This month, Hello Fresh ran a Pride-themed ad campaign that seems far removed from the assurances many Americans heard during the same-sex marriage debate. Remember? “My marriage won’t affect your marriage.” “What consenting adults do in private is none of anyone’s business.”

Many voters who supported same-sex marriage believed these assurances, understanding it as a request for legal recognition, not the beginning of a broader cultural project that would eventually permeate corporate branding, workplace policies, schools, and popular culture.

Ordinary moms and grandmas just wanted their gay relatives to be happy. They were assured that redefining marriage would be harmless.

But here we are, almost exactly 11 years since the Obergefell decision, and the most popular meal-kit delivery service in the country has brought gay sex out of the bedroom and right to the kitchen table.

‘Bottoms up’

Now, I don’t want to write about this any more than you want to read about it. But the unfortunate truth is that we can’t afford to ignore it, no matter how distasteful we find it. Because if you and I won’t talk about these things on our terms, be assured, the sexual revolutionaries will talk about them on theirs.

So here is the ad Hello Fresh posted on Instagram: “We know eating isn’t always a top priority this month. We respect that. But for those of you who are … prepping … we have an extensive lineup of high-fiber recipes available. Happy Pride.”

Perhaps you are unfamiliar with the term “prepping.” In Megan Basham’s delicate translation: “For those not initiated into the sexual practices of gay men, let me help decipher what ‘prepping’ means. HelloFresh is saying that their product is useful for clearing out the rectum of feces in preparation for sodomy. Yes, that’s what it means.”

The company later added a discount code: BOTTOMS UP.

This tasteless Hello Fresh “Pride Month” campaign delivers your food with a side dish of unappetizing sexual innuendo, whether you ordered it or not.

Hardly harmless

What ever happened to that “gay marriage” deal about the privacy of the bedroom? Many people accepted that bargain in good faith. Ordinary moms and grandmas just wanted their gay relatives to be happy. They were assured that redefining marriage would be harmless.

I was a campaign spokeswoman for Proposition 8 in California, the ballot initiative that defined marriage as the union of one man and one woman. I was involved in the marriage debates from Prop 8 in 2008 all the way to 2015 and the Obergefell decision. I distinctly remember that many leaders of the pro-marriage effort made a conscious decision not to talk about gay sex.

“The gay marriage campaign is not about ‘gay.’ It’s about ‘marriage.’” This strategy suited a lot of us, including me. We didn’t want to talk about gay stuff at all, much less gay sex.

We wanted to talk about the meaning and purposes of marriage, how marriage attaches mothers and fathers to their children and to one another. We wanted to talk about how redefining marriage would inevitably redefine parenthood.

We feared that mentioning gay sex would gross people out. We didn’t want to offend the good, decent people who don’t want to talk about any sex in public, much less gay sex. We figured the first side to bring it up would lose.

RELATED: Trans is the natural progression from ‘gay marriage’

Justin Sullivan/Getty Images

Sanitizing sodomy

But there was a downside to this strategy. It allowed the gay lobby to sanitize the sexual activities of two men. The public was never asked to think about what gay men actually do together. Grandma could picture her grandson cuddling on the sofa with his boyfriend, listening to showtunes.

I recall giving a talk at Stanford. In response to a question about “marriage equality,” I asked the student, “Is there any sexual act that would equally consummate the marriage of a male couple and a female couple and a man-woman couple?”

The student thought for a minute. This was a new thought for her. She probably couldn’t imagine anyone getting married who hadn’t already performed the act that normally consummates a marriage, long before they walked down the aisle.

She finally said, “Well, marriage doesn’t necessarily have to be a sexual relationship.” This is a tacit admission that there is no “equal” way of consummating these “marriages.”

Intrinsically sterile

Maybe avoiding “gay” was a good tactic at the time. But the marketing geniuses at Hello Fresh broke the tacit deal: What happens in the bedroom doesn’t stay in the bedroom. It was wishful thinking to believe that it would.

Decent people prefer to keep a discreet lid on discussions of sex. Unfortunately, the sexual revolutionaries — be they gay, straight, nonbinary, or whatever — can’t shut up about it.

The marital act between a man and a woman can bring forth new human life. The combination of oxytocin and vasopressin during sex creates bonds between the man and the woman.

Neither babies nor bonding are part of the gay sex equation. Gay sex is intrinsically sterile. Gay sex is gross.

There: I said it.

But don’t forget who brought it up first.

​Culture, Gay marriage, Lifestyle, Marriage debates, Obergefell decision, Parenthood, Proposition 8, Obergefell v. hodges, Family, Lgbt, Countering ‘pride’ 

For generations, landing a summer job has been a traditional American rite of passage. Whether working at a local ice cream shop, a neighborhood grocery store, or an amusement park, teenagers have their very first taste of being a part of the workforce. However, a new report shows that teens are facing the toughest hiring market since the government began tracking the data in 1948.

The traditional summer job that generations of American teenagers have relied on is facing its grimmest outlook in nearly eight decades.

‘That is exactly the kind of work teens depend on.’

Challenger, Gray, and Christmas — a Chicago-based workforce consulting company — released a recent forecast revealing the troubling summer employment outlook that teens are grappling with.

Citing data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the report noted that last summer’s teen hiring total plummeted to its lowest level since the government began tracking the data in 1948. In 2025, teen summer hiring hit rock bottom at 801,000 positions — the worst figure in the 77-year history of tracking by the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

However, this summer’s job forecast for teenagers is even more dire. In an alarming projection, Challenger, Gray, and Christmas warns that employers will offer teens 790,000 jobs in May, June, and July 2026.

The previous documented low point occurred in 1949 during post-war demobilization, when teen hiring dropped to 932,000. In 2010, the total number of teenage jobs fell to 960,000, when the economic recovery from the Great Recession dragged on.

Fortune reported that federal data shows that approximately one-third of 16- to 19-year-olds in the United States were employed last summer, noting that it is “down from a peak of about 60% in the late 1970s.”

The Wall Street Journal reported that applications for New York City’s Summer Youth Employment Program this year have already shattered 2025’s record of 200,000 candidates competing for just 100,000 slots.

Meanwhile, advertisements for summer camp counselor positions on the Indeed jobs board have crashed by nearly 30% year-over-year, according to the WSJ.

“Last summer was the weakest summer for teen hiring we have ever recorded,” said Andy Challenger, labor and workplace expert and chief revenue officer for Challenger, Gray, and Christmas.

RELATED: The secret to Chick-fil-A’s success has nothing to do with chicken

Challenger stressed, “What is striking is that it happened without a recession.”

The report by Challenger, Gray, and Christmas cited “rising inflation, climbing oil prices, and a broadly cautious hiring environment” as factors contributing to the historically weak teen summer job forecast. The report also said artificial intelligence, automation, and older workers staying in the workforce later have hurt job prospects for teens.

“Inflation and rising fuel costs are squeezing the same households and small businesses that hire teens, such as amusement parks, restaurants, retailers, and summer camps,” Challenger continued. “When margins tighten, summer hirers will wait for demand to dictate hiring.”

Challenger said, “We predicted a quiet summer last year, and it played out even quieter than expected. The dynamics that drove that slowdown — cost pressures, automation, employers waiting to see how consumer demand holds up — are all still in place, and in some cases they’ve intensified.”

Non-seasonally adjusted data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics showed that there were 5,193,000 employed workers ages 16 to 19 in April. The report said the total is a noticeable drop from the figure from April 2025, which saw 5,487,000 teen workers on payrolls.

Challenger pointed out, “When fewer teens are working in April, the late-spring catch-up usually doesn’t close the gap. June will be the most important month to watch, but the trajectory is already pointing down.”

Challenger, Gray, and Christmas reported, “Entertainment and leisure, which led the seasonal categories most relevant to teen hiring last year with 28,000 announced plans, has announced only 8,261 hiring plans through April of this year, a 70% drop.”

Challenger added, “The collapse in entertainment and leisure hiring announcements is one of the clearest signals we have for the summer.”

Challenger said jobs in places like theme parks, resorts, hotels, and events will “run leaner this year.”

“That is exactly the kind of work teens depend on,” Challenger stated.

The report said teenagers could find employment opportunities in agriculture, hospitality, and food service. The report claimed that in areas with crackdowns on illegal immigration could help American teens secure jobs.

“Tighter labor supply in certain regions, particularly those most affected by ongoing immigration enforcement actions, continues to push some employers to lean more heavily on local teen workers,” the report proclaimed.

Challenger declared, “In the places where labor remains tight, teens can be a real solution.”

According to NewsNation, teenagers could find a “few bright spots” in summer employment, including lifeguards and working in retail.

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

​Business, Economics, Employment, Inflation, Jobs, News, Politics 

A virulent anti-Trump critic did very poorly in the Democratic primary election for an open seat representing Manhattan, and the president didn’t hold back his mockery.

George Conway, ex-husband of former Trump adviser Kellyanne Conway, was a Republican political strategist before President Donald Trump won election in 2016. He has since become a fierce opponent of the president and even helped found the Lincoln Project, an anti-Trump political organization.

‘This is a truly unattractive person, both inside and out. Have a nice life, George!’

None of that helped Conway in the primary race for New York’s 12th Congressional District, which had a crowded field of candidates that included a Kennedy scion.

“Wow, Mr. Kellyanne Conway, a Trump Deranged Loser at the highest level, is getting absolutely CRUSHED in the Primaries tonight,” the president wrote in a post on Truth Social, referring to Conway’s defunct marriage.

“He’ll end up at about 5% of the vote in a rather weak field of young and aggressive Communists,” Trump added. “No wonder his ‘husband’ dumped him like a dog! This is a truly unattractive person, both inside and out. Have a nice life, George!”

The Conway campaign did not immediately respond to a request for comment from Blaze News.

Kellyanne Conway was a Republican strategist who was Trump’s campaign manager in 2016 and became a passionate supporter of his policies.

Kellyanne Conway left the Trump campaign just a few months ahead of the 2020 election. The Conways announced their divorce in March 2023 after two decades of marriage.

The primary election was called for New York state Assembly Member Micah Lasher, who garnered 39% of the vote with 87% of the ballots counted. Conway had gotten support from only 6% of the vote at that point.

Jack Kennedy Schlossberg, 33, also performed poorly despite carrying the Kennedy name — he received only about 11% of the vote.

RELATED: George Conway publicly chides Kellyanne Conway while she defends Trump

Lasher is a longtime Democrat who promised to “revamp and recharge the Democratic Party in Washington” after his victory.

He added that his goal was to show his party has “bold new ideas to improve the lives of struggling Americans and then deliver on them.”

Lasher will likely have an easy road to Congress, as two-thirds of the voters in the district are registered as Democrats.

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

​Democratic primary, George conway, Kellyanne conway, New york, Politics 

While the Trump administration has seen some major pro-life wins, BlazeTV host Allie Beth Stuckey is worried that the administration hasn’t made much headway on issues like the abortion pill.

“A lot of pro-lifers, myself included, are concerned about mifepristone continuing to circulate. Most abortions now are done via abortion pill. The FDA under Trump hasn’t reversed the Biden policy about mail-order abortions and mifepristone circulating,” Stuckey tells Vice President JD Vance.

“So can you tell us the latest on that front and if that’s going to change?” she asks.

“So the FDA has put this under review, and we’re well under review. I think the Wall Street Journal reported that it had just started. … And of course, I’m not going to prejudge the investigation, and I’m not going to tell anybody exactly what it will find because I don’t know what it will find,” Vance answers.

“We’re trying to be led by the science, and that’s also how you make sure this stuff is defensible once it will inevitably be challenged in court. I think, number two, that you know there are so many wins, not just in designating embryos as worthy of protection, but all of the foreign funding of abortion that grew up in the wake of the Biden administration — that was completely stopped,” he continues.

“We expanded the Mexico City policy, which cut down on the amount of foreign funding going to abortion services overseas,” he says, asking, “Why are American tax dollars funding abortions in other countries?”

“Also, the One Big Beautiful Bill mostly was a tax-cut legislation for working families. We’re obviously very proud of it, but it also meant that abortion providers would not get tax money in the United States of America either,” he continues.

“So,” he adds, “I think that there are a lot of wins to hang our hat on.”

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, Allie beth stuckey, Jd vance, Donald trump, Pro-life, Abortion, Pill, Joe biden, Relatable with allie beth stuckey 

The Democratic Party is undergoing a hostile takeover by democratic socialists — as evidenced in New York’s primaries on Tuesday where Democrat establishment-types suffered humiliating defeats at the hands of radicals cut from the same cloth as New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani.

With over 90% of the votes in on Wednesday morning, incumbent Rep. Daniel Goldman trailed former NYC Comptroller Brad Lander 65.8% to 34% — a whopping 31.8 percentage points.

‘We are Westerners fighting for the total eradication of Western civilization.’

Lander was endorsed by Mamdani, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), and the Working Families Party, and ran largely to the left of Goldman, heir to the Levi Strauss fortune.

Goldman — who was endorsed by AIPAC, Gov. Kathy Hochul, and House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries — did his apparent best to join his opponent, who is also Jewish, in criticizing Israel and virtue-signaling to radical would-be voters, but his best was nowhere near good enough.

After getting steamrolled at the ballot box, Goldman told supporters, “The voters of New York’s 10th Congressional District have spoken, and while this is certainly not the outcome I hoped for and worked so hard for, I respect their decision.”

RELATED: CNN data analyst stunned by Democratic Party’s takeover by Mamdani’s fellow travelers

Brad Lander and Mayor Zohran Mamdani. Spencer Platt/Getty Images.

President Donald Trump weighed in on Truth Social, writing, “Weak and pathetic Congressman Dan Goldman just lost, BIG! I guess people didn’t like him illegally targeting President TRUMP. In any event, this jerk is finally GONE!”

Rep. Adriano Espaillat, the five-term Democrat who leads the Congressional Hispanic Caucus, also lost to a Mamdani-backed radical, democratic socialist Darializa Avila Chevalier.

Chevalier is a black identitarian who co-founded Columbia University Apartheid Divest, a radical coalition that posted “death to America” on social media earlier this year; stated, “We are Westerners fighting for the total eradication of Western civilization”; and asked for “community and instruction from militants in the Global South, who have been on the frontlines in the fight against tyranny and domination which undergird the imperialist world order.”

‘NEVER be a communist Country!’

In addition to her involvement with the international intifada, Chevalier helped advance the Columbia rape hoax and made headlines for advocating against all deportations, claiming, “Israel doesn’t exist,” and demanding a “world without prisons or police.” She was backed by Mamdani, the local Democratic Socialists of America chapter, and Justice Democrats PAC.

With 88% of the votes in, Chevalier leads Espaillat — who enjoyed endorsements from Hochul, Jeffries, and New York Attorney General Letitia James — 49.4% to 45.9%.

Espaillat endorsed Mamdani for mayor last year.

Claire Valdez, a Mamdani-backed democratic socialist member of the New York State Assembly, won her primary race for Democratic incumbent Rep. Nydia Velazquez’s seat, beating the Democratic establishment’s apparent preference and Velazquez’s desired successor, Brooklyn Borough President Antonio Reynoso.

Valdez campaigned on abolishing U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, “demilitar[izing] the border,” making it easier for illegal aliens to gain lawful permanent residence, defunding Israel, and super-charging the “Green New Deal.” Like the other radicals, she also enjoyed support from Sanders, Justice Democrats PAC, and the DSA.

Following the Mamdani-backed candidates’ clean sweep, Trump wrote, “America the Beautiful will NEVER be a communist Country!”

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

​Aipac, Dan goldman, Elizabeth warren, Hakeem jeffries, Zohran mamdani, Brad lander, Adriano espaillat, Democrats, Democratic socialist, New york, Primary, Election, Leftism, Israel, Claire valdez, Politics, Donald trump 

The Joe Biden years proved a hard truth: Lawfare works, and the right is far more vulnerable to it than the left.

Stacked judiciaries, activist allies, and unprincipled prosecutors all play their parts. But one factor matters above all others: money.

The left built a legal machine because it understood power. The right must build one because it understands what happens when power goes undefended.

Lawsuits are expensive. So are investigations, subpoenas, demand letters, bar complaints, defamation claims, and congressional inquiries. The left figured out that it could move political disputes into legal disputes and shift the fight to terrain overwhelmingly favorable to itself.

The cost is the punishment

The left has nearly conquered major law firm culture. Despite President Trump’s early executive orders aimed at changing that landscape, little has materially shifted. The left still enjoys a vast network of pro bono and donor-funded legal organizations ready to defend allies and pursue enemies.

Look no further than the nearly billion-dollar Southern Poverty Law Center, which has served as an investigative engine for government action against political opponents. That is one organ in a much larger ecosystem, and it dwarfs anything available on the right.

Similar efforts are already preparing for the possibility that Democrats win a House or Senate majority and then the presidency in 2028. If that happens, the right will return to the Biden years, with one key difference: The left views its earlier campaign as unfinished business. Its base believes Merrick Garland did not go far enough. Next time, they will.

The mere receipt of a congressional subpoena, demand letter, defamation claim, bar complaint, or federal investigative request can create legal bills that climb into the tens of thousands of dollars. Competent defense costs money, and the people most likely to become targets often cannot afford it.

The old model failed

During the Biden years, several noble efforts raised money for legal defense. But the old model had limits. A few senior-level individuals benefited from donor generosity. The money rarely reached the broader class of people caught in the machinery of political targeting.

The reason was simple: Lawyers are expensive.

I saw this firsthand. A friend of mine, a senior White House official in his early 30s who had not even been at the Capitol on January 6, received a subpoena from the January 6 committee and a not-so-friendly outreach from the Federal Bureau of Investigation. He was on his own.

Big lawyers charging big fees were representing bigger players. He received quotes he could never dream of affording just to deal with the investigation. For lack of a better term, he was pretty screwed.

RELATED: The left wants to put MAGA on the couch — then on trial

Photodisc/iStock/Getty Images

I represented him pro bono and handled the January 6 committee and a daylong deposition. Weeks of prep and review went into the matter. Even discounted representation from a firm with relevant expertise would easily have cost tens of thousands of dollars.

The story has a happy ending. My friend now works at the FBI.

But that is one person and one story. My organization, the Oversight Project, does what it can to represent allies across the country caught in the crosshairs of weaponized targeting. Far more must be done before the next wave arrives.

Build the bench

The right needs to rethink legal defense. We can no longer hope to collect vast sums and spend them on a handful of high-priced outside lawyers. A serious movement needs a dedicated defense team.

The fundamental problem is cost. The model cannot depend on hourly fees that crest above $1,000.

The left has built a corps of highly paid attorneys who handle matters ranging from major lawsuits to symbolic complaints over reflecting pools or the naming of the Kennedy Center. Its financiers will pay lawyers to sue constantly and defend constantly.

The right has the opposite problem. It must accept that reality and build the equivalent of a nonprofit public defense network.

That may seem unfair to right-leaning lawyers who deserve the million-dollar paydays available in the left-wing ecosystem. But a serious political movement must be able to sustain itself by defending itself.

The conservative ecosystem needs major structural reform. Policy shops, communications firms, advocacy groups, and convening organizations all have value. But the movement has too much of that compared with the infrastructure needed to gain and maintain power.

A legal defense unit is one of those structural necessities.

A ‘public defender’ for lawfare

What would a public-defender equivalent for political allies on the right look like?

The current model concentrates money in legal defense funds that serve a few high-profile defendants and a few expensive, well-credentialed lawyers. The better model would create permanent, full-time attorneys working on salary inside a nonprofit structure to defend more people at lower cost.

Some cases will still require outside counsel or a hybrid approach. But the goal should be to build, credential, and develop a specialized legal bench equipped to handle lawfare.

RELATED: Republicans took ICE hostage — then bragged about saving it

Paul Campbell/iStock/Getty Images

That bench should also reap the political rewards the so-called conservative legal movement has long monopolized: prominent appointments, elected office, and leadership positions. The days of prestigious Big Law careers converting automatically into prestigious political patronage should end unless they include acts of sacrifice and service to the broader cause.

Defense efforts should prioritize those most in need: ICE officers, mid-level political appointees, local officials, young staffers, activists, and others without meaningful financial resources.

The effort must also maintain integrity. Resources should go only to cases that can honestly be characterized as political weaponization. A legal-defense network cannot become a mechanism for defraying the costs of white-collar crime, contract solicitation, self-dealing, or financial misconduct.

This is not about shielding wrongdoing. It is about ensuring that actual ethical violations, not political speech or service to conservative causes, trigger professional consequences.

Change the incentives

When one side can impose costs without meaningful pushback, it will keep doing so. When the other side develops the institutional ability to absorb those costs and impose consequences in return, the incentive structure changes.

A public-defender-style legal network would create in-house capacity for rapid-response representation when subpoenas, bar complaints, investigations, or lawsuits strike. It would develop specialized expertise in constitutional, administrative, ethics, and First Amendment defenses tailored to political attacks. It would coordinate a nationwide roster of aligned counsel rather than leaving every target to negotiate alone with expensive firms.

Most important, it would operate on a charitable model that directs resources to the most vulnerable clients — the people who would otherwise be destroyed before the real fight even begins.

The left built a legal machine because it understood power. The right must build one because it understands what happens when power goes undefended.

​Big law, Democrats, Donors, Fbi, January 6, Justice department, Lawfare, Legal defense, Opinion & analysis, Pro bono, Public defender, Weaponization of government 

Film archives are pulling back the curtain to provide footage of an unfinished Orson Welles piece that he worked on for decades.

Spanish, French, Italian, and German sources are working together to allow the reconstruction of lost works that the “Citizen Kane” writer started production on in 1957.

‘Welles’ death in 1985 at age 70 meant he could not finish what was more than 30 years of work.’

Welles started the project in the 1950s in Mexico and continued to compile scenes and make changes in 1961 and 1969, Wellesnet reported. This footage was the start of Welles’ work on a film adaptation of “Don Quixote,” the 17th-century book that is widely credit with more than 500 million sales.

The deaths of multiple actors did not prevent Welles from continuing the project in 1972, then shifting to color footage, as he put together what is believed to be an experimental film format.

Although the movie is believed to have been nearly finished by 1982, Welles’ death in 1985 at age 70 meant he could not finish what was more than 30 years of work.

Now, reconstruction of the film is set to commence through the collaboration of film archives across Europe, which will release the footage to be compiled and overseen by author and filmmaker Esteve Riambau.

Riambau published a book about Welles in the year of his death, and the Spaniard has reportedly been petitioning for the last two years to get approvals of the archival footage.

RELATED: Full ‘Disclosure’: Steven Spielberg’s latest has no signs of intelligent life

Eduardo Parra/Europa Press/Getty Images

Mass amounts of film reel will be compiled from sources including Oja Kodar, Welles’ unwed partner at the time of his death. The Croatian actress won custody of the “Don Quixote” negatives in 2017, which consists of 50,000 meters of film.

From France, the Cinémathèque Française will contribute a reported 80 minutes’ worth of 35mm film that was actually screened at the Cannes Film Festival in the mid-1980s, according to citations in a Welles biography.

The Filmoteca Española in Spain has another reported 50,000 or so meters of 16mm film that it acquired in 1991, holding all the rights to the materials under the category of cultural and research purposes.

RELATED: Saving History

Central Press/Getty Images

The Filmmuseum München in Munich will contribute its own prints, negatives, tapes, videos, and other documents from Welles’ films, including items that are said to only be “referring” to the “Don Quixote” project.

The intention — for unknown reasons — is that there will be three versions of the film, which will be screened at festivals and archives on a nonprofit basis.

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

​Film, Orson welles, 1984, Don quixote, Entertainment 

The saddest number in the Reuters/Ipsos America 250 poll is not Donald Trump’s approval rating, which is bad enough. It is not the 77% of Americans who expect political violence to increase over the next five years. It is not even the 38% who doubt the United States will exist as a single country in 2276.

The saddest number is 30.

America reaches its 250th birthday not as a confident republic, but as an anxious one.

Only 30% of Americans say America is the greatest country in the world.

That doesn’t mean the rest hate the country. Polls can reveal what people are willing to say. They are notoriously bad at explaining why they say it. Forty-eight percent say America is one of many great countries. Thirteen percent say America is not great at all.

But the partisan split exposes the wound. Sixty-two percent of Republicans say America is the greatest country in the world. Only 11% of Democrats say the same. Among independents, the number is 20%.

We’re past mere disagreements over policy. People are no longer talking about the same country.

America approaches the 250th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence, and Americans can barely agree what the birthday means. Seventy percent say observing the anniversary matters. But only 34% say they are likely to attend or view an America 250 event. Fifty-five percent say they are unlikely. Sixty-three percent say the events have become too political.

Even the Fourth of July no longer escapes the country’s partisan sorting. Asked what best describes the holiday, 42% call it “a day where I celebrate the United States of America.” Among Republicans, 65% choose that answer. Among Democrats, only 24% do.

Twenty-four percent of Democrats and independents say they will not celebrate at all, compared with 8% of Republicans.

Flags tell the same story. Forty-one percent of Americans say they will display a flag or bunting outside their home on July Fourth. Sixty-four percent of Republicans will. Twenty-seven percent of Democrats will. Thirty-three percent of independents will.

A flag should not require a party registration. Neither should gratitude.

RELATED: Damning poll reveals what Democrats actually think of America ahead of its 250th birthday

Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images

The Reuters/Ipsos poll is not an outlier. Gallup reported in 2025 that American pride had fallen to the lowest point in its polling history. In 2001, 87% of Americans said they were extremely or very proud to be American. After 9/11, that figure rose to 90%. Last year, it fell to 58%.

The partisan gap was immense: 92% of Republicans, 36% of Democrats, and 53% of independents said they were extremely or very proud to be American. PRRI’s 2026 America 250 survey was even bleaker: 51% of Americans said they were extremely or very proud of being American, down from 82% in 2013.

This problem cannot be solved by scolding. Some Democrats should be ashamed of their reluctance to love the country that shelters them. Some Republicans should be ashamed of mistaking loyalty to a president for loyalty to the republic. But contempt will not repair our civic fabric.

The more painful truth is that the presidency has become a proxy for the country. When their side holds the White House, Americans find it easier to say the country is good. When the other side holds it, the flag begins to look like a campaign banner, the holiday like a rally, and the anniversary like propaganda.

A healthy polity would know the difference between a country and an administration. Presidents come and go. The country remains. The Declaration remains. The graves remain. The songs remain. The old promises and principles remain.

But Americans struggle to make that distinction.

Still, the Reuters/Ipsos poll contains signs of life. Seventy-five percent say they value elections even when their party loses. Seventy-three percent say democracy is the best form of government. Seventy percent say the Declaration’s 250th anniversary should be observed. Sixty-one percent say celebrating July Fourth should make them think about America’s founding beliefs and ideals.

RELATED: ‘This is the greatest country in the world’: Vietnam vet’s powerful remarks will leave you speechless

Ken Cedeno/AFP/Getty Images

Those are not the numbers of a dead country. They are the numbers of a seriously wounded one.

The distinction is vital because wounded countries can still heal. Dead ones obviously cannot. Americans have not forgotten the old civic language — at least not entirely. We still recognize liberty, democracy, the Declaration, the flag, and the Fourth. But those words now come carrying the stench of faction.

So America reaches its 250th birthday not as a confident republic, but as an anxious one. We still have fireworks, flags, cookouts, parades, and songs. Beneath the rituals sits a terrible question: Can a people remain one people when they no longer know how to be grateful for the inheritance?

Polls cannot answer that. They only show the wound.

A nation does not survive 250 years because its people are always proud of it. A nation survives when enough people love it through disappointment, correct it without despising it, and inherit it without pretending they invented it.

America doesn’t need citizens who pretend the wound is not there. It needs citizens who can see it clearly and love the country anyway.

​America 250, Donald trump, Democrats, Republicans, Approval ratings, Patriotism, Americans, Declaration of independence, Opinion & analysis