More than a dozen Democratic senators voted with Republicans on Monday to confirm President Donald Trump’s latest nominee, himself once a Republican member of the upper chamber.
The Senate confirmed David Perdue of Georgia to become Trump’s ambassador to China, an all-important post given the significance of trade and national security issues with the world’s second-largest economy. The vote was 64-27 in favor of cloture, which requires 60 votes.
In 2022, Trump backed Perdue in his attempt to primary incumbent Gov. Brian Kemp (R), but he wasn’t successful.
Meanwhile, the Democratic Party is continuing to lose support among one of its key voter blocs, young people, according to a new survey.
Brett Cooper, who hosts “The Brett Cooper Show,” believes that many people of her generation believe that the Democratic Party no longer reflects their values.
“Democrats are completely out of touch with their voter base,” she said during an appearance on “Fox & Friends.” “They are aging out. We do not want them in Congress anymore on the left and the right.”
She highlighted the aging senators and representatives, including Sen. Dick Durbin who announced his retirement last week, as examples.
“You see members of Congress like Dick [Durbin] who are so old,” she said. “Young people feel unrepresented, and they are fed up.”
She believes the Democrats are in a no-win situation as a tug-of-war unfolds between those on the radical left and those in the center.
“If they don’t like Donald Trump, then they’re angry that their representatives are not pushing back enough. If they are more common sense in the center, they’re angry with how radical they’ve gotten. They just feel completely left alone,” the host said.
A poll that was just released by the Harvard Kennedy School’s Institute of Politics backs her claims.
The poll showed that approval of congressional Democrats among young voters cratered to 23 percent, down from 42 percent in early 2017.
Republicans do slightly better with an approval of 29 percent, which is higher than in recent years among a demographic that does not traditionally vote Republican.
President Donald Trump’s approval rating in the poll is at 31 percent, which is a virtual tie with his rating during his first term.
Cooper believes that someone like New York Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez may have a chance with new voters.
“I think that they are going to have to change course. We will see if that works,” Cooper said. “We’ll see if AOC resonates with as many people as they’re hoping.”
“It is obviously an emotional issue, and they know that in order to reach Gen Z, I mean, historically, in the past, it has been through emotion, which is why you’re seeing these selfie videos, these rallying cries,” she said.
“The tactics that they have been able to use in the past to reach my generation, through social media, using big, broad, emotionally charged language, that might not work,” she said. “They need to listen to their voters for once and actually see how they’re responding.”
If the Democrats are looking for new leadership, polls show that Ocasio-Cortez may be the one they look to.
A survey by Data for Progress indicates that the left-wing New Yorker is ahead of Schumer by 19 points in a hypothetical 2028 Democratic primary contest. Although Schumer still retains his title as leader of his party in the upper chamber, his popularity among the party’s base appears to be rapidly declining.
Between March 26 and 31, 767 likely Democratic primary voters in New York were asked whom they would support in a hypothetical primary matchup between Schumer and Ocasio-Cortez. The results were striking: 55% backed Ocasio-Cortez, while only 36% chose Schumer.
The findings were not anomalies. The poll revealed that Schumer had the highest disapproval rating among all Democratic figures tested, whereas Ocasio-Cortez ranked among the most popular, trailing only Bernie Sanders (I-VT), Kamala Harris, and Elizabeth Warren (D-MA).
One sentence.
That’s all it took.
“I’ll take a pickax to it if I have to.”
When Kerry Kennedy — daughter of Robert F. Kennedy and niece of John F. Kennedy — delivered those words, Washington felt the aftershock almost instantly.
What followed wasn’t just outrage or applause. It was something deeper and more combustible: a renewed national argument about power, memory, and who gets to define the Kennedy legacy in modern America.
The John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts has long been treated as sacred ground — a space meant to celebrate art, creativity, and unity beyond ideology. Named in honor of JFK, the Center has traditionally stood apart from the partisan battles that consume Washington.
That’s why recent controversy surrounding the use — and interpretation — of the Kennedy name at the institution has struck such a nerve.
Critics argue that decisions involving the Kennedy Center risk politicizing a national cultural landmark and diluting the legacy of a family whose name is inseparable from American history. Supporters counter that silence is no longer neutral — and that defending the Kennedy legacy requires confrontation, not quiet reverence.
Into that tension stepped Kerry Kennedy.
This wasn’t an offhand comment from a pundit or protester. Kerry Kennedy carries a surname that still echoes with ideals of service, sacrifice, and unfinished promise. Her work as a human rights advocate has often placed her in the center of moral and political debates — but this time, the conflict was personal.
Her statement was read by many as a line in the sand:
a declaration that the Kennedy name cannot be invoked without accountability.
Supporters praised her bluntness, calling it long overdue — a refusal to allow the family legacy to be used in ways they believe betray its values.
Opponents accused her of inflaming division, arguing that such rhetoric risks turning shared national heritage into a partisan weapon.
Either way, the reaction was immediate — and intense.
More than half a century after JFK’s assassination, the Kennedy name still carries extraordinary weight. It represents hope to some. Hypocrisy to others. And to many, it remains a mirror reflecting America’s unresolved struggles over power, justice, and identity.
What this moment has made clear is that the legacy is not settled history. It is living, disputed, and emotionally charged.
And when a Kennedy herself suggests tearing something down — even symbolically — it forces the country to ask uncomfortable questions:
Who owns history?
Who decides what a name stands for?
And when does preservation become distortion?
This isn’t just about a building or a plaque. It’s about authority — moral, cultural, and historical. It’s about whether national institutions can ever truly stand above politics, or whether they inevitably become battlegrounds for meaning.
Insiders say the debate has only begun.
Cultural leaders are weighing in.
Political figures are choosing sides.
And the Kennedy family’s internal divisions are once again playing out on a public stage.
One thing is certain: the argument Kerry Kennedy reignited isn’t going away quietly.
Love it or loathe it, the Kennedy legacy still has the rare ability to stop the country mid-sentence and force a reckoning.
And with emotions rising, language sharpening, and history itself on trial, this latest showdown may become one of the most defining cultural clashes in years.
