Connect with us
[the_ad id="89560"]

Daily Caller

Celebrities Do Not Have The Political Star Power They Thought They Did

Published

6 minute read

 

From the Daily Caller News Foundation

By Bob Rubin

Oprah Winfrey’s hypocrisy and Robert De Niro’s suggestion that he might to leave the United States are reminders that, at the end of the day, celebrities are just people — with no greater understanding of the political landscape than anyone else.

Their declarations of doom and gloom have become background noise in a country that is tired of being talked down to. For years, celebrities have wielded their platforms like megaphones, hoping to sway voters and shape public opinion.

Yet, despite their drama and declarations, their political star power appears to be waning.

Take Oprah Winfrey, for example, who found herself embroiled in controversy after it was revealed her organization  accepted a significant amount of money to conduct a townhall with Vice President Kamala Harris. But now, critics are left asking: Did Oprah’s endorsement even move the needle for voters? Was there anyone genuinely on the fence about Harris who decided, “You know what, if Oprah’s on board, I’m in”?

The fallout from this has only further eroded trust in celebrity endorsements.

Then there are the celebrity escape plans. Robert De Niro, for example, suggested in 2016 he might leave the United States if Trump won.

But what is truly laughable is the hypocrisy of the countless celebrities who back in 2016 shouted: “If Trump wins, I’m out of here!” Cher and others were loud and proud about their disdain for a Trump presidency. Yet, when the moment came, they stayed put — clinging to their mansions in the United States rather than booking flights to Canada.

It begs the question: Why the double standard? If America under Trump is as terrible as they claim, why not leave? Or is it that, deep down, they know there is no better place to live than the United States?

Celebrities threatening to leave the country have become as predictable as award-show standing ovations. These threats serve less as genuine convictions and more as performative gestures meant to energize their social media followings. Yet, the average American sees right through it.

For most working-class voters, celebrity complaints ring hollow when they come from people who enjoy wealth and freedom. The idea that Robert De Niro, who became famous portraying gritty, tough-as-nails characters, feels so aggrieved by election outcomes that he might move abroad is almost comical.

Moreover, the notion that these stars believe their opinions hold more weight than the average American’s is a glaring example of Hollywood’s elitism. Their proclamations of moral superiority may resonate in the echo chambers of coastal cities, but for the rest of the country, it is just noise.

And here is the kicker: President-elect Donald Trump now has more followers on X than Taylor Swift, one of the biggest pop stars on the planet. The fact that Trump has outpaced the ultimate celebrity in social media influence shows that America is not as enamored with Hollywood elites as it once was.

A larger question looms: Do celebrity endorsements even matter in politics anymore? Vice President Kamala Harris’ campaign surely thought so when it brought in Oprah, but the results suggest otherwise. Harris’ historic unpopularity has not been bolstered by celebrity star power.

In fact, it could be argued that Hollywood endorsements hurt more than they help. Many Americans see them as out of touch, self-serving or even condescending. After all, why should a multimillionaire actor or singer have any more influence over an election than a small business owner in Ohio or a teacher in Texas?

As Trump’s return to the White House sends shockwaves through the liberal establishment, perhaps it is time for Hollywood to take a hard look in the mirror. Their star power no longer carries the political weight it once did. Americans are increasingly skeptical of those who claim to speak for the “common man” while living in gated communities and vacationing in the South of France.

The truth is, America is not perfect, but it is far from the dystopian nightmare Hollywood claims it will become under conservative leadership. And maybe, just maybe, it is time for these celebrities to stick to what they do best — entertaining — and leave the politics to the people.

Bob Rubin is the Founder and President of Rubin Wealth Advisors. Learn more about him by visiting www.rubinwa.com.

Business

UN’s ‘Plastics Treaty’ Sports A Junk Science Wrapper

Published on

 

From the Daily Caller News Foundation

By Craig Rucker

According to a study in Science Advances, over 90% of ocean plastic comes from just 10 rivers, eight of which are in Asia. The United States, by contrast, contributes less than 1%. Yet Pew treats all nations as equally responsible, promoting one-size-fits-all policies that fail to address the real source of the issue.

Just as people were beginning to breathe a sigh of relief thanks to the Trump administration’s rollback of onerous climate policies, the United Nations is set to finalize a legally binding Global Plastics Treaty by the end of the year that will impose new regulations, and, ultimately higher costs, on one of the world’s most widely used products.

Plastics – derived from petroleum – are found in everything from water bottles, tea bags, and food packaging to syringes, IV tubes, prosthetics, and underground water pipes.  In justifying the goal of its treaty to regulate “the entire life cycle of plastic – from upstream production to downstream waste,” the U.N. has put a bull’s eye on plastic waste.  “An estimated 18 to 20 percent of global plastic waste ends up in the ocean,” the UN says.

As delegates from over 170 countries prepare for the final round of negotiations in Geneva next month, debate is intensifying over the future of plastic production, regulation, and innovation. With proposals ranging from sweeping bans on single-use plastics to caps on virgin plastic output, policymakers are increasingly citing the 2020 Pew Charitable Trusts reportBreaking the Plastic Wave, as one of the primary justifications.

But many of the dire warnings made in this report, if scrutinized, ring as hollow as an empty PET soda bottle. Indeed, a closer look reveals Pew’s report is less a roadmap to progress than a glossy piece of junk science propaganda—built on false assumptions and misguided solutions.

Pew’s core claim is dire: without urgent global action, plastic entering the oceans will triple by 2040. But this alarmist forecast glosses over a fundamental fact—plastic pollution is not a global problem in equal measure. According to a study in Science Advances, over 90% of ocean plastic comes from just 10 rivers, eight of which are in Asia. The United States, by contrast, contributes less than 1%. Yet Pew treats all nations as equally responsible, promoting one-size-fits-all policies that fail to address the real source of the issue.

This blind spot has serious consequences. Pew’s solutions—cutting plastic production, phasing out single-use items, and implementing rigid global regulations—miss the mark entirely. Banning straws in the U.S. or taxing packaging in Europe won’t stop waste from being dumped into rivers in countries with little or no waste infrastructure. Policies targeting Western consumption don’t solve the problem—they simply shift it or, worse, stifle useful innovation.

The real tragedy isn’t plastic itself, but the mismanagement of plastic waste—and the regulatory stranglehold that blocks better solutions. In many countries, recycling is a government-run monopoly with little incentive to innovate. Meanwhile, private-sector entrepreneurs working on advanced recycling, biodegradable materials, and AI-powered sorting systems face burdensome red tape and market distortion.

Pew pays lip service to innovation but ultimately favors centralized planning and control. That’s a mistake. Time and again, it’s been technology—not top-down mandates—that has delivered environmental breakthroughs.

What the world needs is not another top-down, bureaucratic report like Pew’s, but an open dialogue among experts, entrepreneurs, and the public where new ideas can flourish. Imagine small-scale pyrolysis units that convert waste into fuel in remote villages, or decentralized recycling centers that empower informal waste collectors. These ideas are already in development—but they’re being sidelined by policymakers fixated on bans and quotas.

Worse still, efforts to demonize plastic often ignore its benefits. Plastic is lightweight, durable, and often more environmentally efficient than alternatives like glass or aluminum. The problem isn’t the material—it’s how it has been managed after its use. That’s a “systems” failure, not a material flaw.

Breaking the Plastic Wave champions a top-down, bureaucratic vision that limits choice, discourages private innovation, and rewards entrenched interests under the guise of environmentalism. Many of the groups calling for bans are also lobbying for subsidies and regulatory frameworks that benefit their own agendas—while pushing out disruptive newcomers.

With the UN expected to finalize the treaty by early 2026, nations will have to face the question of ratification.  Even if the Trump White House refuses to sign the treaty – which is likely – ordinary Americans could still feel the sting of this ill-advised scheme.  Manufacturers of life-saving plastic medical devices, for example, are part of a network of global suppliers.  Companies located in countries that ratify the treaty will have no choice but to pass the higher costs along, and Americans will not be spared.

Ultimately, the marketplace of ideas—not the offices of policy NGOs—will deliver the solutions we need. It’s time to break the wave of junk science—not ride it.

Craig Rucker is president of the Committee For A Constructive Tomorrow (www.CFACT.org).

Continue Reading

Business

‘Experts’ Warned Free Markets Would Ruin Argentina — Looks Like They Were Dead Wrong

Published on

 

From the Daily Caller News Foundation

By Melissa O’Rourke

The current state of Argentina’s economy is a far cry from what “experts” predicted when they warned that President Javier Milei’s pro-free market leadership would devastate the country.

The chainsaw-wielding libertarian rose to power on promises to slash government spending, implement free-market policies and lift strict currency controls to rescue a nation crippled by inflation, debt and entrenched poverty. Though the pundit class warned that Milei’s policies would spark an economic collapse, the results so far have been a rebuke to those warnings.

Just days before the November 2023 presidential election, 108 economists from around the world signed an open letter claiming that Milei’s “simple solutions” were “likely to cause more devastation in the real world in the short run, while severely reducing policy space in the long run.”

“His policies are poorly thought through. Far from building a consensus, he would struggle to govern,” The Economist’s editorial board wrote in a September 2023 piece describing “Javier Milei’s dangerous allure.”

Well over a year into Milei’s presidency, Argentina is showing its strongest economic performance in years. The country’s gross domestic product (GDP) jumped 7.7% in April compared to the same month in 2024, far exceeding expectations.

The GDP is expected to rise by 5.2% in 2025, compared to declines of 1.3% in 2024 and 1.9% in 2023, according to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD).

Inflation, a long-standing hallmark of Argentina’s economic dysfunction, dropped to 1.5% between April and May, reaching a five-year low. Annual inflation has plunged from 160.9% in November 2023 — just before Milei took office — to 43.5% in May.

Meanwhile, poverty rates have also declined sharply, falling from 52.9% in the first half of 2024 to 38.1% in the second half of the year.

Argentina’s rental housing supply also increased by 212% between December 2023 and June 2024, after Milei repealed the country’s rent control laws, according to the Cato Institute.

“Against the background of a difficult legacy of macroeconomic imbalances, Argentina has embarked on an ambitious reform process, starting with an unprecedented upfront fiscal adjustment. Reforms have started to pay off. Inflation has receded and the economy is set for a strong recovery,” the OECD noted in its new analysis of the Argentinian economy. “Maintaining the reform momentum will be key to restore confidence, boost investment and productivity growth.”

Milei — a self-described anarcho-capitalist — has been an ardent supporter of President Donald Trump’s efforts to downsize the U.S. government, including the Department of Government Efficiency’s (DOGE) push to cut spending.

“I come from a country that bought all of those stupid ideas that went from being one of the most affluent countries in the world to one to one of the [poorest],” Milei said in a speech at the Conservative Political Action Conference in 2024. “If you don’t fight for your freedom, they will drag you into misery … Don’t surrender.”

Continue Reading

Trending

X