• Search for:
    17Oct, 2025
    When “Most Read” Misses the Mark: The Associated Press and Its Curious Priorities

    By Judy T., Rescue Our Democracy

    Meet Angela Putnam (Correction: Allie Beth Stuckey)

    When “Most Read” Misses the Mark

    If journalism’s mandate is to inform the public about what truly matters, then the Associated Press’s recent headline, “In Dallas, 6,700 women rally for culture war battles after Kirk’s death,” raises serious questions. Placed under the AP’s “Most Read” section, this story elevated a small gathering to national attention. Yet 6,700 attendees in a metro area of roughly 8 million represent only 0.08% of the population. That’s a decimal point, not a movement.

    In contrast, nationwide movements like the No Kings protests, organized by Indivisible and Ezra Levin, mobilized over 2,500 locations across the U.S. and drew millions. Despite this, coverage was minimal, often relegated to brief mentions or photo galleries.

    The Throngs That Weren’t

    The No Kings protests opposed what organizers described as increasingly authoritarian actions by President Donald Trump. These demonstrations were largely peaceful, far-reaching, and clearly newsworthy. Yet the AP focused on a niche rally led by “Angela Putnam”, assigning national prominence to an event of tiny scale.

    Join the NO KINGS 2 protests on October 18th! (AP, I better see full articles on this, if you want to focus on a local small rally of extremists, I expect an article on EACH town/city for their NO KINGS event, it’s only fair.)

    (BTW, the “throngs of women” phrase — really, AP? 6,700 equals a throng, but millions nationwide barely register?)

    This disparity isn’t about numbers alone; it’s about narrative control. Elevating small, ideologically aligned gatherings while downplaying massive pro-democracy mobilizations skews public perception. Readers are left thinking fringe events have outsized influence, while widespread civic engagement disappears into the background.

    From “Angela Putnam” to Handmaid’s Tale

    Editorial choices like this suggest a troubling trend: prioritizing spectacle over substance, and amplifying voices that align with a particular ideology. By promoting “Angela Putnam” nationally, the AP inadvertently normalizes a Christian nationalist agenda.

    Consider the parallels to The Handmaid’s Tale. The Dallas rally’s messaging — and the organizer, “Serena Waterford” — evoke dystopian playbooks of gender and societal control. The AP treated it as cultural curiosity rather than a cautionary sign. Elevating such figures gives legitimacy to a philosophy that should remain strictly fictional.

    Coverage Comparison: Small Rally vs. Massive Mobilizations

    EventEstimated AttendanceAP Coverage LengthHeadline Placement
    “Share the Arrows” Rally (Angela Putnam)6,700~620 wordsHomepage, Most Read
    “No Kings” Protests (Indivisible)Millions nationwide~1,070–1,450 wordsBrief mentions / aggregated dispatches

    Word counts are approximate; placement illustrates editorial priority.

    Facts, Sources, and Methodology

    • The AP reported 6,700 attendees at the Share the Arrows event.
    • AP has previously reported on coordinated pro-democracy actions (50501, No Kings, Indivisible).
    • The DFW metro population is roughly 8 million; 6,700 attendees = 0.08%.

    Percentage calculation:
    6,700 ÷ 8,000,000 × 100% ≈ 0.08% (rounded).

    Article length estimates:

    • AP, Share the Arrows: ≈ 620 words
    • AP, 50501 coverage: ≈ 1,450 words
    • AP, No Kings: ≈ 1,070 words
    • AP, 50-state anti-Trump coverage: ≈ 1,200 words

    Interpretation: Even though AP devoted more word count to large, nationwide protests, the smaller rally received national prominence. This signals misplaced editorial priorities.

    Fiction Should Stay Fiction

    This article should have remained local, not national. By elevating “Angela Putnam” and “Serena Waterford”, the AP promotes a dystopian agenda straight out of The Handmaid’s Tale.

    Journalists should illuminate truth, not amplify fringe spectacle. If outlets want their credibility back, they must recognize that 6,700 does not equal millions. Reality, context, and proportionality matter — because democracy cannot survive if fiction masquerades as fact.

    11Oct, 2025
    ROD Site Update

    Sometimes You Have to Admit You’re Only Human

    The latest ROD site update:

    Well, folks, it’s official: the Events section of Rescue Our Democracy has been retired. We didn’t want to do it, but let’s be real—it takes a small army to keep that thing current. Right now, that “army” looks a lot like one tired person with a keyboard, a caffeine habit, and a questionable sense of time.

    Oh, and about that “vision”? Yeah. That’s funny, because I can barely see straight these days—literally. But even with blurry eyes, I can still see the big picture. This work matters, and it’s worth doing right.

    What are you getting at?

    Between maintaining the website, writing articles, tracking political chaos (sorry, “current events”), building state-by-state district tables, creating educational PDFs, and designing all the graphics—it’s a lot. Even democracy has limits, and apparently, so do I.

    Until we grow our team of contributors, editors, and volunteers, Rescue Our Democracy will focus on what it does best: education and editorials grounded in fact. We’ll keep breaking down complex issues, connecting the dots others ignore, and keeping the conversation real.

    Ok…so what’s this mean?

    This doesn’t mean we’ve given up on events forever. It just means we’re putting our energy where it makes the biggest impact for now. When more hands join the work (hint, hint—yours could be one), we’ll expand again.

    For now, Rescue Our Democracy remains a home for truth-tellers, learners, and doers who believe that facts still matter—and that democracy is still worth fighting for. Preferably without losing our collective sanity in the process.

    So stay tuned, stay active, and maybe send Dr Pepper.

    — Rescue Our Democracy Team

    4Oct, 2025
    Proposal: Why We Should Call Trumpists “Drumpf-ists”

    In today’s political climate, labeling Trump or his supporters as “fascists” is increasingly counterproductive. The historical weight of that term invites endless debate and provides an opening for opponents to pivot attention to groups like Antifa, which are not structured political organizations but loosely affiliated individuals. To focus clearly on the unique threat posed by Trump’s leadership style, we propose using the term Drumpf-ist instead.

    We already know he’s not exactly proud of his family’s original name, Drumpf. Still, we don’t want to give him the satisfaction of seeing his branding name used yet again to slather something in gold and call it “classy.” It’s less baroque elegance and more “I have no sense of space, style, or grace—and I’m compensating heavily for something else.” (Yes, I absolutely screamed “opulence!” when MC Hammer decorated his house.)

    The Trump era has redefined how quickly a leader can challenge democratic norms. Never before in modern American history has one individual amassed so much power, tested institutional limits, and reshaped public trust—all in just a few years. These rapid-fire actions, which we will call Drumpf-ist policies, are unprecedented in both speed and volume.

    At the same time, citizens and journalists must Release any information uncovered and for institutions to act quickly. Understanding the mechanisms through which power is concentrated helps Americans recognize when democratic norms are under threat. Even hidden scandals—like the ongoing investigations into figures connected to Jeffrey Epstien—highlight how powerful individuals can exploit weak oversight. Reporting on these files and ensuring transparency is crucial to maintaining democracy.

    Drumpf-ist Actions in Context

    Donald Trump’s previous presidency already bore witness to early assaults on constitutional norms, civil liberties, and institutional checks. From aggressively using executive orders to weaken regulatory protections, undermining independent agencies, to flouting congressional oversight, he signaled a readiness to bend or break longstanding democratic guardrails. Now, in his current term, those tendencies have not only resumed but accelerated—smashing boundaries at a pace few world leaders match.

    This post zeroes in on the current administration’s Drumpf-ist “achievements” — the policy shifts, power grabs, and rights rollbacks taking place in an insanely short span. The table below maps how these actions affect real people and institutions, and then situates them alongside rapid moves from global leaders who have similarly consolidated power.

    FACT-PEEK:

    Comparing Trump to other modern world leaders highlights the speed and audacity of Drumpf-ist tactics:

    Table 1: Drumpf-ist (Trump) – Current Presidency (2025– )

    Date / PeriodActions & Policy ChangesPrimary Rights / Institutions Affected
    Jan 2025Sweeping executive orders; dismantling protections across multiple agenciesFederal bureaucracy, civil service, environmental safeguards
    First 100 Days, 2025Human Rights Watch: ~100 harmful actions undermining rights (speech, immigration, education, environment)Free speech, immigration rights, education access
    2025 (Spring)Disengagement from UN Human Rights Council; threats to pull out of treatiesInternational law, global human rights accountability
    Mid-2025Attempt to revoke birthright citizenship via executive orderCitizenship, 14th Amendment, due process
    2025 (Summer)Court allowed cuts to Education Dept’s Civil Rights staffCivil rights enforcement in education
    2025 (Fall)Deportation threats against pro-Palestinian foreign students/facultyFirst Amendment, academic freedom, noncitizens’ rights
    2025 (Fall)Mass firings of federal DEI staff and contractor prohibitionsEqual protection, workplace rights, free expression
    2025 (Ongoing)Ignored Congressional appropriations; diverted funds without authoritySeparation of powers, legislative checks
    2025 (Ongoing)Interference with law firms’ contracts and attorney clearancesLegal accountability, access to counsel
    2025 (Ongoing)Broad claims of executive power over agencies and spendingChecks and balances, constitutional norms

    Table 2: Rapid Power Consolidation Abroad

    Leader / PeriodActions & Policy ChangesPrimary Rights / Institutions Affected
    Recep Tayyip Erdoğan (Turkey, 2016–2018)Post-coup purges: 100,000+ public workers dismissed; 150+ media outlets shut; judiciary overhauled; 2017 referendum expanded presidential powersJudicial independence, press freedom, military autonomy, democratic checks
    Rodrigo Duterte (Philippines, 2016–2017)“War on Drugs”: thousands of extrajudicial killings; targeted political opponents; withdrawal from the International Criminal CourtRight to life, due process, international accountability
    Viktor Orbán (Hungary, 2010–2013)New constitution adopted; gerrymandered elections; packed Constitutional Court; “media laws” restricted independent outletsElectoral fairness, judicial independence, press freedom, minority rights

    Drumpf-ist Rapid-Action Timeline vs. Other Leaders

    Even among authoritarian-leaning leaders, Trump’s velocity of disruption stands out. Rapid appointments of federal judges, attempts to overturn election results, and attacks on long-standing norms all happened in a compressed timeline, putting U.S. institutions under unprecedented strain.

    Why Adopting “Drumpf-ist” Matters

    Calling Trump or his supporters “fascists” risks:

    1. Distracting from actual behaviors.
    2. Shifting the conversation toward groups like Antifa.
    3. Diluting the meaning of the warning.
    4. Being labeled a “terrorist” and potential ramifications

    Using Drumpf-ist instead:

    • Precisely names the threat tied to Trump-style authoritarianism, albeit a name he doesn’t use or like to be reminded of.
    • Highlights speed and audacity of attacks on norms.
    • Focuses public attention on defending democratic institutions rather than debating historical accuracy.

    Drumpf-ist tactics are dangerous not only for what they do, but for how fast they do it. When democratic checks are tested repeatedly in months rather than years, citizens and institutions are forced into reactive stances, often without sufficient time to respond. Rapid disruption erodes public trust, normalizes attacks on independent oversight, and encourages followers to view democratic institutions as optional or illegitimate.

    Call to Action

    To resist this unprecedented speed of erosion, citizens must stay informed, engaged, and proactive. Rapid action from a Drumpf-ist leader requires rapid, coordinated responses from the public, civil society, and democratic institutions. Understanding Drumpf-ist strategies helps identify threats before they become irreversible.

    As we continue our work at Rescue Our Democracy, it’s essential to recognize that defending the Constitution requires vigilance not just against actions, but against the velocity of those actions. The lesson is clear: democracy is not only about laws—it is about timing, response, and collective engagement.

    Head Guerilla, Judy T.

    Proud to be an Anti-Drumpf-ist

    **P.S. Release the Epstein files!

    References:

    References