Jennifer Rubin posted her first editorial as editor-in-chief of The Contrarian.
The Contrarian will be a central hub for unvarnished, unbowed, and uncompromising reported opinion and analysis that exists in opposition to the authoritarian threat. Our pre-election warnings that Donald Trump posed an unprecedented threat to our democracy were often treated as alarmist. However, the election of an openly authoritarian figure who traffics in conspiracies, lies, unconstitutional schemes and un-American notions, has moved the United States to an inflection point. The future of our democracy, and what Lincoln called “the last best hope of earth” hangs in the balance. And yet corporate and billionaire media and too many in the political establishment persist in downplaying the threat and seeking to accommodate Trump and his radical agenda. We refuse to follow the herd.
Unlike most corporate or billionaire media, The Contrarian will not offer Trump the benefit of the doubt. We will not normalize him. We will not engage in false equivalence. We will not excuse enablers in the media, government or business. We will not infantilize his supporters nor treat them as victims; we will confront them with the consequences of their presidential pick.
Trump is no ordinary politician and will be no ordinary president so the response must be extraordinary. His insane pronouncements—be it a premature and utterly false declaration that the New Orleans terrorist had just come over the border or a threat to annex the Panama Canal and Greenland—cannot be ignored or treated as hyperbole. They reveal a warped mind and dangerous agenda that would take America down the road of other authoritarian states such as Viktor Orbán’s Hungary.
We will not be distracted by shiny objects or phony scandals. Instead, we will call out Trump and his fellow bad actors’ dangerous, unconstitutional and immoral actions and vile rhetoric. We will put them in the context of American history and international authoritarian movements. We will call on a range of experts from psychology, sociology, political science, international relations and other fields to inform the discussion and analysis.
We do not call Trump a dictator—yet. That is because a conscientious pro-democracy movement determined to expose, denounce and counteract Trump’s authoritarian impulses has time to act, to preserve our pluralistic democracy. The Contrarian seeks to be in the vanguard of that effort. To that end, we will summon the opponents of authoritarianism from all walks of life—the media, the arts, government, academia, business, sports, culture, labor and civil society—to join a grand coalition, a national front for freedom, decency, democracy, justice, self-determination, and diversity.
The urgency of the task before us cannot be overstated. We have already entered the era of oligarchy—rule by a narrow clique of powerful men (almost exclusively men). We have little doubt that billionaires will dominate the Trump regime, shape policy, engage in massive self-dealing, and seek to quash dissent and competition in government and the private sector. As believers in free markets subject to reasonable regulation and economic opportunity for all, we recognize this is a threat not only to our democracy but to our dynamic, vibrant economy that remains the envy of the world.
Although the task before us is deadly serious, we emphatically believe that joy, humor, and most of all community are essential to preserving a free people. We will offer all three. We also realize the danger of preaching to the choir and failing to reach outside our bubble. We will offer a platform that includes multi-generational, fresh voices from whatever venue or field who can contribute to our endeavor. We are building a community of passionate defenders of democracy who are fed up with equivocation, timidity, and resignation.
We could not be more excited to begin this journey. Our irreverence, candor and refusal to pull punches may offend establishment politicians, campaign insiders, and complicit media. We hope so. Throughout all our work, we pledge to live up to our credo: Not Owned by Anybody.

This:
and this:
are arguably at odds. The shiny objects are often the crazy, weird stuff Trump says. If you’re devoted to assiduously covering all of that, you’ll drown in it, while in the meantime much more important stuff is happening while you just keep writing “Trump is crazy and not normal” over and over.
LikeLike
Yes arguably. Most of his shiny objects actually serve a purpose beyond that of distraction. Is it crazy to say windmills cause cancer? Sure. But not if your goal is to market fossil fuels instead of wind power to a segment of the population that is not critical – indeed adoring – of you. Is it crazy to talk about annexing Greenland and Canada? Sure. But not if you’re trying to normalize Putin’s expansionist predilections and secure future trade routes. Besides, he’s a true moron. He doesn’t have near the capacity to dream up this kind of “crazy haphazard” material, the Kremlin does. They’re running the same script across the planet right now, most recently and effectively in Romania.
LikeLike
My only quibble there would be to change “serve a purpose” to “have an effect.” I can never get comfortable with the idea that there is a method to Trump’s madness.
LikeLike
I figure the professional journalists have the capacity to cover the intricacies of the front-page and investigative stories, write columns, AND cover what stuff you think they’ll drown in. WE ARE DROWNING with the normalization of trump’s behaviors, disdain, and out-of-nowhere pronouncements.
How many voters of his knew they were voting for MUSK and KENNEDY and the other unfit or inexperienced cabinet picks? How many knew Greenland was on the table*
Imagine Biden, Obama, Bush II, Clinton, Bush I, Carter, go back as far as you want – imagine them speaking the same lies, comments, more lies and intentional misinformation (fires just the latest)… It would be front page news.
Sarah Palin makes one comment and ad about guns and she’s hammered in the press and party. That wouldn’t even be covered.
We may never see Walter Cronkite again, but we deserve major analysis and criticism of what may seem to most “oh, he doesn’t mean that” or “he would never do that” while millions are caught in the crossfire.
LikeLike
Finally, can’t wait. Good luck to the Contrarian. I’ll spread the word to my like minded friends.
LikeLike
I have been waiting for objective news and commentary and not equivocation, normalizing of authoritarian behavior, and stupid polls, which is not news but created by media to shape public opinion and make money. If Ms. Ruben is interested; I would like to contribute my prose to her Substack. The appellation of my essay is “A Free Press If We Can Keep It!” It’s an apt piece that crushes the pusillanimous behavior of the billionaire owners of the press and other important actors involved in weakening our constitutional guarantee of a free press, such as George Stephanopoulos and Mika and Joe Scarborough. Please let me know if you are interested. I would like to do my part in bringing down these scums of the Earth; to paraphrase from Arthur Koestler.
LikeLike
I don’t get the naysayers on here. It feels as if they are offering a false equivalency that doesn’t exist by completely mischaracterizing what Rubin is saying in order to distract from Rubin’s important message and undermine her.
I should think most folks on here would recognize the playbook, because the anti-public school propaganda does the same thing to Diane Ravitch in order to undermine her, frequently reducing her fact-based, carefully researched, complex criticism of the privatization movement and her honest appraisal of the importance and flaws of public education into unimportant pro-union rhetoric from an advocate who hates charter schools and says public schools are perfect.
It is a fact that the news media had no difficulty at all writing 500+ stories about Biden’s single horrific debate performance – making Biden’s supposedly cognitive vegetable state a NECESSARY feature of every single story about him, while ALSO being able to write another 500 or 1,000 stories about Biden’s many disastrous policy “failures” – the Afghanistan withdrawal, the horrible job Biden did with the economy, the nightmare of his personal failures in the mideast and Ukraine. And if the liberal media was, in 2024, not yet willing to totally bend the knee to Trump by blatantly lying, they were certainly embracing that the “news that’s fit to print” is 1,000 stories about what “people think” instead of the same number of stories about what reality is (newsflash: all the regular people whose voices are “newsworthy” think the economy is a disaster and Biden is a vegetable who ruined Trump’s perfect economy, so the so-called liberal media knew that the news fit to print was what people thought, even if those people already knew what they thought!)
I am sure Rubin’s Contrarian will not follow the NYT rulebook in which NYT editors and reporters ask: Does the public already know these negative things about Trump? Yes, we reported it in one story and it’s no longer newsworthy and must not be mentioned in any further news stories. Does the public already know these negative thing about Biden? Yes, we reported these Biden disasters in 1,000 stories and that makes it EXTRA newsworthy, because the public already knows about it, so we must amplify that negative news that undermines Biden in every story instead of reporting an accurate picture! Is the person espousing a pro-Trump view? yes, then the person must be presented as a very, very good person who just wants to make America great again and cares about people. Is the person a supporter of Kamala or Biden? Then they must be presented as an elitist who is out of touch and only cares about identity politics and doesn’t care about working Americans one bit.
(FYI, the NYT obviously has this same rulebook for their education reporters. Is the view pro-privatization? Then the person saying it must be presented as a regular mom who just cares about every kid getting a good education. Is the view critical of the privatization movement or supportive of public schools? Then the speaker must be presented as rabidly pro-union and summed up as simply “anti-charter” with no need to explain why since these anti-charter folks don’t care about public school kids the way the privatizers do)
“We are building a community of passionate defenders of democracy who are fed up with equivocation, timidity, and resignation.
We could not be more excited to begin this journey. Our irreverence, candor and refusal to pull punches may offend establishment politicians, campaign insiders, and complicit media. We hope so.“
I have no idea if Rubin’s venture will have any impact, but I do know that it will not have the NEGATIVE impact of the complicit media, which is on bended knee to normalize authoritarianism and fascism and lies in the name of “fair and balanced” reporting. The right wing media has always needed the imprimatur of the so-called liberal media to make their lying right wing narratives credible to most of the public. And since 2021, the so-called liberal media has been the Susan Collins of journalism, “tut tut, look at what Trump did, we will shake our finger vigorously in one editorial and then pretend it never happened and then enable him to do more of the same while we pile onto Biden, the worst president ever.”
If you think Susan Collins is a strong and fierce Trump critic whose been a non-stop fighter for democracy, then you probably love the NYT, too. They share the same values.
LikeLike
Bravo!! Thank you!
LikeLike
how and when I can sign up for the paper?
LikeLike
Go to the App called Substack. The Contrarian is there. Go to this link to subscribe.
https://open.substack.com/pub/contrarian/p/i-have-resigned-from-the-washington?r=rls8&utm_medium=ios
LikeLike
And yet more then half of American voters voted for Trump. So the real question is why and what did the Democrats do wrong? I hope ALL truth comes out, because it is getting to the point we do not know what to believe.
LikeLike
“And yet more then half of American voters voted for Trump.”
NO, no, no, a thousand times no! Not even half of those who voted voted for the tRump.
So the real question is: How the hell can you be so ignorant to not know that?
Perhaps because you are not a real person? Perhaps you are a product of Fake Smarts.
LikeLike
”Share this” ought to include BlueSky and possibly not Twitter/X.
LikeLike
Where can I find the list of charter schools that have closed suddenly or cheated tax payers out of money?
I want to answer those who believe charter schools are the answer to solve American education.
Frances Frakes frfrakes4211@gmail.com
LikeLike
https://networkforpubliceducation.org/charter-scandals/
NPE has been tracking charter scandals and stories for several years. It is compelling and the facts are the facts. Therefore, a very good artifact to take to State committee hearings on charter expansion and to drop off in legislators’ offices!
LikeLike
This is for California. Other states might have similar lists, but don’t bet on it. A lot of states don’t have the same level of transparency.
https://www.cde.ca.gov/sp/ch/csclosurerules.asp
LikeLike
A peek at the list of writers planning to contribute to The Contrarian reveals no “contrarians” among ’em! (When has Jennifer Rubin ever pushed back against establishment/concensus narratives?) Jennifer Rubin is definitely a conservative that liberals can love, if only because she’s a Never Trumper.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Rubin and Eisenhower have lined up a very impressive group of writers. Who knows the Constitution and the law more than Laurence Tribe? None of these writers will self-censor. I have subscribed.
LikeLike
Laurence Tribe knows the Constitution and how to use its words to defend those with wealth and power. Do you believe that corporations should enjoy all the civil rights that living, breathing citizens have? Laurence Tribe, the attorney that represented corporation after corporation after corporation does! Tribe was never a contrarian! Now in his dotage, Laurence Tribe is typical of old guard establishment figures who’ve outstayed their welcome on the political stage.
LikeLike
I subscribed, too! Thank you for the heads up.
Part of the Orwellian takeover of our discourse is exemplified in the comment above:
“When has Jennifer Rubin ever pushed back against establishment/consensus narratives?”
What does this even mean? It seems as if TRUTH is now reduced to being characterized as an “establishment/consensus narrative” and anyone who doesn’t push back on an “establishment narrative” (i.e. one that Democrats from Pelosi to AOC recognize as true) is suspect.
The problem is that the subtext to all these kinds of criticisms – whether those amplifying them know it or not — is that it supports the false right wing narrative that the people who should not be trusted are those who CRITICIZE the Republicans! Because criticism of Republicans means you are part of a never-defined (but very bad), amorphous “establishment” (also known as “elites”).
Orwellian. The definition of “the establishment” has become anyone who criticizes Trump and the Republicans, the right wing political party that has wielded enormous power for decades, even when the Dems briefly had a tenuous majority. I guess opposing authoritarianism instead of scapegoating Democrats for all the evils in this country is now something that makes you part of an amorphous evil “establishment” that just happens to exclude right wing Republicans who have extraordinary power.
Had “the establishment” been properly defined as the right wing billionaires who control so many media institutions, the Supreme Court, Congress, etc., the comment above would have been supportive of Rubin, but instead it makes her views not worthy of even being read. Just say “Rubin won’t go against the (undefined, but very bad) establishment” and there is no need to even consider the truth she tells. Falsely accuse Rubin of “not being a contrarian” and dismiss her out of hand.
Do you know who is “contrarian” by the definition suggested by Rubin’s critic above? Joe Manchin. Kyrsten Sinema. Those “contrarians” always stand up to “the establishment” that Rubin won’t stand up to. They will have high paying jobs at Fox News or Newsmaxx – or perhaps at the Washington Post, LA Times and NYT — waiting for them.
In fact, Jennifer Rubin and Diane Ravitch ARE contrarians in the best sense of the word. They believe in truth and evidence and are “contrarians” because they stand up against those with extraordinary power who normalize authoritarians and fascists and liars. Some folks seem to believe they should be spending their efforts fighting against Democrats and embracing the right wing lies to scapegoat Dems for all the ills of America, instead of standing up against the far right.
I think it takes some chutzpah to reduce Diane Ravitch and Jennifer Rubin – both women who support their opinions with truth and fact – as unwilling to go against the “establishment” when it is the right wing establishment they have fought against who is pushing that lie. What better way to undermine the valid and evidence-based criticism they make about the Republican party, by ignoring their reasonable fact-based criticisms and instead throw out nonsensical insults about how they won’t stand to an undefined (but clearly very bad and comprised only of people who don’t like Trump) “establishment”.
We have a co-opted media bending the knee to Trump’s propaganda and lies, ready to demonize Trump’s enemies, and some folks seem to believe that Rubin pushing back against THAT is not pushing back against the establishment. Orwellian.
LikeLike
Thank you. At last, brave individuals pursuing truth
LikeLike
it’s important, surely, to go hand to hand with MAGA. It’s also important to focus on basics. As I see Trump in action, I regret a lot of things. Big question for me,: where is the decency? Is that a word anymore? Des Johnson.
LikeLike
“They reveal a warped mind and dangerous agenda that would take America down the road of other authoritarian states such as Viktor Orbán’s Hungary.“
Well, we know that Project 2025 drew direct inspiration from the Danube Institution which is behind the antidemocratization in Hungary. Lately, Hungary’s PM, Orbán, has been personally cheerleading Trump on X and repeating the lies of Musk about USAID.
Orbán wrote on X:
So apparently USAID financed ultra-progressive Politico in Brussels and basically the entire left-wing media in Hungary under the previous US administration.
https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/usaid-payments-to-politico/
Also, Trump’s withdrawal from WHO has inspired Orbán and other autocrats to withdraw from WHO.
LikeLike
As Snopes found, USAID paid $44,000 to Politico for subscriptions, not the $8 million that Trump and Musk alleged.
Snopes also investigated the claim that’s widespread on Twitter that Chelsea Clinton collected $84 million from USAID. False. She got nothing. Zero.
But it’s all over social media.
LikeLike
Mate, welcome back!
LikeLike