suddenly it is time to drink beers with friends, watch the game, yell at the TV, and claim Mexico with pride.

But pride cannot only exist when it is fun.

Pride cannot only show up when there is a soccer game, a party, or a jersey involved.

If you are proud of Mexico during the World Cup, but silent when Mexican families are being targeted, then what exactly are you proud of?

The colors?

The beer?

The chants?

The vibes?

Because heritage is not a costume you put on for kickoff.

Subscribe now

It is people. It is language. It is family. It is culture. It is struggle. It is the immigrant parent working long hours. It is the kid translating documents at 10 years old. It is the family afraid of a knock at the door. It is the community that keeps showing up even when this country tells them they do not belong.

That is why this World Cup feels different.

It should be a moment of joy, unity, and pride. And in many ways, it still is. I am not saying people should not enjoy the games. I am not saying Mexican fans should not wear the jersey, wave the flag, or celebrate their team.

We should.

But we should also be honest about the country we are watching this tournament in.

We are watching it in a country where immigration enforcement has become a political weapon.

We are watching it in a country where ICE has been empowered, funded, and defended by people who claim they are just enforcing the law.

We are watching it in a country where a Somali referee can be selected for the World Cup, fly to the United States, and still be denied entry.

We are watching it in a country where people can love immigrant culture while supporting policies that harm immigrant people.

That is the part I cannot get past.

Because the World Cup is not just about soccer. It is about the world. It is about nations. It is about people carrying their histories, their families, their languages, and their identities into one global stage.

And if America wants to host that stage, then America needs to confront the hypocrisy of celebrating the world while fearing the people who come from it.

This should not be happening in 2026.

This feels like something that should have been left in the past. Before the Civil Rights Act. Before this country supposedly learned from its ugliest chapters. Before we were told that America was a place where people from every nation could come and build a life.

But here we are.

Hosting the world while fearing the world.

And that is exactly why this World Cup feels so uncomfortable.

The Wall Street Journal, “Trump Cancels Iran Strikes, Says Peace Deal Could Be Signed in ‘Coming Days,’” published June 11, 2026.

Was this another Freudian slip from Trump, or was he finally being honest with us?

Donald Trump was quoted saying, “I love the inflation,” after a reporter asked him about rising costs amid the war with Iran.

It is no surprise that this unnecessary war is creating inflationary problems around the globe.

The Strait of Hormuz is one of the most important shipping lanes in the world, and Iran knows that. They are using it as a war tactic, threatening global supply chains and creating uncertainty around the movement of oil and other goods.

Add to that the uncertainty of a peace deal. It seems like Trump, JD Vance, or Marco Rubio are always saying we are weeks, days, or even hours away from peace.

Honestly, at this point, it is hard to keep up. Most of us just assume the talks are not actually advancing, because we have been lied to repeatedly.

Case in point.

Trump is now claiming that “everybody in Iran has approved the deal.” Sure.

This is the same pattern we keep seeing from his administration: promise that peace is right around the corner, act like everything is under control, and then leave the rest of us trying to figure out what is actually happening.

I am literally writing this article in real time, and more information keeps coming out.

At this point, it feels like nothing but lies on top of lies.

It is annoying. It is exhausting. And honestly, it is embarrassing to watch our country be represented this way by an unstable leader who seems more interested in spin than actual governance.

So what can people do?

Flip the House. Flip the U.S. Senate. Give Democrats the power to investigate this administration, hold people accountable, and finally put a stop to the chaos.

The more we organize, speak out, and vote, the less power Trump will have after November.

That is the choice in front of us. We can either keep reacting to the chaos every single day, or we can build the power to stop it.

And the map is not hopeless. This year, the purple and competitive states include Georgia, North Carolina, Maine, Ohio, Michigan, New Hampshire, Alaska, Iowa, Nebraska, and yes, even my home state of Texas.

That means control of Congress is not some abstract national conversation. It is going to be decided by voters in real states, real communities, and real districts where people are tired of the chaos.

Flipping seats will not automatically save us, but it damn sure is where we start.

Because power does not check itself. Trump will not suddenly become responsible. His administration will not suddenly become honest. The only way to limit the damage is to organize, vote, and take back the institutions that can hold him accountable.

Clayton Tucker, a rancher and Democratic nominee for Texas Agriculture Commissioner, is making the case that Texas agriculture needs leadership rooted in urgency, experience, and working people. Photo via Clayton Tucker for Agriculture Commissioner campaign.

I am not going to lie.

When most people think about Texas politics, they probably are not thinking about screwworm.

They are thinking about immigration, property taxes, schools, the grid, health care, or whatever insane thing comes out of Austin that week.

But sometimes, there are issues that do not sound flashy until you realize how much they actually affect people’s lives.

New World screwworm, often referred to as NWS, is one of those issues that does not sound urgent until you realize how much damage it can do.

And in Texas, agriculture is not some side issue.

It is land.

It is water.

It is food.

It is ranchers.

It is farmers.

It is small towns.

It is working families.

It is a major part of who Texas is.

That is why I wanted to talk to Clayton Tucker.

Clayton Tucker is a rancher, agriculture advocate, and the Democratic nominee for Texas Agriculture Commissioner. His campaign has centered around food, farming, water, land, ranchers, farmers, and working Texans.

So when screwworm started becoming a bigger issue in Texas, I wanted to hear from someone who actually understands this from the ground level.

Not just as a political talking point.

As a real threat.

When I asked Tucker how serious the New World screwworm threat is for Texas, he did not sugarcoat it.

“If we don’t get on top of the NWS ASAP, it can be very serious,” Tucker said. “The wildlife, especially feral hogs, will take it just about everywhere. It’ll harm or kill livestock, wildlife, and pets alike.”

That is what makes this so serious.

This is not something that stays neatly contained if leaders are slow to respond.

Wildlife moves.

Feral hogs move.

Livestock moves.

And once something like this spreads, regular Texans are the ones who end up paying the price.

Ranchers pay the price.

Rural communities pay the price.

People who depend on agriculture pay the price.

That is why Tucker’s answer stood out to me. He was not trying to make it sound scarier than it is, but he also was not downplaying it.

He was being honest.

And honestly, that is what Texas needs more of.

When I asked him what Texas should be doing right now, Tucker said the state cannot rely on only one solution.

“We’re fighting the screwworm with one arm tied behind our backs,” Tucker said. “While sterile flies are a part of the solution, we’re probably two to three years away from our own sterile fly facility opening, so there’s no way we’ll have enough of them to use them only. We’ll need to also use what’s called SWASS, Screwworm Adult Suppression System, plus every other proven tool.”

That answer matters because it shows he is actually thinking through the problem.

He is not saying sterile flies are bad.

He is saying sterile flies alone are not enough.

And that is the kind of leadership people should want from an Agriculture Commissioner. Someone who understands that during a crisis, you do not sit around waiting for the perfect solution while the problem gets worse.

You use every proven tool available.

You move with urgency.

You communicate clearly.

You protect the people who are most at risk.

Tucker was also very direct in his criticism of the current response.

“The USDA is refusing to use SWASS because they call it an environmental harm,” Tucker said. “While I am not claiming it is a perfect system, if the USDA was so concerned about environmental harm, they wouldn’t be handing out grants to data centers, which will do way more environmental harm than SWASS ever could. At this point, we’ve been too reliant on failed federal leadership.”

That is a strong statement.

And whether people agree with every part of it or not, the bigger point is clear.

Tucker believes Texas cannot just wait around and hope the federal government gets everything right.

That is a very real concern.

Because when you are dealing with something that can affect livestock, wildlife, pets, ranchers, and rural economies, waiting is not leadership.

Waiting is how things get worse.

When I asked Tucker what he would do differently as Texas Agriculture Commissioner, his answer was simple.

“I would immediately deploy SWASS or similar systems ourselves,” Tucker said. “I don’t want to wait around for the federal administration to continually fail us.”

That is the kind of urgency this office needs.

And this is why these down-ballot races matter.

People treat races like Agriculture Commissioner like they are not important, but then something like screwworm happens and suddenly the office becomes very real.

This office matters when ranchers need support.

It matters when agriculture is under threat.

It matters when land and water are being fought over.

It matters when rural communities are ignored.

It matters when food systems are being controlled by powerful interests.

It matters when Texas needs someone who understands agriculture beyond a campaign slogan.

That is where Tucker has a real argument.

He is not just talking about ranching because it polls well.

He is a rancher.

When I asked him how his background would shape his response to a crisis like this, he gave one of the most human answers I have heard from a candidate.

“When any of my animals get sick, I aggressively do everything I can to get them better,” Tucker said. “There’s been times I literally slept in barns to wake up every two hours to help a sick animal. I would take this sort of single-minded dedication to the TDA.”

That quote stuck with me.

Because that is not consultant language.

That is not some overproduced campaign answer.

That is someone who knows what it means to care for animals when nobody is watching.

If you have ever been around ranchers, farmers, or people who take care of animals, you know that kind of dedication is real.

Animals do not get sick on your schedule.

A ranch does not care if you are tired.

The work does not stop just because you want to sleep.

You do what needs to be done.

That is the kind of mentality Tucker says he would bring to the Texas Department of Agriculture.

And honestly, that is exactly the kind of mentality Texas agriculture needs.

Because this is bigger than screwworm.

This is about what kind of leadership Texas wants.

Do we want leaders who react after everything is already falling apart?

Or do we want leaders who see the problem early and move before regular Texans are forced to suffer?

Do we want leaders who treat rural communities like props?

Or do we want leaders who actually understand the people, animals, land, water, and work that keep Texas going?

For too long, Republicans have acted like rural Texas belongs to them.

It does not.

Rural Texas is not owned by MAGA.

Agriculture is not owned by Republicans.

Ranchers, farmers, small towns, land, food, and faith are not Republican property.

They are Texas.

They are working-class.

They are everybody.

And Democrats should not be afraid to fight for them.

Tucker’s message goes beyond one parasite or one outbreak. He connects this issue to the larger fight over who Texas government actually serves.

“All Texans want the right of peaceful enjoyment of their lives, doing what they love with those they love for as long as we have,” Tucker said. “But we have these greedy elites who use their politicians, propaganda, and algorithms to get regular Texans to fight each other. They divide us city versus country, left versus right, all so that they can pluck the wings of the American Eagle to feather their own nests.”

That line right there is the heart of the race.

Because that is what happens over and over again in Texas politics.

Regular people are told to fight each other while powerful people keep taking more.

City versus country.

Border versus inland.

Left versus right.

Rural versus urban.

Immigrant versus citizen.

Young versus old.

And while everyone is distracted, the same greedy elites keep winning.

They win when family farmers get squeezed.

They win when ranchers are ignored.

They win when water gets treated like a corporate resource instead of a public necessity.

They win when rural hospitals close.

They win when people cannot afford food.

They win when working Texans are too divided to organize.

Tucker put it plainly.

“Only organized people can beat organized money,” he said.

And he is right.

That is the whole fight.

The Agriculture Commissioner race is not just about agriculture in the narrow sense. It is about whether Texas is going to keep letting powerful interests run the show, or whether regular Texans are going to organize and take power back.

That is why this race matters in November.

Screwworm may be the issue right now, but the larger question is bigger.

Who do we trust to protect Texas agriculture?

Who do we trust to listen to ranchers and farmers?

Who do we trust to fight for land, water, food, rural communities, and working Texans?

Who do we trust to act with urgency when the state is facing a real threat?

After speaking with Clayton Tucker, I believe the answer is clear.

Texas does not need more passive leadership.

Texas does not need more politicians who wait until a crisis becomes impossible to ignore.

Texas does not need leaders who treat agriculture like a photo op.

Texas needs someone who understands the land, understands the animals, understands rural communities, and understands that working Texans deserve a government that actually fights for them.

Texas deserves Clayton Tucker.

Pictured from left to right at Gina Hinojosa’s fundraiser on June 11, 2026: Isabella Zapata, our Hidalgo County Young Democrats Press Secretary; myself; Gina Hinojosa, candidate for Governor of Texas; Abraham Sanchez, President of the Hidalgo County Young Democrats and Executive Director of the Hidalgo County Democratic Party; and Angelina Rodriguez, one of our Hidalgo County Young Democrats members.

Meet our Press Secretary, Isabella “Isa” Zapata.

Isa is a 21-year-old Valley native and UTRGV graduate who earned a dual degree in biology and anthropology. V’s Up.

So, naturally, my first question was:

Why those two career paths?

Isa told me she began pursuing biology because of her interest in working in the medical field. But she also found herself drawn to learning about humans, culture, and community. Eventually, she decided to listen to her heart and pursue anthropology as well.

Later on, she realized how both biology and anthropology connect to forensics, something I personally found very interesting and something I think a lot of people overlook.

The fun fact I was not expecting

I then asked her to share a fun fact about herself.

And honestly, I was not expecting her answer.

Isa’s fun fact is that, for whatever reason, she is an ordained minister.

That might come in handy later on. Who knows, haha.

How politics became personal

I then asked her when her interest in politics started.

She said her interest was really piqued in high school around the COVID years, 2020 and 2021, after the tragic killing of George Floyd and the revival of the Black Lives Matter movement in the post-Obama years.

But during my interview, our Democratic nominee for Texas House District 41, Julio Salinas, decided to crash the conversation and told me to quote him as saying:

“What’s up, Doc?”

Like Bugs Bunny, haha.

Anywhoooo, after Julio’s cameo, Isa explained that the George Floyd case really revived the Black Lives Matter movement. She said that during that time, she became more informed about politics than she had been during the Obama years, and she started to see the importance of protesting, organizing, voting, and getting involved.

She also mentioned that she did debate programs during the summer and, according to her, “she would always win” because she is “a great winner.”

We’ll take her word for it, haha. No, but seriously, I do not doubt she went undefeated.

From UTRGV leadership to Young Democrats

After joining UTRGV, Isa decided to get involved in SGA, the Student Government Association, where she served as Chief Justice because she wanted to be part of leadership.

After graduation, she wanted to continue those efforts, which is what eventually led her to the Hidalgo County Young Democrats.

One of the goals Isa hopes to accomplish as a Young Democrat is restoring trust in the healthcare system in the Valley.

Healthcare trust in the Valley

Isa and I both acknowledged that part of the mistrust in the medical system here comes from our Hispanic culture.

We all know that tío or tía who says:

“Ay mijo, nomás ponte árnica y tómate un Tylenol,”

even when you have a serious injury.

Isa said that during her internship at a forensic pathology office, she saw many preventable cases where, if the person had gone to the hospital sooner, they would have had a real chance of surviving.

Whether someone has insurance or not, many Valley residents still mistrust the medical system. Isa wants to help change that.

She wants to restore trust in the medical system and encourage better lifestyle choices in our community.

She also mentioned that she wants to bring more attention to how understudied women’s health conditions are, including conditions like PCOS.

I agreed with her. Issues like that deserve more research, better treatment, and more awareness so people do not have to continue suffering without answers.

Isa knows that in order to change those outcomes, you have to change the system.

And through the Young Democrats, she believes she can be part of that work.

The legacy she wants to leave

I then asked her what legacy she wants to leave behind in the Young Democrats.

Her answer surprised me.

Isa said she wants the Valley to become a community again.

A place that feels welcoming.

A place where people can gather, study, talk, organize, and build something together.

She wants to help create those spaces where young people can hang out, learn, and get involved.

And honestly, that answer stuck with me.

Because politics is not just about campaigns, candidates, and elections. At its best, politics is about community. It is about giving people a space where they feel like they belong and where they feel like their voice matters.

That is the kind of politics young people in the Valley deserve.

One last question

Then I surprised her by asking if she would vote for me if I ever ran for office.

Her answer was yes, haha.

So there you have it:

Isa’s permanent endorsement of me.

Just kidding.

President Donald Trump during his NBC Meet the Press interview with Kristen Welker, which he ended after being pressed on his election fraud claims. Photo by Francis Chung/POLITICO.

Once again, for what feels like the thousandth time, Donald Trump threw a tantrum and stormed out of an interview.

And honestly, this might be one of his worst interview meltdowns yet.

He was not being aggressively attacked. He was not being ambushed. He was being asked a basic question: where is the evidence?

That was enough to set him off.

And that is what makes this so embarrassing.

The question was not complicated. It was not some deep legal trap. It was not a hostile ambush.

It was basically: if you are going to claim elections were rigged, where is the proof?

According to reporting from The Guardian, Trump’s Meet the Press interview with Kristen Welker became tense after he repeated false claims about the 2020 election and claimed, without evidence, that California’s gubernatorial race was rigged. When Welker pressed him for proof, Trump attacked her, attacked NBC, called the press “crooked,” removed his microphone, and ended the interview.

Yes, that is literally the President of the United States throwing a fit on camera.

And remember when misogynists said Hillary Clinton was too “shrill,” too “cold,” too “unlikable,” or too emotional to be president?

Remember when they said Kamala Harris could not be president because she was too emotional, too angry, too ambitious, or somehow not serious enough?

Well, how did that turn out?

Because now those same people are defending Donald Trump, a 79-year-old man who pulled off his microphone and stormed out of an interview because a female journalist asked him to prove what he was saying.

That is the double standard.

President Donald Trump responds to reporters aboard Air Force One after Bloomberg White House correspondent Catherine Lucey asked him about the Epstein files. Trump told Lucey, “Quiet. Quiet, piggy.” Photo by Roberto Schmidt/Getty Images.

When Hillary was prepared, they called her calculated. When Kamala pushed back, they called her angry. When women in politics show emotion, they are told they are unstable. When they show discipline, they are told they are fake.

But when Donald Trump loses control on national television, insults the interviewer, attacks the network, and walks away from accountability, his supporters call it strength.

No.

That is not strength.

That is a tantrum.

This is the same man who constantly talks about law and order, strength, discipline, and respect. But when the pressure is on him, suddenly all of that disappears.

The rules are always for everyone else.

Everyone else has to be calm. Everyone else has to be respectful. Everyone else has to accept tough questions. Everyone else has to show proof.

But Trump?

He gets to throw a fit, attack the interviewer, pull off his mic, and walk away while his supporters pretend it is some kind of power move.

If almost any other public official did this, it would be front-page news everywhere. People would be asking if they had the temperament to serve. They would be asking if they could handle pressure. They would be asking why a grown adult in one of the most powerful positions in the world cannot sit through a basic interview without losing control.

So why are people not reacting with the same level of shock?

Because we have become desensitized to Donald Trump.

We have seen Trump explode, insult people, lie, dodge questions, lash out, and attack anyone who challenges him so many times that another meltdown starts to feel normal.

But it is not normal.

A president storming off because a journalist asked for evidence is not normal. A president calling an interviewer crooked because she challenged him is not normal. A president removing his microphone and walking away from accountability is not normal.

And to me, this shows that Trump is getting worse.

He is losing his grip, and he knows it.

Trump has two clocks ticking at the same time. The first is political. The 2026 midterms are coming, and when Democrats win back Congress, his power gets checked in a very real way. The second is age. Trump is 79 years old, and the White House has already acknowledged that he was diagnosed with chronic venous insufficiency, a common condition that affects blood flow in the legs.

To be clear, I am not a doctor. But voters are absolutely allowed to look at the full picture: his age, his public behavior, the outbursts, the rambling, the visible frustration, the impulse control issues, and the way he attacks people instead of answering direct questions.

Frontotemporal dementia has been brought up in public conversations because it is commonly associated with changes in behavior, personality, judgment, impulse control, and language. Trump might possibly have it, since he exhibits a lot of the symptoms, and the public has every right to ask serious questions about whether the person holding the most powerful office in the country is mentally and physically fit to do the job.

This is not about pretending to be a doctor.

This is about accountability.

This is bigger than one interview.

This is about a man who wants unlimited power but cannot handle basic accountability. It is about a president who demands loyalty from everyone around him but runs away the second someone asks him to prove what he is saying.

That is why accountability matters.

Because if Trump cannot handle one journalist asking him for evidence, what happens when Congress pushes back? What happens when the courts push back? What happens when voters push back?

This is a man who wants power without limits, loyalty without questions, and authority without accountability.

That should scare people.

Trump wants to look tough.

But tough people do not run from questions.

They answer them.

Sources:

The Guardian reported that Trump walked out of his Meet the Press interview after Kristen Welker questioned his election claims, including his claims about the 2020 election and California’s vote count.

Axios reported that the interview also covered Trump’s proposed anti-weaponization fund, January 6-related questions, Iran, and his refusal to commit to a no-new-wars pledge.

Fox News also reported that the confrontation came after Welker pressed Trump on election fraud, California’s vote count, and the proposed anti-weaponization fund.

UC Davis Health explained Trump’s chronic venous insufficiency diagnosis and described the condition as a blood-flow issue involving damaged veins.

Fast Company discussed the gendered double standards faced by Hillary Clinton and Kamala Harris, including how women in leadership are often described as too aggressive, angry, or shrill in ways male politicians are not.

The Atlantic identified the Air Force One photo credit as Roberto Schmidt/Getty Images and reported that Trump directed the “Quiet. Quiet, piggy” comment at Bloomberg White House correspondent Catherine Lucey after she asked him about the Epstein files.

On the far left is me. To my right is my former Chief of Staff for the UTRGV College Democrats, Allison Dominguez. In the middle, wearing the gray suit and baby blue tie, is Skyler Howell, Internal Affairs Director for the Young Democrats of Hidalgo County. Third from the right is Abraham Sanchez, Executive Director of the Hidalgo County Democratic Party. On the far right is Hidalgo County Democratic Party Chair Richard Gonzales.

Noche Azul event, October 17, 2024.

I’ve mentioned repeatedly that my interest in politics really started during Trump’s first presidential term. I was always vocal about politics, but for a long time, I never really found my way into that world. I cared about what was happening, I had opinions, and I knew I wanted to be involved somehow, but I did not know where to start.

That changed during my senior year of college.

It is actually a pretty interesting story. I was on my way to class, walking inside the engineering building at UTRGV, when I decided to make a quick stop to refill my water bottle. I am so glad I did, because after I finished filling it up, I saw a QR code on the wall to join the UTRGV College Democrats.

Obviously, I scanned it without hesitation.

I started going to meetings, getting involved, and eventually meeting people from the local Democratic Party. That is where I met my mentor, coworker, and close friend, Abraham Sanchez.

At the time, the semester was almost over, but Abraham encouraged me to stay involved through College Democrats. I took that seriously. Eventually, I became President of the UTRGV College Democrats in the fall of 2025, where I had the opportunity to host events with leaders and public figures like Tejano music legend Bobby Pulido, former U.S. Representative and then-U.S. Senate candidate Colin Allred, and other major local and statewide Democratic leaders.

But more than anything, my time as President of College Democrats is where Abraham taught me how to navigate the world of politics. He taught me who to talk to, who to avoid, how to move in political spaces, how to organize, how to build relationships, and how to actually get things done. A lot of people talk about giving young people opportunities, but Abraham actually did it.

Looking back, that was basically his whole master plan: train young people, bring them into the room, give them guidance, and prepare them to lead.

Running College Democrats became the door that opened everything else for me. It is where I learned how to organize, how to bring young people into politics, and how to connect campus energy with real campaigns happening in our community.

From there, I began working on campaigns. I started as a canvasser for Omar Ochoa’s 2025 campaign for Mayor of Edinburg, and then continued jumping from campaign to campaign, working with candidates like Julio Salinas and James Talarico through the March 3, 2026 Democratic primaries.

But the most important part is that the knowledge did not stop with me. Everything Abraham taught me, I have tried to pass down to the younger people I mentor now. The point was never just for one person to get involved. The point was to build something that keeps going, where every young person who learns the game turns around and helps the next group step into it too.

Fast forward two years, and that vision is becoming real. Today, the Hidalgo County Young Democrats has a board of seven talented young leaders who are not just showing up, but helping build real political power in the Valley. This is a team with the skills, discipline, and drive to help win elections, organize young voters, and make sure the next generation has a real seat at the table.

But none of this would have been possible without Hidalgo County Democratic Party Chair Richard Gonzales believing in the cause. Chairman Gonzales has invested heavily in young people, and that investment has paid off. He believed young Democrats deserved more than a photo op or a token seat in the room. He believed we could organize, lead, and contribute in a serious way.

Because of that support, young people in Hidalgo County have had the chance to step up, build experience, and become part of the future of Democratic politics in the Valley. For that, we are all grateful.

That is the legacy of this work. It was never just about one meeting, one campaign, or one organization. It was about building a pipeline for young people in Hidalgo County to step into politics, be taken seriously, and help shape the future of the Rio Grande Valley.

The goal is for this to continue for a long time. Young people should not have to wait until someone finally decides they are ready. They deserve guidance, mentorship, opportunities, and access now. That is how we build power that lasts.

Looking back, it is wild to think that a simple stop to refill my water bottle helped change the direction of my life. One QR code led me to College Democrats, College Democrats led me to Abraham, and Abraham helped show me that young people do not have to wait their turn forever.

And with leaders like Chairman Richard Gonzales believing in us and investing in the next generation, young Democrats in Hidalgo County are proving that we are not just the future.

We are part of the work right now.

We can organize now. We can lead now. And we deserve a seat at the table now.

For any young person in Hidalgo County ready to get involved, follow our Young Democrats socials, reach out, and show up. There is space for you in this movement.

You can contact me directly at 956-279-7325.

For campaign consulting, political strategy, digital content, field work, or organizing support, you can also reach me at alexfortexas02@gmail.com.

Julio Salinas, left, the Democratic nominee for Texas House District 41, and Gary Groves, right, the Republican nominee.

HD-41 Is a Choice Between the Valley’s Future and Broken MAGA Politics

We’re finally past the primary runoffs.

I had the great opportunity of working on Julio’s campaign, and let me tell you, it was so much fun. I loved going door to door and talking to residents of House District 41 about the issues they were facing, what Julio could do to help, and what Julio stood for.

But let me tell you, the data we got from this race was very interesting.

In the March Democratic primary for Texas House District 41, Julio Salinas finished in first place with 6,023 votes, or 38.61% of the vote. Victor “Seby” Haddad finished close behind with 5,816 votes, or 37.28%, while Eric Holguín received 3,761 votes, or 24.11%.

That means Julio entered the runoff ahead by only 207 votes while being treated as the underdog by much of the local political establishment.

Then came the runoff.

Historically, runoff elections have much lower turnout than regular primaries. Most voters are not paying attention the same way they are in March or November. So in a runoff, the name of the game is simple: turnout, Election Day operations, and GOTV. It is not just about who had support in the first round. It is about who can bring their voters back out when fewer people are voting.

By the May runoff, that narrow lead turned into a clear victory. Julio defeated Haddad 3,365 to 2,695, winning 55.53% of the vote and expanding his margin to 670 votes.

From left: Gary Groves, Sarah Sagredo Hammond and Sergio Sanchez, Republican primary candidates for state House District 41, participate in the Hidalgo County Republican Party candidate forum at the Christian Fellowship Church in McAllen on Jan. 29.
Gabriel V. Cárdenas for The Texas Tribune Gabriel V. Cárdenas for The Texas Tribune

The Republican side tells a different story. In the March Republican primary, Gary Groves did not finish first. Sergio Sanchez led the Republican primary with 2,843 votes, or 45.68%, while Groves came in second with 2,394 votes, or 38.46%. Sarah Sagredo-Hammond finished with 987 votes, or 15.86%.

But in the runoff, Groves consolidated the Republican vote and defeated Sanchez 2,392 to 1,426, winning 62.65% of the vote.

Turnout also tells part of the story. The March Democratic primary for HD-41 had 15,600 votes cast, compared to 6,224 votes cast in the Republican primary. In the runoff, Democrats still had more votes cast in the HD-41 race, with 6,060 votes compared to 3,818 on the Republican side.

From left: Julio Salinas, Victor “Seby” Haddad and Eric Holguín, Democratic candidates for state House District 41, debate at the University of Texas Rio Grande Valley in Edinburg on Feb. 11 2026.

So the numbers show two very different paths to November: Julio went from an underdog to a narrow first-place finish to a decisive Democratic runoff victory, while Gary Groves went from second place in the Republican primary to becoming the Republican nominee.

So what happened?

Why did Julio win, and why did Gary Groves win?

My read is simple: Julio won because we built momentum, contacted voters directly, and executed when turnout mattered most. In a runoff, campaigns cannot assume people will show up. You have to knock doors, make calls, remind voters, chase ballots, and run a strong Election Day GOTV operation.

Gary won because he mobilized his base better than Sergio Sanchez did, especially in a low-turnout runoff where voter retention mattered more than anything else.

In March, Julio led Haddad by only 207 votes. Julio had 6,023 votes, or 38.61%, while Haddad had 5,816 votes, or 37.28%. That was basically a jump ball going into the runoff.

But by May, Julio expanded that lead dramatically. He beat Haddad 3,365 to 2,695, winning 55.53% of the vote. That is a 670-vote margin and an 11.06-point win.

That matters because runoff turnout almost always drops. In the Democratic primary, 15,600 votes were cast in the HD-41 race. In the runoff, that number dropped to 6,060. That is about a 61% drop in turnout.

So the question was not just who had the most support in March. The real question was who could bring their people back out in May.

Julio did that better.

Julio retained about 56% of his March vote total, while Haddad retained about 46% of his. In a runoff, that difference is huge. Julio did not just survive the lower-turnout environment. He improved his position and grew his margin.

The Republican side tells a different story.

In March, Sergio Sanchez actually finished first in the Republican primary. Sanchez had 2,843 votes, or 45.68%, while Gary Groves had 2,394 votes, or 38.46%. Gary was behind by 449 votes.

But in the runoff, Gary flipped the race completely. He beat Sanchez 2,392 to 1,426, winning 62.65% of the vote.

The important detail is this: Gary did not really grow his raw vote total. He received 2,394 votes in March and 2,392 in May. That is basically the same number of votes.

Sergio, however, collapsed. He went from 2,843 votes in March to 1,426 in the runoff. That means Sergio only retained about half of his March vote total, while Gary’s raw vote total stayed almost exactly the same.

That is why Gary won.

He held onto his voters in a smaller electorate, while Sergio’s support dropped off. Republican turnout in the HD-41 race dropped from 6,224 votes in March to 3,818 in May, a nearly 39% drop.

So both nominees won their runoffs, but they won them in different ways.

Julio won by expanding his margin, improving his percentage, and building real runoff momentum through voter contact and GOTV.

Gary won by holding his base while Sergio’s support dropped off.

That sets up the general election clearly: Julio enters November after growing from a narrow primary leader into a strong Democratic nominee, while Gary enters after consolidating a smaller Republican runoff electorate.

But the bigger turnout story goes beyond just HD-41.

Countywide, Hidalgo County Democratic primary turnout jumped from 40,126 voters in 2024 to 67,260 voters in 2026. That is an increase of 27,134 voters, or about 67.6%.

Republican primary turnout also increased, but not nearly at the same level. Hidalgo County Republican primary turnout went from 17,974 voters in 2024 to 19,605 voters in 2026. That is an increase of 1,631 voters, or about 9.1%.

That means Democrats did not just turn out more voters. They grew their turnout much faster than Republicans did.

In 2024, Hidalgo County Democrats outvoted Republicans in the primary by 22,152 votes. In 2026, that Democratic advantage grew to 47,655 votes. Put another way, Democrats had about 2.2 times the Republican primary turnout in 2024. In 2026, Democrats had about 3.4 times the Republican primary turnout.

The HD-41 numbers tell the same story.

In the 2024 Democratic primary for Texas House District 41, Bobby Guerra received 6,937 votes in an uncontested race. In the 2024 Republican primary, John “Doc” Robert Guerra received 5,202 votes in an uncontested race. Democrats had an advantage of 1,735 votes in the HD-41 primary.

But in 2026, that gap grew dramatically.

The Democratic primary for HD-41 had 15,600 votes cast, while the Republican primary had 6,224 votes cast. That means Democrats had a 9,376-vote advantage in the HD-41 primary this year.

Then came the runoff.

Countywide Democratic runoff turnout was 9,940, while Republican runoff turnout was 8,539. Even in a low-turnout runoff environment, Democrats still outvoted Republicans countywide.

In HD-41 specifically, Democrats also outperformed Republicans in the runoff. The Democratic runoff between Julio Salinas and Seby Haddad had 6,060 votes cast, while the Republican runoff between Gary Groves and Sergio Sanchez had 3,818 votes cast.

That means Democrats cast 2,242 more votes than Republicans in the HD-41 runoff.

So yes, both parties had competitive primaries and runoffs, but the turnout story is clear: Democrats showed more energy in 2026, both countywide and inside HD-41. The Republican side had activity, but Democrats outperformed them in raw turnout, growth from 2024, and participation in the HD-41 race.

This is the key to November.

HD-41 is already a blue seat, but blue seats do not stay blue by accident. They stay blue because campaigns organize, voters are contacted, and the message reaches people before Republicans get the chance to define the race.

The turnout numbers show that Democratic energy is there. Democrats outperformed Republicans in the March primary, outperformed them again in the runoff, and showed real momentum heading into November. But momentum by itself is not enough. Now the job is to talk to voters, knock doors, make calls, show up in neighborhoods, and make sure people understand what is actually at stake.

If there is going to be a huge blue wave in November, it will not happen just because people are frustrated with Republicans. It will happen because Democrats do the work to turn frustration into votes.

The data shows the opportunity is there. Now it is about execution.

So what will the Valley choose?

A new generation of leadership, or the same old broken MAGA politics?

That is the question at the center of the HD-41 race.

Julio Salinas represents something different for the Valley. He represents a younger generation of leadership that understands the cost of living, the struggles of working families, the need to protect public education, and the reality that people in the RGV deserve more than being treated like a political talking point.

Gary Groves represents the opposite. His campaign is tied to the same MAGA politics that have divided communities, ignored working people, and turned the border into a campaign prop instead of treating it like a real place where real families live.

The data is pointing in one direction. Democrats are showing up. Julio expanded his margin in the runoff. HD-41 remains a blue seat. And if Democrats keep organizing, keep talking to voters, and keep getting the message out, Julio Salinas is on track to represent Texas House District 41 in the Texas Legislature.

But that will not happen automatically.

It will happen because voters hear the message. It will happen because volunteers knock the doors. It will happen because the campaign keeps showing up in every neighborhood, every colonia, every campus, and every community across HD-41.

The opportunity is there.

Now the Valley has a choice to make.

Disclosure: I worked on Julio Salinas’ campaign. This piece reflects my personal analysis.

Sources

Hidalgo County Elections Department, March 5, 2024 Democratic Primary Election, Official Cumulative Results.

Hidalgo County Elections Department, March 5, 2024 Republican Primary Election, Official Cumulative Results.

Hidalgo County Elections Department, March 3, 2026 Democratic Primary Election, Official Cumulative Results.

Hidalgo County Elections Department, March 3, 2026 Republican Primary Election, Official Cumulative Results.

Hidalgo County Elections Department, May 26, 2026 Democratic Primary Runoff Election, Official Cumulative Results.

Hidalgo County Elections Department, May 26, 2026 Republican Primary Runoff Election, Official Cumulative Results.

The Texas Tribune, “House Democratic runoff heats up in the Rio Grande Valley, where the party hopes to reverse GOP gains.”

Julio Salinas for Texas House District 41 campaign website.

Gary Groves campaign website.

Ken Paxton’s former defense lawyer Dan Cogdell speaks with James Talarico on Cogdell Law Uncensored. Screenshot from Cogdell Law via YouTube.

Well, this came out of nowhere.

Even for those of us who are insiders in Texas Democratic politics, this one was not on the radar. And believe me, insiders usually hear about things before they hit the media. Endorsements, rumors, campaign moves, strategy shifts, all of it usually starts circulating before the public sees it.

But Ken Paxton’s former defense lawyer endorsing James Talarico?

That caught people off guard.

So how does this change the U.S. Senate race in Texas?

To be fair, I am not sure yet.

Ken Paxton is already widely viewed as a corrupt politician. How could he not be? He was impeached by the Texas House, which was controlled by his own political party. Yes, he survived the trial in the Texas Senate, but the fact that Republicans in the House were willing to impeach their own attorney general says a lot.

That is why I am not sure this endorsement changes the race overnight. Paxton being called corrupt is not new. Texans have heard that before.

But does this add credibility to James Talarico’s argument that Paxton is corrupt?

Absolutely.

Because this is not coming from a random Democrat, a liberal activist, or a political opponent who has always been against Paxton. This is coming from someone who defended him. Someone who stood beside him during some of the most serious moments of his political career.

Cogdell is not just some random attorney. He was close enough to Paxton’s legal battles to understand exactly who Paxton is when the cameras are off.

That matters.

And politically, this endorsement can be used to sharpen one of the strongest arguments against Paxton: that he is a corrupt politician who will work for the president, the MAGA movement, and his own political survival before he ever works for everyday Texans.

That is the opening Talarico has here.

He can argue that this race is bigger than party labels. It is about Democrats, independents, and even some Republicans who are tired of corruption, chaos, and politicians who put themselves above the people they are supposed to serve.

And honestly, anyone running as MAGA in Texas should be worried.

Because this is the message Democrats are going to hammer over and over again: these candidates do not work for Texans. They follow orders. They work for the president, the MAGA movement, and whatever national political machine keeps them in power.

But this goes beyond Paxton.

That argument is especially powerful in Texas because Republicans have controlled this state for more than two decades, and Republican dominance has defined statewide politics for nearly three decades. They have had the governor’s mansion. They have had statewide offices. They have had control of the Legislature. They have had every opportunity to fix the problems they complain about every election year.

And what has actually improved?

Property taxes are still crushing families. Public schools are still underfunded. Rural hospitals are still struggling. Healthcare is still out of reach for too many Texans. The power grid is still a political liability. The border is still used as a campaign prop instead of being treated like a real region with real people. Working families are still being squeezed while Republican politicians blame everyone else.

That is the problem for MAGA Republicans in Texas.

They cannot keep running as outsiders when they are the ones who have been in charge. They cannot keep pretending they are fighting for Texas when their record shows they are more interested in fighting for Trump, fighting for the MAGA brand, and fighting to keep themselves in power.

And when things go wrong, Texans should remember who was in charge.

Remember Hurricane Harvey?

Republicans were in control.

No, Republicans did not create the hurricane. But when a historic storm devastated Texas, exposed weaknesses in infrastructure, emergency response, housing recovery, and flood preparedness, the same party that had been running this state was still in charge.

Remember when the power grid froze?

Republicans were in control.

Texans were left freezing in their own homes. Families lost power, water, food, and in some cases, loved ones. And after all of that, Texas Republicans still want voters to believe they are the responsible governing party.

Remember when Camp Mystic flooded?

Republicans were in control.

Again, no one is saying politicians created the flood. But disasters test leadership. They test preparation. They test whether a state has invested in warning systems, emergency planning, inspections, accountability, and basic public safety. When the same party has been in power for decades, they do not get to act like innocent bystanders every time Texas fails a major test.

That is the larger point.

MAGA Republicans do not get to campaign like outsiders while governing like insiders. They do not get to blame Democrats, immigrants, teachers, cities, Washington, or anyone else every time Texas families suffer. At some point, voters have to ask the obvious question:

You have been in charge. So why are these problems still happening?

That is why this endorsement matters.

It gives Talarico and Texas Democrats another way to make the argument that Paxton is not just corrupt. He is compromised by his own ambition. He has spent years fighting for himself, fighting for Trump, and fighting for the MAGA movement.

The question now is simple: when has Ken Paxton actually fought for Texans?

The answer?

He has not. And after decades of Republican control in Texas, voters have every right to ask what exactly they have gotten in return.

Sources:

The Associated Press reported that Dan Cogdell, who represented Ken Paxton during his 2023 impeachment trial and long-running securities fraud case, endorsed James Talarico in the Texas U.S. Senate race.

The Texas Tribune also reported Cogdell’s endorsement and noted that Cogdell said Paxton had “lost sight of his core mission.”

The Texas Tribune reported that Paxton was impeached by the Texas House in 2023 and later acquitted by the Texas Senate.

The Texas Tribune reported that Republicans have controlled the Texas House since 2003, and Ballotpedia notes that Texas currently has a Republican trifecta, with Republicans controlling the governor’s office and both chambers of the Legislature.

ABC News reported that Donald Trump endorsed Ken Paxton before Paxton defeated John Cornyn in the 2026 Republican U.S. Senate runoff.

The National Hurricane Center reported that Hurricane Harvey caused at least 68 direct deaths in Texas, almost all from freshwater flooding.

Reports on the 2021 Texas winter storm found that millions of Texans lost power during the grid crisis, with severe impacts across the state.

Reuters reported that Texas authorities found Camp Mystic’s flood emergency plan insufficient after the 2025 flash flood killed 27 people at the camp, and the AP reported that state inspectors had approved the camp’s disaster plan two days before the deadly flood.

The Texas Tribune reported that Texas ranks 38th among states in per-student public school funding, based on a 2024 National Center for Education Statistics report.

The U.S. Census Bureau reported that Texas had the highest uninsured rate in the country in 2024, at 16.7%.

San Mateo County Libraries. “Celebrate Pride 2026 at San Mateo County Libraries.” SMCL Blogs, June 1, 2026.

Happy Pride Month to all who celebrate.

Unfortunately, every year, reactionary right-wingers find a way to spoil this month for the LGBTQIA+ community.

So what are they saying now?

Basically the same thing they have been saying since Obergefell v. Hodges was decided, except now the main boogeyman is trans people.

It is wild to think that my interest in politics started almost a decade ago. I was around 14 years old watching politics shift from the Obama years into the Trump era. Excluding Mexican politics, I had never seen so many childish politicians hurling insults at each other instead of talking about real issues.

Keep in mind, this analysis started with 14-year-old Alejandro, not 23-year-old Alejandro.

My question back then was simple: why do so many people follow this man when he goes on these insane ramblings?

I did not really understand the answer until after the 2024 election, but I digress.

What I do remember is Trump trying to present himself as some kind of protector of the LGBTQIA+ community during the 2016 campaign. At the Republican National Convention, after the Pulse nightclub shooting, Trump said he would do everything in his power to protect LGBTQ citizens from violence and oppression.

But once he got into office, the policy reality told a very different story.

Fitzsimons, Tim. “Trump trend: LGBTQ mentions quietly axed from discrimination guidelines.” NBC News, December 31, 2019.

The bathroom fearmongering started around 2015 and 2016. In Houston, opponents of the city’s equal rights ordinance turned nondiscrimination protections into a panic campaign about “men in women’s bathrooms.” Trump’s federal anti-trans rollback started in 2017, when his administration rescinded Obama-era guidance that told schools to allow transgender students to use bathrooms matching their gender identity. The full MAGA culture-war machine turned trans rights into a central issue around 2021 and 2022, as Republican state legislatures increasingly targeted transgender people, especially transgender youth. By 2023 and 2024, Trump had made attacks on trans people one of his main campaign weapons.

And the numbers show that backlash is having an effect.

In 2022 and 2023, national support for same-sex marriage was at 71%. By 2024, it had slipped to 69%. Now, according to Gallup, it is down to 65%. That is still a majority of the country, so this is not a total collapse in support, but the direction is clear.

The sharper shift is inside the Republican Party. In 2021 and 2022, 55% of Republicans supported same-sex marriage. By 2024, that number had dropped to 46%. Now it is down to 37%.

Gallup also found that Republican moral acceptance of gay or lesbian relationships has fallen from 56% in 2022 to 35% today.

That is not a coincidence.

That is what happens when a political movement spends years turning LGBTQIA+ people, especially trans people, into a target.

I am not going to lie to you. As someone who works in politics, this is still a difficult issue to navigate. Not because LGBTQIA+ people are difficult to understand, but because the conversation around them has been intentionally poisoned.

This issue has become like abortion, immigration, and religion. People do not talk about it honestly. They talk around it. They whisper about it. They repeat whatever they heard on Facebook, Fox News, TikTok, or from some politician trying to go viral.

And in many Hispanic families and communities, it can be even harder to talk about openly. We do not always talk about these issues directly. And when we do, it can quickly become a shouting match instead of a real conversation.

But people in the LGBTQIA+ community are exactly that: people.

That should not be controversial.

I cannot understand looking at another human being and seeing them as anything less than human. I do not see someone first through the lens of being gay, trans, lesbian, bisexual, queer, or anything else. I see a person first. Everything else is part of who they are, but it does not erase their humanity.

So when people ask where the hate comes from, I think the answer is uncomfortable but simple.

People are not born hating LGBTQIA+ people. They are taught to fear them.

And right now, Republicans are using that fear, especially against trans people, because it is easier to attack a vulnerable group than explain why people still cannot afford rent, groceries, healthcare, or a decent life.

In the same breath that they claim to stand for freedom, they turn around and attack LGBTQIA+ people. They say they want government out of people’s lives, then try to control who people marry, what bathrooms people use, what healthcare families can access, and how teachers are allowed to talk about the existence of LGBTQIA+ people.

That is not freedom.

That is government overreach dressed up as morality.

And honestly, this is the same playbook we have seen used against undocumented immigrants.

If you are not from the Valley, from a border town, or from a community where immigration is not some abstract debate but part of everyday life, you may not fully understand how complicated this issue really is.

Down here, immigration is not just a talking point. It is family. It is neighbors. It is classmates. It is coworkers. It is people at church, people at school, people at work, and people who have been part of our communities for years. So when politicians who have never lived this reality talk about immigrants like they are an invasion, it is obvious they are not trying to understand the issue. They are trying to weaponize it.

Trump launched his first campaign by describing Mexican immigrants through the language of crime, drugs, and violence. Years later, he was still using fear-based language about undocumented immigrants, even saying they were “poisoning the blood” of the country.

Different issue, same strategy.

The point is not to have an honest conversation. The point is to make people afraid.

Because once people are afraid, they stop asking normal questions. They stop asking why rent is too high. They stop asking why healthcare is unaffordable. They stop asking why wages are not keeping up. They stop asking why public schools are underfunded. Instead, they start blaming whatever group politicians told them to fear.

That is what happened with undocumented immigrants. They were turned into a symbol for every problem in America, even problems they did not create. Instead of talking about corporate greed, broken labor systems, housing shortages, or decades of failed immigration policy, right-wing politicians told people to blame the immigrant.

Now we are watching the same thing happen to LGBTQIA+ people.

If you do not personally know people in the LGBTQIA+ community, if you have never listened to their stories, if you have never had to see someone you care about be treated like a political problem instead of a human being, then it becomes easier to believe whatever fearmongering gets thrown at you.

That is how the politics of fear works.

It takes people you do not fully understand and turns them into something to be scared of. It takes immigrants and turns them into criminals. It takes trans people and turns them into a bathroom panic. It takes LGBTQIA+ people and turns their existence into a “culture war.”

But when you actually know these communities, the fearmongering falls apart.

Because you realize they are not the threat.

They are just people trying to live.

And the truth is, LGBTQIA+ people have more in common with you than Donald Trump or any rich, out-of-touch politician who is trying to make you hate them.

They are not the ones raising your rent. They are not the ones making groceries more expensive. They are not the ones denying you healthcare, underpaying you at work, or making it harder for your family to get ahead.

Most LGBTQIA+ people are dealing with the same pressures everyone else is dealing with. They are worried about bills. They are worried about jobs. They are worried about healthcare. They are worried about their families. They are dealing with stress, anxiety, depression, loneliness, and the basic struggle of trying to survive in an economy that keeps getting harder for working people.

And on top of all of that, they also have to deal with people coming after them from right-wing circles. Politicians attacking them. Influencers mocking them. Strangers debating their existence like it is just another talking point. Families rejecting them. Churches judging them. Entire media ecosystems turning them into a threat.

So when you add that on top of the issues we all already face, you can see why I have so much compassion for them.

Because they are not asking for special treatment. They are asking to live, work, love, worship, go to school, go to the doctor, and exist without being treated like a problem.

You might not understand it. You might have been raised differently. You might still be working through what you believe. But that does not change the fact that LGBTQIA+ people have the same right to a good life that you do. The same right to safety. The same right to dignity. The same right to family, faith, work, healthcare, happiness, and peace.

That is a lesson all of us need to learn whenever Republicans create a new boogeyman.

Because the goal is not to solve your problems. The goal is to distract you from who is actually making your life harder.

Like James Talarico says, it is not left versus right. It is top versus bottom.

And the people at the top are more than happy to have working people fighting each other, as long as we never look up and ask why they have so much while the rest of us are fighting to survive.

That is divide and conquer, one of the oldest strategies in politics.

Get people angry at immigrants. Get people angry at LGBTQIA+ people. Get people angry at teachers, students, poor people, women, Black people, Latinos, whoever the target of the week is. Keep everyone fighting sideways so they never fight upward.

Because if working people ever stopped blaming each other and started asking who actually benefits from our division, a lot of powerful people would be in trouble.

Sources

Oyez. “Obergefell v. Hodges.” Supreme Court of the United States, 2015.

National Constitution Center. “Obergefell v. Hodges.”

Jones, Jeffrey M. “U.S. Support for LGBTQ+ Issues Remains Down From Peak.” Gallup, June 3, 2026.

Fitzsimons, Tim. “Trump trend: LGBTQ mentions quietly axed from discrimination guidelines.” NBC News, December 31, 2019.

Texas Tribune. “Bathroom Fears Flush Houston Discrimination Ordinance.” November 3, 2015.

MPR News/NPR. “Trump administration rescinds transgender bathroom guidance.” February 22, 2017.

Chen, Shawna. “Trump unveils sweeping attack on trans rights.” Axios, January 31, 2023.

Washington Post. “Trump in 2016: I ‘will do everything’ to protect LGBT communities.” July 22, 2016.

Washington Post. “Full text: Donald Trump announces a presidential bid.” June 16, 2015.

Reuters. “Trump repeats ‘poisoning the blood’ anti-immigrant remark.” December 16, 2023.

ACLU. “Mapping Attacks on LGBTQ Rights in U.S. State Legislatures.”

Texas Tribune. “Here are the megadonors and dark money groups boosting James Talarico’s anti-billionaire Senate bid.” May 14, 2026.

President Donald Trump appears to be sleeping during an Oval Office briefing, according to Yahoo News. Yahoo News/Mandatory

Trump Is Sleepy Joe Now

After years of mocking Biden’s age and energy, Trump is now facing the same questions about exhaustion, alertness, and whether he is fit to lead.

The president looks unwell.

No, I am not talking about his ego or his personality. I am talking about something much more visible: his ability to stay awake, stay focused, and communicate clearly in public.

You have seen the videos. President Donald Trump has repeatedly appeared to close his eyes or doze off during important televised meetings, Cabinet events, and Oval Office briefings. Yahoo News, through a Daily Beast report, recently ran a story titled “Donald Trump Appears To Be Sleeping Again During Oval Office Briefing.” Reuters and PBS NewsHour also reported that Trump denied sleeping during a previous Cabinet meeting, saying he was not asleep and that he had closed his eyes because the meeting was boring.

But that explanation does not exactly help his case.

If the president of the United States cannot stay engaged during official meetings, that is not a small issue. That is a serious question about stamina, focus, transparency, and fitness for office.

And even when Trump is awake, he often drifts into long, rambling tangents. Instead of staying focused on the issues affecting working families, he talks about ballroom construction, vanity projects, the Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool, or whatever happens to be on his mind that day. At some point, voters are allowed to ask a basic question: is this normal?

This is why medical transparency matters. If the president is truly healthy, alert, and fully capable of doing the job, then the White House should have no problem being transparent with the public. But when voters see repeated moments of exhaustion, confusion, rambling, and impulsive behavior, they are not wrong for asking questions. The presidency belongs to the people, and the people deserve honesty about the condition of the person holding that office.

I am not a doctor. I am a computer scientist and political strategist. But I have tried to do my homework and understand what people are talking about when they bring up cognitive decline, aging, and possible neurological issues. One condition that often comes up in these conversations is frontotemporal dementia.

So what is frontotemporal dementia?

According to the National Institute on Aging, frontotemporal disorders affect parts of the brain connected to behavior, language, problem-solving, judgment, and movement. The National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke explains that frontotemporal dementia is caused by damage to neurons in the frontal and temporal lobes of the brain. As those areas are affected, people can experience changes in thinking, behavior, communication, and movement. Mayo Clinic also notes that frontotemporal dementia can cause socially inappropriate behavior, impulsiveness, loss of empathy, language problems, and changes in personality.

To be clear, frontotemporal dementia should not be thrown around casually as an insult. It is a serious neurological condition. I am not diagnosing Donald Trump with frontotemporal dementia. That requires medical evaluation, and I am not a doctor. But voters like myself are absolutely allowed to ask serious questions when the president repeatedly appears confused, exhausted, impulsive, or unable to stay fully alert in public.

That is the point.

Trump is impulsive. Every time he feels insulted, he lashes out, blows up at people, and attacks them personally. He appears tired during the day, then rambles late at night online. He stumbles over words. He drifts off topic. He shows little empathy when discussing the financial pressure Americans are facing. The Guardian and C-SPAN both documented Trump saying, while discussing Iran, that he does not think about Americans’ financial situation. That kind of statement is politically damaging because it reinforces what many Americans already feel: this president is not focused on their lives, their bills, or their daily struggles.

Does that sound like someone fit for the most powerful office in the world?

No way in hell.

And here is the irony: Trump spent years attacking Joe Biden’s health in public. He said Biden was not fit to serve because he appeared tired, rambled, stuttered, or struggled through public appearances. To be fair, Biden has had a stutter his entire life. But the broader concern was still real: Americans do not want a president whose age, health, or cognitive state creates uncertainty about whether they can do the job.

Democrats eventually had to confront that reality. The Associated Press reported that Biden dropped out of the 2024 race after a disastrous debate with Trump raised doubts about his fitness for office. Biden stepped aside, Kamala Harris became the nominee, Harris lost the election, and America got Trump’s second term.

Now the most ironic part of this entire situation is that Trump has become the very thing he spent years mocking.

He called Biden “Sleepy Joe.”

Now Trump is Sleepy Joe.

So why does his Cabinet not invoke the 25th Amendment?

First, it is important to explain how that actually works. The 25th Amendment does not allow random Cabinet members to remove a president on their own. According to the Constitution Annotated by Congress, Section 4 of the 25th Amendment requires the vice president and a majority of the Cabinet, or another body designated by Congress, to declare that the president is unable to discharge the powers and duties of the office. Reuters has also explained that if a president contests that declaration, Congress would ultimately have to decide the matter with a two-thirds vote in both chambers.

That matters because the vice president and Cabinet are not neutral observers. They are political actors whose careers, power, and futures are tied to Trump himself.

In my opinion, the reason they will not act is simple: protection.

Since 2015, Donald Trump has survived scandal after scandal. He was attacked for being a reality TV star running for president. He was investigated over Russia. He tried to overturn the 2020 election. He was accused of fueling an insurrection. He was criminally charged. He was impeached twice. And through all of it, his movement stayed loyal.

That is why they call him Teflon Don. Nothing sticks.

His Cabinet knows that. They do not just serve Trump. They depend on him. Their power, their relevance, and their political protection are tied directly to him. If Trump is removed, MAGA does not just lose a president. It loses the center of gravity holding the entire movement together.

That is why they will defend him, excuse him, and pretend everything is normal.

But everything is not normal.

A president repeatedly appearing exhausted, distracted, impulsive, and incoherent in public should concern every American, regardless of party. We asked these questions about Biden. We should be willing to ask them about Trump too.

So what will happen to MAGA when Trump is gone? I will go more in depth later, but my theory is that MAGA will fall and be reborn as America First.

Because the question is not whether Trump can survive another scandal.

The question is whether the country can survive pretending this is normal.

Sources:

Yahoo News / The Daily Beast, “Donald Trump Appears To Be Sleeping Again During Oval Office Briefing.”

Reuters, “Trump blames boredom, not sleep, for closed eyes during cabinet meeting.”

PBS NewsHour, “Trump says he closed his eyes in the last Cabinet meeting because it got pretty boring.”

National Institute on Aging, “Frontotemporal Disorders: Causes, Symptoms, and Diagnosis.”

National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke, “Frontotemporal Dementia and Other Frontotemporal Disorders.”

Mayo Clinic, “Frontotemporal dementia: Symptoms and causes.”

The Guardian, “‘I don’t think about Americans’ financial situation,’ says Trump amid Iran talks.”

C-SPAN, “President Trump: ‘I Don’t Think About Americans’ Financial Situation’ Amid Iran Talks.”

Associated Press, “Biden drops out of 2024 race after disastrous debate inflamed age concerns. VP Harris gets his nod.”

Constitution Annotated, “Twenty-Fifth Amendment.”

Reuters, “Why are people talking about the 25th Amendment to the US Constitution?”

Yep. So do I. Most of us probably thought about the Republican Party.

That did not happen by accident. The integration of evangelical Christianity into Republican politics dates back heavily to the Reagan era, especially with the rise of the Religious Right and groups like the Moral Majority. Before then, not every politician treated faith as something that had to be directly tied to one political party. But Reagan and the modern conservative movement understood its power, and it changed American politics forever. [1]

After Reagan’s historic 1984 landslide, where he won 49 out of 50 states, with only Minnesota staying blue, evangelical voters became one of the most important forces in Republican politics. This was also the era when the idea of the religious “single-issue voter” became more powerful. [2]

What is a single-issue voter, you might ask? It is someone who bases their vote mainly on one issue, even if they may disagree with a candidate or party on other things. That issue can come from either side of the political spectrum. For some voters, it may be faith, abortion, gun rights, immigration, healthcare, climate change, LGBTQ rights, labor rights, education, or the economy. What makes them a single-issue voter is not the issue itself, but the fact that one issue becomes the main reason they support or reject a candidate.

So with this knowledge, now you can see why Republicans and MAGA Republicans use faith so much. It is an incredibly powerful persuasive tool. If you can convince voters that one party represents God, Christianity, family, and morality, then you do not have to win them over on every policy issue. You just have to make them feel like voting for the other side is a betrayal of their faith.

And politically, it worked. White evangelical Protestants remain one of the most reliable Republican voting blocs in the country. In 2024, more than eight in ten white evangelical voters supported Donald Trump, according to PRRI’s analysis of the religious vote. [3]

But that is where the contradiction begins.

Republicans often use the Bible as a political symbol, even when many of their policies do not reflect much of what the Bible actually teaches. They focus heavily on issues like abortion, sexuality, gender roles, and religious identity because those issues activate conservative Christian voters emotionally and culturally. But the same Bible also talks constantly about caring for the poor, welcoming the stranger, feeding the hungry, protecting the vulnerable, rejecting greed, forgiving debts, and challenging corrupt power. [4]

That is the problem. It is not faith itself. It is selective faith. Republicans have learned how to use Christianity as a brand, but they often leave out the harder parts of Christianity that would challenge their own politics. They want the parts of the Bible that help them win elections, but not always the parts that demand mercy, justice, humility, and care for people on the margins.

Now, who in their right mind would agree with that? As a Presbyterian Christian, I certainly do not. But the problem is that Republicans are good at playing on people’s fears. They create boogeymen so people fall into the trap and vote for them. Many people have already been taught to fear or dislike members of the LGBTQIA+ community, immigrants, poor people, and anyone who does not fit into their narrow worldview. Because of that fear and prejudice, they look for something to justify it. That is why Republicans often use the Bible to justify bigotry.

And that is not only disingenuous. It is also a huge disrespect to our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ. Jesus taught us to love, not hate. But Republicans have mastered bending the Bible to their will.

Jesus never said the reason you do not have a job is because an undocumented immigrant took it. Jesus never said to blame the poor, the refugee, or the stranger for the failures of powerful people. Jesus never said to take away people’s rights, attack vulnerable communities, or turn faith into a political weapon.

And Jesus definitely did not teach people to turn a political movement, a red hat, or any politician into an idol. In Scripture, the golden calf was a warning against worshiping man-made symbols instead of God. Yet somehow, many have taken Christianity and wrapped it around political symbols, slogans, and leaders as if loyalty to a party is the same thing as loyalty to Christ. [5]

It is not.

Jesus taught us to love. He taught us to feed the hungry, welcome the stranger, care for the sick, clothe the poor, forgive one another, and stand with those pushed to the margins. [4]

Will this change? Maybe. And maybe sooner than anyone expected because of one eighth-generation Texan running for U.S. Senate: James Talarico.

That is where James Talarico, or Jimmy as we call him in political circles, becomes such an interesting figure.

Texas Rep. James Talarico D-Austin speaks during a redistricting rally at Delco Activity Center Friday, July 25, 2025 in Austin, Texas. Ronaldo Bolaños/The Texas Tribune

Talarico is not trying to run away from Christianity. He is leaning into it, but in a completely different way than the Republican Party. He is an eighth-generation Texan, a former middle school teacher, a state representative, and a Presbyterian seminarian studying to become a pastor. His background matters because his faith does not come across as a political costume. It comes across as something that shaped him long before he became a candidate. [6]

Growing up, Talarico’s faith was tied to service, education, and justice. He has talked about how his church taught him that love must grow into justice and move people from the sanctuary to the streets. That is the foundation of his politics. Before he was known for viral speeches or statewide campaigns, he was a public school teacher working with students on the west side of San Antonio. That experience helped shape his belief that politics should not be about power for its own sake, but about how we treat our neighbors. [7]

Texas Rep. James Talarico, D-Austin, speaks during a sermon against Christian nationalism at his home church on Oct. 22, 2023. Screenshot from James Talarico/YouTube.

That is what makes Talarico different. He does not use faith to shame people, exclude people, or control people. He uses faith to talk about democracy, public education, poverty, healthcare, working families, LGBTQ rights, and human dignity. His progressivism is not separate from his Christianity. For him, it flows from it.

This is also personal for me.

I was raised Catholic. Faith was part of my life growing up, but during high school, I started losing that faith. Not because I stopped believing in God completely, but because I kept seeing Christianity used in ways that felt cruel, political, and hypocritical. I saw people use the Bible to justify bigotry. I saw religion used as a weapon against LGBTQIA+ people, immigrants, women, poor people, and anyone who did not fit into a narrow version of what they believed a “good Christian” should be.

That pushed me away.

And to be clear, this is not me bashing Catholicism or any religion. There are good people in every faith tradition. There are Catholics, Baptists, Methodists, Presbyterians, evangelicals, and people of every background who genuinely try to live out their faith with love and humility. My issue was never with God. My issue was with how some institutions and political leaders use religion for power, money, fear, and control.

Then I found James Talarico.

Here was someone who was openly Christian, openly progressive, and not afraid to say that his faith shaped his politics. He was not using the Bible to hurt people. He was using it to defend people. He was not using Christianity to exclude people. He was using it to talk about justice, compassion, democracy, public education, healthcare, working families, and human dignity.

That mattered to me.

Talarico is Presbyterian, and through him, I started seeing a version of Christianity that felt closer to what I believed Jesus actually taught. Eventually, that helped lead me from my Catholic upbringing into the Presbyterian Christian tradition. Not because I think one religion is perfect or another is evil, but because I found a faith tradition that better reflected the values I was searching for: grace, justice, inclusion, service, and love for our neighbors.

For me, that is why Talarico matters. He did not just give Democrats a political blueprint. He helped remind people like me that Christianity does not have to belong to the far right. It does not have to be about hate, fear, or control. It can be about love, justice, mercy, and building a better world for all of God’s children.

So how does the Democratic Party seize this moment and possibly change the idea that faith belongs only to Republicans?

It starts by uplifting James Talarico and his message. Not by copying him exactly, because faith has to be authentic, but by learning from what he is showing us. Democrats do not need to be afraid of saying that Jesus taught us to love, not hate. Jesus taught us to uplift each other, to care for each other, and to help each other through a world that can be cruel and unfair.

Christianity teaches that we are all sinners. We are all imperfect. We are all capable of falling short. But the goal is to live a life that is more Christlike. And how did Christ live? He fed the hungry. He healed the sick. He welcomed the stranger. He stood with the poor. He challenged the powerful. He showed mercy to the outcast. As a child, his family fled violence and sought refuge in Egypt. His ministry was not built around cruelty, greed, or exclusion. It was built around love, sacrifice, justice, and compassion. [4] [8]

Does that not sound like progressive values?

It does. Because it is.

That is the argument Democrats have to stop being afraid to make. We support healthcare for all because people should not have to suffer or die because they cannot afford a doctor. We support feeding every child because no child should sit in a classroom hungry. We support housing, education, workers’ rights, immigrant families, and dignity for LGBTQIA+ people because every person is made in the image of God and deserves to be treated with basic human worth.

This does not mean every Democrat has to be Christian. It does not mean our government should become religious. In fact, protecting religious freedom means protecting everyone, including people of different faiths and people with no faith at all. But it does mean Democrats should stop allowing Republicans to act like they own morality, Christianity, or family values.

They do not.

If Republicans can use faith to divide people, Democrats can speak about faith to bring people together. If Republicans can quote Scripture to justify cruelty, Democrats can remind people that Jesus called us to mercy. If Republicans can use Christianity as a political weapon, Democrats can show that faith, when practiced with humility and love, can be a force for justice.

That is the blueprint Talarico offers. Not a politics of religious control, but a politics of moral clarity. Not Christianity as a weapon, but Christianity as a call to serve.

Sources

[1] ARDA summarizes the Moral Majority’s support for Reagan in 1980 and its role in mobilizing religious conservatives; NBER also analyzes how the Moral Majority’s support for Reagan coincided with evangelical voters shifting from Carter in 1976 to Reagan in 1980.

[2] 270toWin records Reagan’s 1984 victory as 49 of 50 states and 525 electoral votes.

[3] PRRI’s analysis of the 2024 presidential election says more than eight in ten white evangelical Protestants voted for Trump; Pew also documents the strong relationship between religious identity and party affiliation among U.S. voters.

[4] Matthew 25:35–40 is the scriptural basis for the references to feeding the hungry, welcoming the stranger, clothing the poor, and caring for the sick.

[5] Exodus 32 is the golden calf passage, where the people make and worship a man-made symbol instead of God.

[6] Talarico’s campaign bio describes him as an eighth-generation Texan, former middle school teacher, Presbyterian seminarian, and U.S. Senate candidate.

[7] Texas Freedom Network’s interview with Talarico discusses how his Christian faith influences his progressive politics, including his belief that love must grow into justice; The Daily Texan also reported his line that politics is about how we treat our neighbors.

[8] Matthew 2:13–15 is the basis for describing Jesus’ family fleeing to Egypt to escape Herod.