Are you depressed and ready to check out of our politics? Please hear this!

After Trump’s win, losing several Supreme Court cases, and the disastrous Big Beautiful Bill likely to become law, it is easy to get depressed and check out. Here is my message to you.

Are You Depressed and Ready to Check Out?

Watch Politics Done Right T.V. here.

Podcasts (Video — Audio)

---

Summary

A progressive political commentator addresses listeners’ despair following the passage of devastating legislation that cuts vital safety net programs. The commentator acknowledges the natural human response to check out when facing overwhelming political defeats, but emphasizes that this withdrawal serves the interests of those in power. The speaker argues that temporary breaks for mental health remain acceptable, but complete disengagement hands victory to those who benefit from reduced political participation among working-class Americans.

• Strategic Political Disengagement: Republican leadership deliberately creates conditions that exhaust progressive voters, knowing that political fatigue among opposition supporters benefits their agenda of transferring wealth upward while cutting programs for vulnerable populations.
• Historical Pattern Recognition: Every significant social justice movement—from civil rights to women’s rights to LGBTQ+ equality—experienced periods of setback and demoralization, but ultimate success required sustained engagement despite temporary defeats and emotional exhaustion.
• Mental Health Considerations: The commentator validates the need for individual breaks from political activism while stressing that collective sustained engagement remains essential for protecting democratic institutions and social programs.
• Power Dynamics and Economic Reality: The oligarchy depends on middle-class and working-class Americans feeling powerless and checking out of the political process, despite progressives maintaining numerical superiority over corporate interests.
• Long-term Electoral Strategy: The speaker emphasizes that even if current battles fail, continued engagement in the 2025 and 2026 elections offers opportunities to reverse harmful policies and restore programs that serve ordinary Americans rather than wealthy elites.

The commentator correctly identifies the psychological warfare inherent in modern conservative political strategy. By passing legislation that most Americans oppose through narrow margins, Republican leadership creates despair designed to suppress future political participation among their opponents.

---

Premium Content (Complimentary)

In the wake of devastating legislative defeats that strip vital protections from millions of Americans, progressive voices confront a critical crossroads. The recent passage of reconciliation legislation, which passed with a 51-50 vote, with Vice President JD Vance breaking the tie, represents more than a policy disagreement—it constitutes a deliberate assault on the social contract that has defined American democracy for generations.

The bills under discussion reveal the true priorities of the current Republican majority. The House-passed Republican reconciliation plan would cut nearly $300 billion from the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) through 2034, based on Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimates, by far the most significant cut to SNAP in history. These cuts target the most vulnerable Americans while simultaneously delivering massive tax benefits to wealthy individuals and corporations. At the center of the sweeping bill are trillions in tax cuts, which Republicans aim to partially offset through changes to safety net programs, such as Medicaid and SNAP.

The psychological impact of these legislative defeats cannot be understated. When ordinary Americans witness their elected representatives voting against programs that enjoy broad popular support, the natural response is to question the efficacy of democratic participation itself. This emotional response serves the interests of those who benefit from reduced political engagement among working-class and middle-class citizens.

Republican strategists understand that sustained political engagement requires emotional energy and hope. By creating conditions where progressive voters feel overwhelmed and powerless, they effectively suppress opposition turnout without having to resort to traditional voter suppression tactics completely. The commentator identifies this dynamic correctly—the oligarchy depends on political exhaustion among those who would otherwise oppose their agenda.

The healthcare implications alone demonstrate the human cost of this strategy. If the legislation is approved, millions of Americans could lose access to these benefits due to this historic pullback in federal support. The Medicare Rights Center warns that the House-passed bill would extend and expand many of the tax cuts Republicans passed in 2017, while boosting spending on priorities that primarily benefit wealthy Americans and simultaneously cutting programs that support vulnerable populations.

These policy choices reflect a fundamental philosophical divide about the role of government in American society. Progressive politics recognizes that government serves as the primary mechanism through which ordinary Americans can pool resources to address collective challenges. Conservative politics, particularly in its current oligarchic form, views government primarily as a tool for protecting existing wealth concentration and preventing redistribution that might threaten established hierarchies.

This historical analysis proves particularly relevant when examining past social movements. The civil rights movement experienced periods of profound discouragement, particularly following violent backlash and legislative defeats. The women’s rights movement faced similar challenges, with progress often followed by organized opposition that sought to roll back the gains. LGBTQ+ rights activism encountered decades of setbacks before achieving major victories in recent years.

In each case, sustained engagement proved essential for ultimate success. Movements that maintained organizational capacity and political participation during difficult periods positioned themselves to capitalize on favorable political moments when they emerged. Conversely, movements that allowed discouragement to lead to widespread disengagement found themselves unable to respond effectively when opportunities for progress arose.

The current political moment requires similar strategic thinking. While individual activists may need temporary breaks for mental health reasons, the broader progressive movement must maintain pressure on elected officials and continue building organizational capacity for future electoral cycles. The 2025 and 2026 elections offer opportunities to reverse harmful policies if progressive voters remain engaged despite current disappointments.

Economic inequality provides the underlying context for these political battles. Wealthy individuals and corporations possess disproportionate political influence through campaign contributions, lobbying expenditures, and media ownership. However, they remain numerically small compared to working-class and middle-class Americans who bear the costs of policies designed to benefit elite interests.

This numerical advantage becomes politically meaningful only when ordinary Americans participate actively in democratic processes. Voter turnout, grassroots organizing, and sustained pressure on elected officials can overcome financial advantages when consistently applied over time. The oligarchy understands this dynamic and therefore benefits significantly when political defeats lead to widespread disengagement among their opponents.

We must maintain the collective responsibility, which resonates particularly strongly in this context. Individual Americans cannot overcome systemic political challenges single-handedly, but collective action can achieve transformative change. This requires some citizens to maintain high levels of engagement while others take necessary breaks, ensuring continuous pressure on political systems even when individual activists need recovery time.

Progressive politics ultimately rests on the premise that ordinary Americans deserve economic security, access to healthcare, educational opportunities, and environmental protection. These goals require active government intervention to counter market forces that concentrate wealth and power among small elite populations. Achieving these goals demands sustained political engagement despite temporary setbacks and emotional exhaustion.

The current legislative defeats, while painful, represent tactical losses rather than strategic failure. Progressive ideas enjoy broad popular support, as evidenced by polling data showing a majority in favor of maintaining social programs. The challenge involves translating this popular support into electoral victories that can lead to the implementation of progressive policies.

This translation requires both short-term tactical adjustments and long-term strategic planning. In the short term, progressive organizations must maintain pressure on vulnerable Republican legislators while supporting Democratic officials who oppose harmful cuts. Long-term success demands building a political infrastructure that can sustain engagement across multiple electoral cycles, regardless of temporary defeats or victories.

To be clear, checking out totally serves the interests of those who benefit from current power arrangements. Sustained engagement, even in the face of discouraging setbacks, remains the only viable path toward creating an economy and political system that serves ordinary Americans rather than concentrated wealth. Democracy requires active participation to function effectively, and progressive change demands the sustained engagement of citizens committed to justice and equality.