JB Pritzker, the billionaire Democrat governor of Illinois, is already eyeing his shot at the White House for 2028. And he’s decided his best ticket to the nomination is to attack President Trump with reckless abandon. Pritzker’s recent speeches, campaign videos, and public appearances are all carefully designed to position him as the loudest anti-Trump voice within the Democratic Party. Make no mistake—he sees this as his path to power.
In a recent speech in New Hampshire, the governor accused President Trump, a leader who has consistently championed our military and veterans, of “hating our military.” Such rhetoric isn’t just inflammatory; it’s patently false and deeply offensive to millions of patriotic Americans who support our troops. Pritzker’s campaign is now rolling out a series of videos designed solely to undermine President Trump’s stellar record, claiming that Trump’s policies have negatively impacted Illinois residents. But the facts paint a very different picture: Under Trump’s America First policies, we’ve seen historic economic growth, manufacturing resurgence, and stronger border security nationwide.
What’s especially troubling is how Pritzker has been ratcheting up his rhetoric. During his State of the State address in February, he outrageously compared America’s current political climate to the era leading up to Nazi Germany. Later, in New Hampshire, he repeated discredited reports about President Trump supposedly calling fallen soldiers “suckers” and “losers”—claims which have been repeatedly and thoroughly debunked. Pritzker even went so far as to label Trump an “authoritarian” during an interview with Jimmy Kimmel. This divisive rhetoric carries real consequences; it not only cheapens genuine discourse but also inflames tensions unnecessarily.
Yet, despite backlash from Republicans and even concerns raised by moderate Democrats, Pritzker’s team insists their boss is just being authentic. Jordan Abudayyeh, a spokeswoman for the governor’s campaign, claims that Pritzker’s anti-Trump stance isn’t new and points back to disagreements during the COVID-19 pandemic as evidence. But let’s be clear: Pritzker’s current strategy isn’t about authenticity or principles—it’s about cold political calculation.
Some Democrats express frustration that more members of their party aren’t taking Pritzker’s aggressive approach. Adam Green, co-founder of the Progressive Change Campaign Committee, argues that “taking the fight to Trump should not be considered bold within the Democratic Party. It should be the norm or the bare minimum.” It’s clear that Pritzker is tapping into the far-left base’s unhinged hatred for President Trump, cynically exploiting that anger to boost his national profile.
But other Democratic hopefuls have taken a less combative route. California Governor Gavin Newsom, once a vocal critic of Trump, has pivoted toward cooperation when it benefits his state—most notably during recent natural disasters. Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer has similarly balanced criticism with cooperation, notably working with President Trump to secure a critical new fighter jet mission at a Michigan air base. Even Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer has occasionally cooperated with Republicans to pass necessary legislation despite backlash from his own party’s activists.
The contrast couldn’t be clearer: Pritzker’s strategy is to inflame division, not bridge divides. His harsh rhetoric, which even some Democrats privately worry could incite violence, reveals a candidate more interested in scoring political points than leading responsibly. Alex Conant, a Republican strategist who worked for Marco Rubio, accurately notes that Pritzker is merely “meeting the Democratic base where it is,” channeling their anti-Trump hysteria for personal gain.
Still, Pritzker’s wealth—he is a billionaire—could pose a problem for him within his own party. Democratic pollster Ben Tulchin points out that Democratic primary voters rarely warm to ultra-wealthy candidates. Even so, some progressives believe his vast resources and willingness to spend them could be an asset. Adam Green suggests Pritzker could follow in the footsteps of FDR, positioning himself as a “traitor to his class,” using his billionaire status as credibility to attack other wealthy elites.
But Americans have grown weary of divisive, inflammatory rhetoric. They want results, not partisan theatrics. President Trump’s America First agenda delivered historic economic growth, increased manufacturing, secured our borders, and ended disastrous foreign entanglements. JB Pritzker, by contrast, offers only divisiveness, cynical rhetoric, and empty promises. Conservatives—and all Americans—should reject such blatant opportunism.
