One of the most disappointing parts of Trump’s term 2 has been something that has nothing to do with Trump – it has to do with conservative influencers.
So many conservatives whom we’ve followed for years are now unrecognizable. They have taken the bias of the mainstream media and just converted it into a right-wing version.
The most disappointing, in my view, is Tucker Carlson.
From 2018-2024, Tucker Carlson was my favorite media personality on the right. The reason I was so supportive of him was that his worldview was simple, it was a common-sense platform.
He covered the issues in a way that spoke to millions of Americans. He wasn’t a conservative who blindly backed big corporations. He understood the importance of having a Republican party that focused on real issues, not some theory. It was simple, the Republican Party should represent the American people. The party should be focused on making sure Americans are safe. The party should be focused on making our cities and towns clean. The party should be focused on making it so that Americans can own homes and get not just jobs, but jobs that you can raise a family on. That stability actually matters to a country.
If you had asked me in 2021 who I would back for President in 2024, my list would read this.
- Donald Trump
- Tucker Carlson
When Tucker got fired, I canceled my Fox Nation subscription and signed up for Tucker Carlson Network.
I was so looking forward to Tucker having his own platform to interview interesting guests. I thought it would actually be perfect. Finally, we have a platform where conservatives from all sides of the right can go and get a fair interview.
You could have the neo-cons, libertarians (the ones that are actually conservative), paleo cons, Trump conservatives and more on the channel and through that we could find common ground on the key issues of the day.
It would be the opposite of the mainstream press.
Sadly, in 2026, it is clear that isn’t what we got.
It is clear, that Tucker will have great charitability to those he agrees with and yet gives really uncharitable interviews to those he disagrees with.
Guests he agrees with get the benefit of the doubt while those he wants to be against are having there arguments being scrutinized and even small errors the guests make get completely blown out of proportion.
I want to be clear that the issue is not who Tucker interviews, one of the things I wanted to see the most from his network is that he would interview basically everyone.
The problem is that we aren’t getting that, we are getting basically the same ideas over and over again.
The recent interview with Mike Huckabee was a great example of what is so disappointing.
Before, we show you Christopher Rufo’s tweet I want to make one thing clear.
Huckabee did not win the argument in any way shape or form.
Although, Huckabee sounded like a really nice man, he was all over the place with his arguments.
All he had to make clear is that Israel’s right to exist is the same as every other country.
The interview in my view was two sides of people I just completely disagree with.
I found the Tucker-Huckabee conversation deeply frustrating. Both men seemed to be grounding their arguments on the question of “indigeneity,” which, if applied to other parts of the world, becomes immediately recognizable as the Third Worldist ideology of “decolonization” and “land acknowledgements.”
“International law” is fake and, as Huckabee conceded elsewhere, should not be something to which we automatically submit. And the “right to exist” formulation is a leftist bastardization of the natural rights doctrine, which, properly interpreted, would point to the argument that Israel secures the natural rights of its citizens in a state of civil society, but exists in a state of nature, and sometimes a state of war, relative to its neighbors.
Rather than go in circles, supporters of Israel should reject the premise of arguments related to “the right to exist” or “indigeneity,” and instead, make the argument that Israel has established a state to secure the life, liberty, and property of its citizens and will defend itself against its enemies. That’s probably more persuasive to modern Americans than parsing the genetic lineage of Abraham or debating whether the Jews or the Palestinians should be doing “land acknowledgements.”
There is a big debate about this on both sides of the political aisle and pro-Israel conservatives can’t rely on inertia or half-formed theological arguments. It’s baffling that the US Ambassador to Israel seemed totally lost on these questions.
Rufo was right on the money here.
The fact he is right is why this has all be so disappointing.
The Republican party stance on this should be quite simple. Israel has a right to exist just like every other country on earth. We support Israel when the interests of the United States align with it. It isn’t that complicated.
