Lifestyle
Control issues? These two simple words could help
“The single best thing” Mel Robbins has ever done began with a stressful moment on her son’s prom night.
The bestselling author, former attorney and host of one of the world’s most popular podcasts is talking about her latest book, “The Let Them Theory: A Life-Changing Tool That Millions of People Can’t Stop Talking About ” (Hay House).
The book — which demystifies ancient concepts from Stoicism, Buddhism and Greek philosophy for modern, plugged-in, multitasking audiences — arose that evening, when Robbins says she was “being a complete control freak” and “micromanaging every detail.”
Shelf Help is a wellness column where we interview researchers, thinkers and writers about their latest books — all with the aim of learning how to live a more complete life.
She was agonizing over the teens’ lack of dinner plans and the fact that it was raining and they might show up to the dance soaked. She was on her phone and shouting to other parents and trying to take control of the situation when her daughter repeatedly insisted that she let the kids do it their way.
Let them grab tacos instead of going to a restaurant. Let them ruin their shoes in the rain. “It’s their prom, not yours,” she said to Robbins.
After “like the 11th time,” it finally sunk in, Robbins said, and she felt herself relax.
After sharing the experience with her 8.3 million Instagram followers, and then to her legions of loyal podcast subscribers, the enthusiastic response made it clear: She needed to write a book. In December 2024, so came “The Let Them Theory.” In an interview with Robbins, Oprah Winfrey called it “one of the best self-help books I’ve ever read.”
The Times spoke with Robbins about how the simple phrases “let them” and “let me” can help us feel less stressed and more empowered, and help us better navigate the challenges of dating, family relationships and social media.
This interview has been condensed and edited for clarity.
(Mel Robbins author of “The Let Them Theory” (Jenny Sherman))
How did you realize that “let them” could work beyond the prom?
I’m the kind of person that’s always wanted to know how to be more stoic and let go, yet I’ve never really been able to apply philosophy when I’m already emotionally triggered. The way it hit me was at the prom.
From that point forward, any time either life was frustrating me or my husband did something that was annoying, or my mother — I just started saying, “Let them,” and I noticed that it was immediate peace in a way that I had never experienced in my life.
All that I’m doing is reminding people of what they know to be true. The issue of trying to control things that aren’t yours to control, and how it just creates stress for you, this is the fundamental law of human beings that has been around since the beginning of time.
There are two parts to the theory: let them and let me. Why is it important to use both?
The second part is the more important part, because the second part is where you actually cue yourself and remind yourself that your life is your responsibility. When you say, “Let me,” you remind yourself that in any situation — and this is literally the teaching in “Man’s Search for Meaning,” [Holocaust survivor] Viktor Frankl’s work — the only thing that’s in your control is your response to what’s happening. You can control what you think about what’s happening. You get to choose what you do or don’t do in response. And you get to choose how you process your emotions. That’s what you get to control and that’s where your power is.
You say the hardest part of “let them” is learning to feel raw emotions without immediately reacting. A lot of times, we’re already reacting before even thinking “let them.” How do we do this?
I’m still working on it. I think you deserve a gold medal if you have the presence of mind to even say, “I would like to be less reactive moving forward.” Just being aware that it’s a skill and it would benefit you and bring more peace to your life, that is the first step. Part of the reason we’re so reactive is because we feel this sense that we’re trapped because we’ve given so much power to other people. Every time you say, “Let them,” even if it’s after the outburst, you’re still diffusing the emotion. What I have found in my own life, because [I’m] a very emotional person, is that the more I said it, the more you close the distance between the impulse to flip somebody off and actually saying, “Let them.” And you’ll get to a point where every time you say it, you’re literally using it as a tool to catch that nervous system or emotional response.
How can we use “The Let Them Theory” to prevent that compare-and-despair feeling we often get from social media?
It took me a long time to flip from this really insecure, scarcity mind-set, where I truly believed that if somebody else got something that I wanted, it meant they were winning and I lost. I didn’t understand the beauty of the world we live in, which is the things that you want in life — whether it’s success or it’s money or it’s happiness or it’s friendship — these things are in limitless supply.
It took me too long to understand that I’m not actually competing against somebody else in the game of life. I’m playing with them. If my friend is able to do [something], then it is evidence that I — with work and with time and with patience — can do that for myself too.
You start to realize that other people are not standing in your way; you’re doing that to yourself. You’re the one using comparison to stop yourself. You’re the one telling yourself it’s never going to happen. You’re the one telling yourself that you’re not good enough or that you can’t figure it out. When you stand in your own way, you miss out on the fact that literally every single person that has something that you’re interested in or that you want in life, they can actually show you how to get it. They show you what’s possible.
Let’s talk about “let them” as it relates to dating. You say let them show us who they are, how responsive they are. But given today’s digital landscape, how do we use “let them” and still be present enough to allow for flirtation and mystery in relationships?
It’s understanding what part of the dating cycle you’re personally in instead of constantly trying to guess what part of the cycle the other person is in. If you’re in that phase where you’re just meeting a ton of people, really staying focused on, “I’m cool with playing the field right now.” But there’s going to come a point in time where you’re no longer interested in that, or where you say to yourself, “I actually like this person and I don’t want them to see other people.”
When you recognize that you’re no longer in that space of wanting to be casual, the mistake that everybody makes is we now give power to the other person we’re interested in. We now become detectives trying to figure out when they feel the same way we do. That’s when you start chasing the potential. That’s when you start overanalyzing everything you do. That’s when you start to cling, and you start to get weird, and you start to pretend that things are still casual, but you’re secretly looking to see if their Hinge profile is still up.
That’s where you lose power. Because the better thing to do when you no longer just want to be in the casual space is to have a conversation. They could say no, but this is how you respect yourself.
It seems like saying “let them” and “let me” requires self-confidence and self-compassion. How do we get there?
You don’t get there by hoping it comes. You have to use the tools. One of the reasons why we don’t have these conversations — or even something more subtle, like you have a roommate or sister or a parent who’s just negative or passive-aggressive and you’ve put up with it for years — is it takes courage to say to yourself, “I don’t want to have to deal with this, so I’m going say, ‘Let them,’ because I’m going to stop trying to manage their mood.”
It takes a lot of compassion and grace for yourself. And then you do the “let me” part, which is: Let me remind myself that I get to choose how much time and energy I spend with this person.
You say this is especially hard with loved ones. Why is that?
These people have known you since you were born, and they have expectations about who you are and who you should be and what should happen in this family.
Think about family like a spiderweb. Any tap on the web reverberates through everybody. Anytime you start to let your family have their opinions, or let them have their fears, or let them have their expectations and let them have their concerns — which they have, because they’ve always had them about you — when you start saying “let them” and create space, you’re widening out the space between the webs. People don’t like that.
Then you say: Let me live my life in a way that makes me happy; let me pursue a career I really want to pursue; let me love the person that I love. Those decisions actually force other people to have to deal with their own expectations and opinions. But that doesn’t mean you have to change what you’re doing in order to appease them or meet their opinions.
How do we apply the theory without becoming passive or aloof or waiting for a big blowup?
One of the things I see from people is like, “I’m supposed to let people abuse me? I’m supposed to let them disrespect me?” I’m like, no, that’s probably happening right now. Because we, especially in families and with loved ones, explain away bad, disrespectful and abusive behavior.
(Maggie Chiang / For The Times)
If we are in a family system or a relationship where there has been a cycle of emotional abuse or a cycle of narcissism, the psychology of it is very, very challenging, because you keep holding on to the hope that someone’s going to change. We keep a fantasy alive in our heads versus learning how to live with the reality in front of us. You start to realize, every time you say, “Let them” and “Let me,” that the power isn’t in what other people are doing. The power is in your values and how you respond.
TAKEAWAYS
from “The Let Them Theory”
Lifestyle
What Did Valentines Day Cards Look Like 200 Years Ago?
In the late 19th century, few things telegraphed yearning like a card adorned with paper lace, gold foil and a couple exchanging a coy glance.
Today, such a card would evoke an eye roll.
The evolution of cards from the treacly confections of Victorian England to the quippy missives of today reflect both shifting design aesthetics and broader cultural customs around romance. As the borders of socially accepted relationships have shifted, so have the cards. Where once there was poetry, now there are drawings of pizzas.
“Greeting cards are a reflection of society,” said Carlos Llansó, executive director of the Greeting Card Association, a trade organization that represents roughly 4,000 independent card makers.
Valentine’s Day cards today are less formal, precious and prescribed, Mr. Llansó said, because our understanding of love has become more expansive.
Lottery and lace
Historians struggle to trace the exact origins of Valentine’s Day — some pinpoint the holiday to a curiously unromantic Pagan festival in Rome that involved goat slaughter and nudity — but they tend to agree that its association with romance was most likely established in England.
Early Valentine’s Day celebrations, dating as far back as the 17th century, were only loosely associated with love and often revolved around a lottery, said Sally Holloway, a cultural historian at the University of Warwick whose research focuses on love, marriage and courtship in 18th century England.
People would pull names out of a hat and select someone to be their Valentine from February through Easter.
“Your Valentine could be your neighbor, it could be a colleague, it could be a member of your family,” Dr. Holloway said. “You’d pin the name of the person who you’d been given as your Valentine to your clothes.” Matched pairs would exchange gifts, dance together and maybe write funny riddles or poems for each other.
A confluence of rapid social changes in the late 1700s and early 1800s, including the idealization of marrying for love rather than for economic advantage, Dr. Holloway said, helped to transform Valentine’s Day into a commercialized celebration of romantic love with a partner of your choosing.
Click on an image to look at the details.
This period dovetailed with the advent of new printing technologies and mass production, as well as an expansion of postal services, making Valentine’s Day cards a popular component of courtship rituals.
They presented, in many ways, a rare opportunity to directly convey desire within the confines of an otherwise buttoned-up Victorian society, where bold romantic declarations could be both risky and risqué. At the time, the responsibility of pursuing a marriage partner fell to men, and women tended to avoid overtly signaling affection.
But on Valentine’s Day, those rules were flipped.
“For one day a year, the language of love became the preserve of women,” Dr. Holloway said. And because it was considered a daring and even racy act to send a Valentine’s Day card, women “couldn’t put their name to it,” Dr. Holloway said. It is why so many cards from that era contain only vague, brief greetings, sometimes with a question mark at the end, adding a whiff of mystique.
The custom arrived in the United States in the mid-1800s, and crafty, entrepreneurial women fueled its commercialization.
Esther Howland — often referred to as the “mother of the American valentine” — is said to have first received a Valentine’s Day card from someone in Britain in 1847 and was inspired to create her own version.
“It was her idea to essentially create an assembly line of women putting together these really complex Valentines,” said Jamie Kwan, an assistant curator at the Cooper Hewitt, Smithsonian Design Museum. The cards were handmade, and Howland “imported materials from the U.K. and Germany to incorporate into these cards.”
Estimates suggest she sold between $75,000 and $100,000 worth of cards a year, roughly the equivalent of $3 million today.
Embracing new ideas of love
Over time, innovation around the craftsmanship of cards slowed, and it was their imagery that began to reflect a rapidly changing culture.
In 1910, Hallmark entered the industry and quickly became one of the largest and most recognizable card makers. The brand’s earliest Valentine’s Day cards relied heavily on the Victorian symbols of love from the previous century: hearts, Cupids and lovebirds.
By the 1930s, Hallmark started printing cards with boundary-pushing images of couples embracing and, by 1945, dancing.
“It used to be that we used a lot more traditional forms of creative crafts, like engraving, calligraphy and lace,” said Jen Walker, a vice president of Hallmark’s creative studios. Eventually, consumers found those aesthetic details less enticing.
“We are a consumer led brand — so we followed the consumer and what their needs were,” she added.
But Hallmark cards did not display Black couples until 1970, and the company did not introduce Valentine’s Day cards for those in same-sex relationships until 2008.
‘There isn’t even a heart on it’
In the mid 2000s, Valentine’s Day cards went through another major shift.
In 2013, Emily McDowell, a writer, product consultant and business adviser, designed a Valentine’s Day card to better reflect some of the difficult-to-categorize situationships she had been in.
The card had no illustrations. It was plain and white with text on the front that read: “I know we’re not, like, together or anything but it felt weird to just not say anything so I got you this card. It’s not a big deal. It doesn’t really mean anything. There isn’t even a heart on it. So basically it’s a card saying hi. Forget it.”
She put it up on Etsy, anticipating that only a handful of people would buy it.
Within days, she sold thousands, she said, and had to stop accepting new orders. The success prompted her to quit her job in advertising and start her namesake brand. The next year, she released another card that also instantly became a hit. It read: “There’s no one I’d rather lie in bed and look at my phone next to.”
Over the past 13 years, the company has sold millions of similarly witty cards. (Ms. McDowell left the company in 2022, and it was acquired by Hachette Publishing last year.) While Ms. McDowell’s early designs feel commonplace now, they were among the first in an industrywide move away from the stilted, saccharine Valentine’s Day cards of previous decades.
Many independent card designers today, Mr. Llansó explained, continue to tap into a consumer demand for plain-speaking, authentic cards. As a result, some of the more popular designs feature references to the state of the world. Others nod to cultural iconography, like Labubus or the enduring appeal of sweatpants. Not all of them are intended for romantic partners, and many can be used in other kinds of relationships.
Mitzi Sampson, the founder of the card company Mitzi Bitsy Spider, said her best-selling card was one that featured a grinning raccoon holding up a sign reading “you are TRASH to me.”
Ms. Sampson said she designed that card in 2023 for her sister “because she loves raccoons and because I love her.”
That, she added, is exactly what consumers want now. Not frills or grand proclamations, but an intimate knowledge of the receiver and “the simple recognition that says I know you, I see you, I choose you.”
Lifestyle
FBI Investigates Possible Vehicle of Interest in Nancy Guthrie Search
Nancy Guthrie Search
Feds Investigate Potential Vehicle of Interest
Published
Federal agents in Arizona may have snagged another crucial lead in the search for Nancy Guthrie … because cops were seen poking around a potential vehicle of interest at a Tucson restaurant near her home Friday night.
Around 11 PM local time Friday, reporters spotted a swarm of FBI agents and Pima County Sheriff’s deputies descending on a home near East Orange Grove Road and North First Avenue … but that wasn’t the only hotspot, as investigators were also zeroed in on a nearby Culver’s where a silver Range Rover SUV appeared to be a key focus.
VIDEO: FBI and PCSD officials covering Range Rover and apparent investigation continues. pic.twitter.com/Vm4weqJx2C
— KGUN 9 (@kgun9) February 14, 2026
@kgun9
According to online videos, law enforcement investigated the vehicle and eventually towed it away. Sources tell Fox News Digital one man was detained following a traffic stop involving the vehicle and confirmed the stop is connected to a search warrant served at a home near Nancy Guthrie’s house.
It’s unclear what investigators are specifically searching for within the vehicle, since they have taken measures to cover their inspection from the cameras with a yellow sheet. It’s worth noting this Culver’s location is just 2 miles away from the confirmed activity tied to the Nancy Guthrie investigation.
#BREAKING – FBI on scene at a Culver’s, very close to the scene related to the Nancy Guthrie investigation. We are still working to see if there’s any connection. Pima County deputies and Marana Police are here. One man has been detained here at the scene pic.twitter.com/S4fZlJGtpq
— Nick Ciletti (@NickCiletti) February 14, 2026
@NickCiletti
Fox News is reporting that at least three people have been detained Friday evening in connection with the investigation into the disappearance of Nancy Guthrie, according to a local law enforcement source.
A resident told News 4 Tucson that she witnessed three people being detained during this SWAT operation, and according to an unconfirmed report by a neighbor and outlets at the scene, another person had shot himself in the head during the interaction.
When we asked the Pima County Sheriff PIO about this detail, their response was “We cannot confirm anything at this time” — adhering to the FBI’s request to refrain from commenting further on the joint investigation.
NewsNation
As we previously reported, NewsNation‘s Brian Entin first reported that their crew got the video of cops walking out with a man and woman from a home which is about 2 miles from Nancy’s. There are reportedly about 2 dozen officers on the scene … including FBI agents.
While authorities are staying mum on confirming any details, reporters on the scene are covering this operation bit-by-bit.
Story developing …
Lifestyle
When Posting Becomes Its Own Style of Politics
A growing number of conservative influencers are making content in which they claim to uncover fraud.
In December, the YouTuber Nick Shirley uploaded a video purporting to expose a scheme led by Somali refugees in Minneapolis.
It caught the attention of Vice President JD Vance, who shared the video online. Soon after, ICE was deployed to the city.
The video was inspiring to Amy Reichert, a 58-year-old San Diego resident, who started making her own videos claiming a similar scheme was afoot in her city.
She is one of many creators channeling populist rage and elite resentment into a style of posting.
It’s a mode of practicing politics some are calling “slopulism.”
Ms. Reichert doesn’t like to call herself a right-wing influencer.
She has a sizable following on social media (some 60,000 followers on X, and 80,000 on Instagram), where she posts videos of herself talking about what in her view is corruption in the Democratic-leaning city government of San Diego, usually while wearing rose-tinted aviator sunglasses.
Since the beginning of this year, Ms. Reichert, a licensed private investigator, has been making content that highlights what she thinks is a pattern of taxpayer fraud in her city’s child care centers. It’s a pivot she has made since watching the video by Mr. Shirley, the 23-year-old MAGA YouTuber, in which he claimed to have uncovered widespread fraud by a network of Somali Americans operating child care centers.
“I thought, How can I, as a private investigator and private citizen, do what Nick did in Minnesota?” Ms. Reichert said. “We are drowning in fraud in California.”
After just a few hours of researching state databases in early January, Ms. Reichert began to post screenshots on X of documents she claimed belonged to “ghost” day care centers in San Diego County. The posts spread widely. Soon, she was on television to discuss her work with the Fox News host Jesse Watters, and President Trump was sharing a clip of the segment on his Truth Social platform.
Then Ms. Reichert began making videos, sometimes standing outside the day care centers in question, in which she repeated the allegations while presenting little proof of wrongdoing. But her message — that foul play was taking place — was clear.
One video Ms. Reichert posted was quickly clipped and reshared on X by right-wing news aggregators. It earned close to half a million views — essentially a viral moment for a creator of Ms. Reichert’s stature.
She was also happy to see that Mr. Shirley, whose work Mr. Vance suggested was more consequential than Pulitzer Prize-winning journalism, began to follow Ms. Reichert on X.
“Quite amazing, these past few weeks,” Ms. Reichert said.
Ms. Reichert is one among many conservative content creators who have become the internet’s busiest sleuths in recent weeks. They create videos that are light on evidence and traditional journalistic techniques but are filled with sinister-sounding claims that neatly align with the Trump administration’s priorities.
Armed with digital cameras and publicly available documents, they claim to be documenting patterns of elite corruption, taxpayer fraud, abuse of power and government waste across the country, hoping their posts and videos will cross into the feeds of elected officials, as Mr. Shirley’s did.
Some of the biggest names in MAGA media have fanned out across the country to make this content.
The influencer Cam Higby claimed to have uncovered a nearly identical case of fraud, undertaken once again by Somali migrants, in Washington State.
Benny Johnson, a creator with close ties to the Trump administration, set out looking for fraud within state-run homeless programs and misspent Covid relief funds in California.
On YouTube, Tyler Oliveira, a 26-year-old creator with over eight million subscribers, posted videos claiming to have uncovered a “welfare-addicted” township in upstate New York.
Even Dr. Mehmet Oz, a Trump administration official, has made a video in which he claims a $3.5 billion medical fraud operation is happening in Los Angeles.
What Is ‘Slopulism,’ Exactly?
It’s a novel form of political behavior that has left many political commentators and researchers struggling to articulate what it is. Though many are quick to say what it’s not: investigative journalism. It is also, experts say, more than misinformation or disinformation, terms that fail to capture the nature of these misleading posts and how they are filtering up into the highest echelons of government.
Curt Mills, the executive director of The American Conservative magazine, called it “MAGA-muzak.”
Kate Starbird, a researcher at the University of Washington who studies online spaces and extreme politics, has called it “participatory propaganda.”
“Try ‘entrepreneurial opportunism,’” said A.J. Bauer, an assistant professor of journalism at the University of Alabama with a focus on right-wing groups.
“The real novelty here is the synchronization between the movement, the party and the state — but there isn’t a buzzword yet,” Mr. Bauer added.
The sameness of this politicized content, created overwhelmingly by figures orbiting the conservative cultural ecosystem, is, to many on the right and the left, not unlike digital “slop.” The term, which refers to low-quality, low-information, A.I.-generated content, has gradually expanded to more generally describe the gruel-like mixture of online ideas, images and memes flooding our feeds.
That’s how you get another term, “slopulism,” which has of late become a buzzword with X users and Substackers, many associated with the right, during the course of Trump’s second term.
Slopulism, as described by these commentators, is a kind of political post that elides concrete political concerns in favor of the fast-acting satisfactions of social media rage and culture-war jargon. It’s a political tendency that offers followers emotional gratification through mindless, performative gestures online.
Many of the content creators, like Ms. Reichert, were unfamiliar with the terms slop or slopulism.
These days, on platforms like X, slopulism is a pejorative label often applied to posts by politicians and pundits alike, anyone who shares out lowest-common-denominator ideas designed to appeal to loyal political bases.
On the right, this can look like gleeful cruelty, sadistic memes, posts that “own the libs” or sensationalized claims about fraud and conspiracy. On the left, it could be social justice messaging, online identity politics or populist economic proposals to, say, tax the rich.
The new wave of fraud-themed content, made by creators like Mr. Shirley, invokes familiar themes of populist rage and elite resentment. It seems to be the latest evolution in a culture where posting is a primary method of practicing politics — except these posts appear to be made not only to get in on a trending wave, but also to provoke policy action.
“Slopulism works by harnessing the excitement and vibe of a moment,” said Neema Parvini, a senior fellow at the University of Buckingham in England who is considered to have popularized the term. He believes it’s a way for populist leaders, like Mr. Trump, to keep their bases content.
“It convinces supporters to invest their emotions in story lines rather than the substantive politics or structure behind it,” he said. “It doesn’t lead anywhere, it’s just entertainment.”
‘Building for Years’
Renaming the Gulf of Mexico. The annexation of Greenland. A proposal to turn Gaza into a glittering resort town. All of these ideas found their potency in the form of viral content, circulated by those on the right, before they were fully embraced by the Trump administration. The online right podcaster Alex Kaschuta called this “the vibes-based international order.”
“This dynamic has been building for years,” said Dr. Starbird, the extremism researcher. “But in the second Trump administration, this relationship is more direct, with policies clearly being motivated, shaped and justified by and through digital content creation.”
As with most viral content, the ideas emerging from these online environs can be fleeting. Mr. Mills, of The American Conservative, described the administration’s recent policy priorities as having a “flavor of the month” feel.
Some on the right pushed back against the idea that slopulism, or any dynamic like it, is driving the administration’s actions.
“It’s a misread of the situation,” said Jesse Arm, vice president of external affairs at the Manhattan Institute, a conservative think tank. He pointed out that something like the Greenland annexation, which is often described as meme policy, could be traced to “far more serious conversations” between the president and his advisers as far back as 2019.
“I don’t think President Trump is hyper-invested in what’s happening online,” he said. “His administration is paying attention to what happens online, sure, but only in the sense that this is the main arena to gauge policy discourse.”
In a statement, Abigail Jackson, a White House spokeswoman, said Mr. Trump “always receives feedback and input from a variety of sources before making a decision that is in the best interest of the American people.”
Some see this as a positive style of governance, Mr. Mills said, adding, “It’s hyper-democratic in some ways: ‘Let’s look online and see what’s popular.’”
The content can have political consequences, but Mr. Bauer, the University of Alabama journalism professor, said he did not view its creation as a sincere political effort. Many of the creators he has observed making these videos aren’t highly ideological figures or even MAGA die-hards.
“They see an opportunity,” he said. “These are people that aspire to be famous online. They see that there’s a lot of desire and demand for right-wing content. And they are motivated by things like money and attention.”
Ms. Reichert said that the amount of money generated from her posts was “pathetically low,” but declined to offer further details.
Most of the fraud videos published in recent weeks resemble Mr. Shirley’s in both form and content. Almost always, the person suspected of wrongdoing is an immigrant or a member of a minority group, the most common ethnic category being that of Somali refugees, as in Mr. Shirley’s video about Minnesota.
While some, like Ms. Reichert, say they are inspired by Mr. Shirley, others deny any influence.
Until this January, David Khait, a conservative content creator with over 100,000 subscribers on YouTube, posted mostly man-on-the-street debates and interviews, a confrontational content style popularized by the conservative activist Charlie Kirk, who was assassinated in September. But recently, he has begun making videos about what he says is voter fraud in Fulton County, Georgia.
“There’s been no pivot here,” Mr. Khait, 26, wrote in a text message. “Call my content what it is: confronting institutional failure head-on because that’s what’s staring Americans in the face.”
The slopulist impulse may be most acute on the right at the moment — owing to the Republican control of the federal government — but some have argued this mode of online political engagement has its origins across the aisle.
Sean Monahan, the founder of the trend forecasting group K-Hole, has traced it back to the rise of the so-called “dirtbag left,” an online set of leftists who came to prominence during Bernie Sanders’s presidential run in 2016.
“It was a style of politics presented to younger, left-wing consumers, things like raising taxes on billionaires or modern monetary theory or controls on rent,” Mr. Monahan said. “There was a presumption that you could lay out a policy goal with no political trade-offs, no constituencies to navigate and no downsides.”
One recent example of slopulism on the left, he said, might be the mayoral campaign of Zohran Mamdani, whose platform included a promise to freeze the rent.
“He’s a little bit slopulist,” Mr. Monahan said of Mr. Mamdani, adding, “This is the feel-good model of politics where the mechanics are less important than taking credit and celebrating.”
For some, it is likely to be one of the more rewarding ways to practice politics in modern-day America.
“I don’t want to live a life of quiet desperation,” Ms. Reichert said.
Mr. Shirley, in recent days, has been staying the course, too. While he has moved on from Minnesota, he’s still making videos about fraud aimed at immigrant-operated day care centers. But this time he’s in California and has a new collaborator by his side: Ms. Reichert.
Last month, she posted a photograph of herself and Mr. Shirley on X that has been viewed 1.4 million times. Using a flame emoji, she wrote: “California, here we come!”
-
Politics1 week agoWhite House says murder rate plummeted to lowest level since 1900 under Trump administration
-
Alabama1 week agoGeneva’s Kiera Howell, 16, auditions for ‘American Idol’ season 24
-
San Francisco, CA1 week agoExclusive | Super Bowl 2026: Guide to the hottest events, concerts and parties happening in San Francisco
-
Ohio1 week agoOhio town launching treasure hunt for $10K worth of gold, jewelry
-
Culture1 week agoIs Emily Brontë’s ‘Wuthering Heights’ Actually the Greatest Love Story of All Time?
-
News1 week agoThe Long Goodbye: A California Couple Self-Deports to Mexico
-
Science1 week agoVideo: Rare Giant Phantom Jelly Spotted in Deep Waters Near Argentina
-
Culture1 week agoVideo: Farewell, Pocket Books