“A Time for Choosing:” U.S. Elections 2025
To my fellow Virginians and my fellow Americans who have a chance to make a positive difference on November 4, 2025, I wish to say: it is a time for choosing.
I performed my civic duty and voted in the Virginia gubernatorial elections. My son, a sophomore in college, was home on Fall break and joined me in stopping by the Republican booth to express moral support. Fortunately, an increasing number of young people are embracing patriotism and traditional values, as was revealed in the 2024 presidential elections. It is also true that Generation Z is far more polarized than previous generations: some espouse radical leftism, and others turn to conservatism, but there are very few moderates.
My family lives in Fairfax County, which, unlike traditional rural Virginia, is heavily populated by left-leaning residents, many of whom work in Washington, D.C. I find it shockingly frustrating that numerous otherwise reasonable people disregard facts and common sense when choosing radical left policies, which most of them do not actually support on a rational philosophical level. Such voters are not even driven by financial interest. They act out of Trump-derangement syndrome or virtue signaling. Some of them vote based on pure emotional attachment to a party that has now completely lost itself in a dystopian fusion of socialist and jihadist sentiments, as the disturbing tendencies in the mayoral races in New York and Minneapolis reveal.
My voting experience reminded me of Ronald Reagan’s legendary speech “A Time for Choosing,” which was aired exactly 61 years ago — on October 27, 1964. The speech is remarkably prescient; it addresses multiple problems our country is currently facing as a result of unsustainable leftist policies. Reagan warned:
Today, 37 cents out of every dollar earned in this country is the tax collector’s share, and yet our government continues to spend 17 million dollars a day more than the government takes in. We haven’t balanced our budget 28 out of the last 34 years. We’ve raised our debt limit three times in the last twelve months, and now our national debt is one and a half times bigger than all the combined debts of all the nations of the world.
Regarding the proliferation and growing power of unelected bureaucrats, Reagan remarked:
Federal employees — … [t]hese proliferating bureaus with their thousands of regulations have cost us many of our constitutional safeguards. How many of us realize that today federal agents can invade a man’s property without a warrant? They can impose a fine without a formal hearing, let alone a trial by jury? And they can seize and sell his property at auction to enforce the payment of that fine.
The speech concludes with sentiments that closely resemble President Trump’s principled defense of American ideals and Western civilization, both internationally and at home:
You and I have the courage to say to our enemies, “There is a price we will not pay.” “There is a point beyond which they must not advance.” And this — this is the meaning [of] “peace through strength.” Winston Churchill said: “The destiny of man is not measured by material computations. When great forces are on the move in the world, we learn we’re spirits — not animals.” And he said, “There’s something going on in time and space, and beyond time and space, which, whether we like it or not, spells duty.”
You and I have a rendezvous with destiny. We’ll preserve for our children this, the last best hope of man on earth, or we’ll sentence them to take the last step into a thousand years of darkness.
To my fellow Virginians and my fellow Americans who have a chance to make a positive difference on November 4, 2025, I wish to say: it is a time for choosing. As Charlie Kirk recently wrote: “America must choose: MAGA or Mamdani-ism.”
Nora D. Clinton is a Research Scholar at the Legal Insurrection Foundation. She was born and raised in Sofia, Bulgaria. She holds a PhD in Classics and has published extensively on ancient documents on stone. In 2020, she authored the popular memoir Quarantine Reflections Across Two Worlds. Nora is a co-founder of two partner charities dedicated to academic cooperation and American values. She lives in Northern Virginia with her husband and son.
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
One of the greatest speeches ever
A Marxist at Columbia gives a remarkably accurate summary of the situation across the world and in the United States
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KzwR9OA-Qto&t=732s
(turn on subtitles, select autotranslate to English)
Notable for being thoughtful and not angry, from the other side. A sympathetic description of the right, as a fact to be accepted and wondered about.
I watched 30 seconds of this pseudo-intellectual tripe in which the lecturer did nothing but name-drop five other famous commies and overuse the words “dialectic” and “criticism” at a glacial pace… then I switched off.
If I want to listen to word salad, I’ll watch a Kamala interview — they’re shorter, and they come with laugh tracks.
He’s a TDS guy, you’d have to say, but taking seriously what he liked to quote against Trump, the 2nd Preface to the 18th Brumiad, the last line being the zinger he loved for that
Of the writings dealing with the same subject at approximately the same time as mine, only two deserve notice: Victor Hugo’s Napoleon le Petit and Proudhon’s Coup d’Etat. Victor Hugo confines himself to bitter and witty invective against the responsible producer of the coup d’etat. The event itself appears in his work like a bolt from the blue. He sees in it only the violent act of a single individual. He does not notice that he makes this individual great instead of little by ascribing to him a personal power of initiative unparalleled in world history. Proudhon, for his part, seeks to represent the coup d’etat as the result of an antecedent historical development. Inadvertently, however, his historical construction of the coup d’etat becomes a historical apologia for its hero. Thus he falls into the error of our so-called objective historians. I, on the contrary, demonstrate how the class struggle in France created circumstances and relationships that made it possible for a grotesque mediocrity to play a hero’s part.
So he sees what’s getting support around the world and is interested now less in the grotesque mediocrity and more in the circumstances and relationships, and starts giving a very fair characterization of the right, i.e. one that the right would embrace.
He teases out a source in contradictions in Hegel, which perhaps are uninteresting, but not the point. A friendly characterization of the right by the left, is the point.
Can you say ‘pseudo-intellectual tripe’?
Why, yes, apparently you can.
At length.
Here’s the TDS Maxist’s evaluation of what’s going on in the world. Not identifying it as evil or the left as good, but just its being remarkable and a challenge to Hegel and Marx:
“So, we will address this question in these first two seminars this week through a reading of the early writings of the young Louis Altuser. We will continue, I hope, in November with some readings from the old Altuser as well as from Cogve. But you are probably wondering why I would link the Louis Altuser after the 1946-47 war with the Heritage Foundation in the United States. You couldn’t think of two more heterogeneous objects of reflection, eh. So, there are three reasons, three motivations. First, we are living in a Geological era. The spirit of our times is changing. In the United States, certainly perhaps in Europe, a shift in mentality is being felt, a clear, perceptible shift to the right. We are going through a tremendous historical transformation in real time. In the United States, a modern counter-revolution has shattered liberal institutions, the former bulwark of the neoliberal establishment. Political liberalism has proven itself completely powerless in the face of a surge of right-wing populism across the world. The bastions of liberalism in the United States are falling one after the other: the legal system, academia, the media, the Democratic Party, all swept away by a wave of nationalist populist sentiment. A conservative will to power is taking the lead. Far-right coalitions are on the rise. Of course, however, they are very unstable, likely to give way to a radically new political landscape, practically unpredictable at this stage, unknowable. We could be witnessing the rise of global fascism, the consolidation of ethnonationalist enclaves, the emergence of political democracy, or perhaps the birth of new alternatives of solidarity and cooperation. But one thing is certain: we have entered a new historical era. The interregnum everyone was talking about is coming to an end. Something new is about to emerge. And so it is a very Geological period.” (trans Google)
In other news Milei has won a landslide in Argentina!! Much to the great disappointment of the left 😂😂
After over sixty years, it remains a defining speech because it spoke of timeless values that are still as valid today as they were then. It was a brilliant call for limited government and stressed the importance of personal liberty.
Sadly, far too many on both sides of the political aisle are hell bent on achieving the opposite.
the rigged 2020 elections cost america more than just money…loss of power..loss of patriotic direction
throw the charlie kirk murder in there and you see how lefty wont stop ..until they are stopped
The Virginia election should be interesting. The Democrat candidate is avoiding all controversial issues such as boys in girl’s locker rooms.
Winsome Earl Sear is campaigning hard on the same issues that won for the GOP 4 years ago primarily parents’ control over local education.
Spanberger’s total message seems to be I am the Democrat candidate and Trump is evil. She won’t even withdraw her endorsement for the Dem AG candidate who sent messages wishing death on a GOP opponent and his young children.
Off year elections are often decided by turnout. Sears seems to be firing up the GOP base and rural areas in Virginia. Spanberger is just going through the motions. The Dems seem to feel that with Trump as President the liberal voters will be motivated to show up even though there are no national issues or candidates on the ballot.
I predict that the GOP will have a very high turnout. If the Dems match that turnout in Northern Virginia, they win easily but I just don’t see the energy. Hopefully Sears is able to translate her hard work and strong message into a narrow victory in Deep blue Virginia.