As we head into a contentious election year, campaign messages will soon flood every screen and mailbox. New technologies keep arriving, but political strategy hasn’t changed much over the past 2,000 years.

Need proof? Go back to 64 B.C., when Marcus Tullius Cicero — the Roman Republic’s great orator — ran for consul, the highest office in Rome and the closest analogue to a modern presidency. Cicero’s brother, Quintus, wrote him a blunt, practical memo on how to win. Princeton University Press published that letter in 2012 in Philip Freeman’s translation, “How to Win an Election: An Ancient Guide for Modern Politicians.” The title isn’t clever. It’s accurate.

Quintus didn’t teach Cicero to preach doctrine. He taught him to assemble a majority.

Quintus urged Cicero to treat every appearance “as if your entire future depended on that single event.” Modern technology only amplifies that warning. A bad phrase or a sour expression, caught on camera and looped endlessly, can sink a campaign.

Quintus also mapped the coalition a successful candidate must build. He told Cicero to focus on the supporters who matter most and to shore up those already on his side: “those holding public contracts,” along with “the business community.” He reminded him not to neglect “the special interest groups that back you.” He added a familiar note of retail politics: use “the young people who admire you and want to learn from you,” and rely on “the faithful friends who are daily at your side.”

Government contractors. Business leaders. Interest groups. Youth outreach. A loyal inner circle. Quintus could charge today’s consulting rates and still find clients.

He also gave Cicero the oldest instruction in politics: collect what you’re owed.

“Now is the time to call in all favors,” Quintus wrote. “Don’t miss an opportunity to remind everyone in your debt that they should repay you with their support. For those who owe you nothing, let them know that their timely help will put you in their debt.”

Anyone who has worked in politics has heard the modern version of that message, usually delivered with a smile and a firm handshake.

Quintus emphasized the need to win over the “nobility” and “men of privilege,” including former consuls. Swap “nobility” for major donors and influential business leaders — Elon Musk and Mark Zuckerberg come to mind — and swap “consuls” for ex-governors, former senators, and party grandees. Candidates still chase endorsements from yesterday’s power brokers.

RELATED: Do you want Caesar? Because this is how you get Caesar.

Blaze News Illustration

Quintus also told Cicero to exploit his opponents’ scandals. He described the corruption and sexual misconduct surrounding Cicero’s rivals, Antonius and Catiline, and urged Cicero to use it. Modern history offers obvious parallels. Gary “Monkey Business” Hart. John Edwards and his “love child” saga. Sex scandals keep happening, and campaigns keep weaponizing them.

Quintus warned Cicero about enemies and mistakes. “Since you have so many potential enemies,” he wrote, “you can’t afford to make any mistakes. You must conduct a flawless campaign with the greatest thoughtfulness, industry, and care.” Political hatreds didn’t start with cable news. Cicero faced what today might be called “Cicero derangement syndrome.”

Quintus broke campaigning into two tasks: hold your friends and persuade the public. He offered instructions for both. When it came to organizations Cicero had helped, Quintus told him to press them: “This is the occasion to pay their political debts to you if they want you to look favorably on them in the future.” He boiled down vote-getting to three levers that still move elections: “favors, hope, and personal attachment.”

Then he reached what he called the most important part of campaigning: create goodwill and kindle hope.

“Bring hope to people and a feeling of goodwill toward you,” Quintus urged. But he warned Cicero not to lock himself into specific promises. He told him to reassure each constituency in language it wanted to hear: Tell the Senate you will protect its “power and privileges.” Tell the business community and wealthy citizens you stand for “stability and peace.” Tell ordinary Romans you have always defended their interests.

Quintus didn’t teach Cicero to preach doctrine. He taught him to assemble a majority.

Cicero won, and he won big — more votes than any other candidate. Romans later called him “Father of His Country,” a title Americans associate with George Washington. Quintus became praetor two years later. Both men met violent ends in 43 B.C., as civil war consumed the republic and paved the way for empire.

Their deaths don’t diminish the point. Quintus’ advice endured because it describes permanent truths about politics: ambition, coalition-building, vanity, fear, flattery, and the eternal hunt for advantage.

Tactics and terrain may change, but the playbook didn’t. One wonders — who in our day will leave such a legacy?

​Opinion & analysis, Politics, Marcus tullius cicero, Cicero, Catiline, Gary hart, John edwards, Quintus cicero, Julius caesar, Rome, Republic, Empire, Technology, Elections, Philip freeman, 2026 midterms, Coalition building, George washington 

In a years-long case, more suspects are being charged in connection with an alleged visa fraud conspiracy ring.

On Friday, the Department of Justice charged 11 individuals in connection with “a conspiracy to carry out staged armed robberies of convenience stores for the purpose of allowing store clerks to falsely claim they were crime victims on immigration applications.”

The DOJ claimed the purpose of the scheme was to allow the ‘victims’ of the ‘robbery’ to falsely claim they were victims of a violent crime on an application for a U visa.

Ten of the 11 suspects, all of whom are Indian nationals, were arrested in states where they were “unlawfully residing,” including Massachusetts, Missouri, Kentucky, and Ohio, according to the DOJ’s press release.

“An 11th Indian nat’l who was deported to India has also been charged,” the Boston FBI announced on social media. The 11th Indian national was deported after “unlawfully residing” in Weymouth, Massachusetts.

According to the DOJ’s press release, the scheme involved staging armed robberies in which the “robber” would threaten store clerks with an apparent firearm, take cash from the register, and flee. The clerk would then wait five minutes or more before calling police to report the incident.

The store owners were compensated by Rambhai Patel, sentenced in August for his role in the scheme, and his alleged co-conspirators, while the “victims” allegedly paid Patel to participate in the scheme.

RELATED: Trump recognizes little girl grievously injured, allegedly by truck-driving Indian illegal alien

FBI Boston

The fraud scheme appears to have begun in March 2023. Those charged on Friday are alleged to have “either arranged with the organizer to set up each robbery or paid for themselves or a family member to participate as a ‘victim.'”

According to an August 2025 sentencing announcement from the DOJ, Patel and Balwinder Singh, who was also charged in December 2023, organized “at least 18” staged armed robberies.

Singh pleaded guilty and was set to be sentenced in September 2025.

Citing charging documents, the DOJ claimed the purpose of the scheme was to allow the “victims” of the “robbery” to falsely claim they were victims of a violent crime on an application for a U visa.

According to U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, the U nonimmigrant status visa is “set aside for victims of certain crimes who have suffered mental or physical abuse and are helpful to law enforcement or government officials in the investigation or prosecution of criminal activity.”

Jitendrakumar Patel; Maheshkumar Patel; Sanjaykumar Patel; Amitabahen Patel; Sangitaben Patel; Mitul Patel; Rameshbhai Patel; Ronakkumar Patel; Sonal Patel; Minkesh Patel; and Dipikaben Patel all face one count of conspiracy to commit visa fraud.

The charge of conspiracy to commit visa fraud carries a sentence of up to five years in prison, three years of supervised release, and a fine of $250,000.

Those charged on Friday were released after initial appearances and will appear in federal court in Boston “at a later date,” the DOJ said.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

​Politics, Visa, Visa fraud, Immigration, U visa, Crime, Doj, Department of justice, Staged armed robberies, Massachusetts, Patel, Rambhai patel, India, Indians, Indian nationals 

Pastor Jeff Schwarzentraub of Brave Church in Denver, Colorado, says the cultural transformation of his once-conservative state has forced him to confront a difficult reality: What were once seen as political debates are now deeply biblical issues.

“People do not migrate to Denver for community. They migrate for hedonism,” he tells BlazeTV host Allie Beth Stuckey on “Relatable,” explaining that it’s “the happiest group of lost people on the entire planet.”

“It’s crazy how Colorado has turned so deeply secular and progressive. It didn’t used to be that way. It was a conservative stronghold for a long time, and then I guess migration from the blue states, maybe even immigration, just changed the demographics, changed the politics, and now it kind of helps, along with California, Oregon, and Washington, lead the charge for progressive radicalism,” Stuckey comments.

“Like we’re talking the most radical transgender ideology in the country has been passed legislatively in the state of Colorado,” she adds.

The pastor explains that 2020 is when Colorado took a turn for the worse, telling Stuckey that when he refused to shut down his church to combat COVID, the church received “threats from the health department, from Christians, saying ‘You don’t love us, you don’t care.’”

“And what we’ve seen is just this whole progressive ideology move. So there was a House Bill 1312 that got passed. It got modified a little bit because people put up a big fight, but basically, in Colorado, what they’re trying to do is be able to take your kids, be able to castrate them, or do whatever they want, without your permission,” he explains.

While he was raised not to get involved in politics and to instead focus on religion, he notes that these issues have changed from “right and left” to “right and wrong.”

“And so everything that I feel like I get involved with that’s quote-unquote ‘political,’ they’re just biblical issues. So the transgender issue, that’s a biblical issue. That’s not a political issue. God created two genders, male and female. You can’t even get out of Genesis chapter 1 and not believe that,” he says.

“I have no desire to make a political run. I have no desire to get involved. But to stay silent on biblical issues is to be complicit with evil, and I just won’t do it,” he adds.

Want more from Allie Beth Stuckey?

To enjoy more of Allie’s upbeat and in-depth coverage of culture, news, and theology from a Christian, conservative perspective, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

​Relatable with allie beth stuckey, Allie beth stuckey, The blaze, Blazetv, Blaze news, Blaze podcasts, Blaze podcast network, Blaze media, Blaze online, Blaze originals, Pastor, Religion, The bible, Colorado, Hedonism, Radicalism colorado, Transgender ideology, Trans agenda, Jeff schwarzentraub, Brave church, Denver colorado 

California has a habit of importing some of the worst tech-regulation ideas from overseas. After lawmakers enacted a censorial statute cribbed from the U.K. in 2022 — and watched it run headlong into an injunction — the Golden State now appears eager to borrow from Australia, which in December barred children from major social media platforms.

Earlier this month, California lawmakers introduced a bill to impose “a minimum age requirement to open or maintain a social media account.” Governor Gavin Newsom (D), who usually avoids weighing in on pending bills, publicly endorsed the idea.

Will America keep light-touch rules that protect consumers without strangling innovation — or import Europe’s heavy-handed, fear-driven approach?

However well intentioned, the Australian model collapses on prudential grounds. In the United States, it also invites a swift constitutional challenge — and likely a swift defeat in court.

Most proposals that force platforms to distinguish between adults and minors require age verification. That means users must hand over sensitive personal information — usually government ID documents or biometric data — as the price of entry to the platforms where everyday digital life happens. Once companies collect, process, and store that data, it becomes a tempting target. Hackers do not need ideology, only opportunity.

The roster of victims reads like Don Giovanni’s catalogue. The list includes corporations such as Target, Equifax, Marriott, Capital One, MGM Resorts, and T-Mobile. Platforms from Facebook to X.com to the “Tea” app were also hit. So were third-party verification services. Even in France, where regulators tried to build a privacy-protective system, a third-party age verifier exposed sensitive user data. In the digital age, breaches and leaks are simply a fact of life.

Legislation promoted as “child protection” thus runs into a basic contradiction: it can expose children to new forms of harm. As the R Street Institute and Experian have reported, 25% of minors will become victims of identity fraud or theft before they turn 18. Age-verification mandates would widen the attack surface and increase the odds that minors’ information gets stolen, misused, or sold — and that families spend years cleaning up the wreckage.

Some advocates now treat constitutional objections to “child-safety” bills as impolite. Courts don’t share that squeamishness. In recent years, judges have enjoined multiple constitutionally defective state laws, leaving behind little more than wasted taxpayer dollars and public frustration, while state attorneys general mount doomed defenses.

Newsom’s favored approach also clashes with a Supreme Court precedent California already lost: Brown v. Entertainment Merchants Association. In that 2011 case, the court struck down a California law that restricted minors’ access to violent video games. Justice Antonin Scalia’s majority opinion applied strict scrutiny — a demanding standard — and rejected the state’s argument that the law simply “helped” parents.

Scalia’s point applies with even greater force here. A sweeping ban on minors’ access to social media would function less as parental support and more as state substitution. The state would not merely empower parents; it would decide what parents should want, then impose that judgment across the board.

RELATED: Kids have already found a way around Australia’s new social media ban: Making faces

David GRAY/AFP/Getty Images

In American law, parents generally hold the duty — and the right — to decide what media their children consume. That principle does not stop at the edge of the internet.

The broader fight over technology policy often turns on a single question: Will America stick with light-touch, sensible regulation that protects consumers without strangling innovation — or will it import the heavy-handed, fear-driven regulatory posture popular abroad, especially in Europe?

The American technology sector grew and thrived in the internet era. Many foreign regimes, more focused on expansive “safety” mandates than innovation, privacy, or consumer benefit, have not.

Lawmakers should borrow good ideas wherever they find them. But California keeps shopping in the wrong aisle. If Sacramento wants to protect kids, it should start with tools that don’t require building a mass ID-check system for the entire public — and that don’t hand criminals a richer trove of data to steal.

It’s wise to learn from other countries. It’s foolish to copy their worst mistakes.

​California, Social media, Social media ban, Age restrictions, X, Facebook, Instagram, Black market, Opinion & analysis, Australia, First amendment, Social media censorship, Constitution, Identity theft, Hacking, Supreme court, Antonin scalia