Bruce Springsteen: “Raise Your Voices Against Authoritarianism and Let Freedom Ring!”

May 21, 2025 05:43 PM EDT, Wed

Trump still has washed-up Kid Rock and Ted Nugent.

Bruce Land of Hope and Dreams - YouTube

Land of Hope and Dreams

Bruce Springsteen

185,345 views May 14, 2025 MANCHESTER Tonight, Bruce Springsteen and The E Street Band opened their Land of Hope & Dreams Tour in Manchester, England. Bruce launched this run of shows with three statements about the situation in the United States, with comments preceding his songs “Land of Hope and Dreams,” “House of a Thousand Guitars” and “My City of Ruins.”

Bruce Springsteen 2.27M subscribers

Home / Bruce Springsteen

Land of Hope and Dreams / Bruce Springsteen

Tonight, Bruce Springsteen and The E Street Band opened their Land of Hope & Dreams Tour in Manchester, England. Bruce launched this run of shows with three statements about the situation in the United States, with comments preceding his songs “Land of Hope and Dreams,” “House of a Thousand Guitars” and “My City of Ruins.” Below are the transcripts of all three spoken segments.

Introduction to Land of Hope and Dreams

Good Evening!

It’s great to be in Manchester and back in the U.K. Welcome to the Land of Hope & Dreams Tour! The mighty E Street Band is here tonight to call upon the righteous power of art, of music, of rock ‘n’ roll in dangerous times.

In my home, the America I love, the America I’ve written about, that has been a beacon of hope and liberty for 250 years, is currently in the hands of a corrupt, incompetent and treasonous administration.

Tonight, we ask all who believe in democracy and the best of our American experiment to rise with us, raise your voices against authoritarianism and let freedom ring!

Introduction to House of a Thousand Guitars

The last check, the last check on power after the checks and balances of government have failed are the people, you and me. It’s in the union of people around a common set of values now that’s all that stands between a democracy and authoritarianism. At the end of the day, all we’ve got is each other.

Introduction to My City of Ruins

There’s some very weird, strange and dangerous shit going on out there right now. In America, they are persecuting people for using their right to free speech and voicing their dissent. This is happening now.

In America, the richest men are taking satisfaction in abandoning the world’s poorest children to sickness and death. This is happening now.

In my country, they’re taking sadistic pleasure in the pain they inflict on loyal American workers.

They’re rolling back historic civil rights legislation that has led to a more just and plural society.

They are abandoning our great allies and siding with dictators against those struggling for their freedom. They are defunding American universities that won’t bow down to their ideological demands.

They are removing residents off American streets and, without due process of law, are deporting them to foreign detention centers and prisons. This is all happening now.

A majority of our elected representatives have failed to protect the American people from the abuses of an unfit president and a rogue government. They have no concern or idea for what it means to be deeply American.

The America l’ve sung to you about for 50 years is real and regardless of its faults is a great country with a great people. So we’ll survive this moment. Now, I have hope, because I believe in the truth of what the great American writer James Baldwin said. He said, “In this world, there isn’t as much humanity as one would like, but there’s enough.” Let’s pray.

The Boss Versus TACO – Trump Always Chickens Out

Trump’s Truth Social attacks on Springsteen, Oprah and Beyoncé aren’t legally sound

What history can tell us about celebrity campaign endorsements — and their impact.

May 21, 2025, 2:18 PM EDT / Updated May 21, 2025, 2:35 PM EDT

By Mark Harvey, author of “Celebrity Influence: Politics, Persuasion, and Issue-based Advocacy”

Nothing seems to incite angry social media posts from President Trump quite like criticism from celebrities. And while celebrities in 2025 seem less interested in feuding with the volatile president, Bruce Springsteen did manage to poke the bear with an unsparing speech delivered before a May 14 concert in Manchester.

The president noticed. On Truth Social, Trump called Springsteen Springsteen “a pushy, obnoxious JERK” with “atrophied skin.” But the pettiness didn’t stop with dermatological insults. In the early hours of May 19, Trump escalated even further, implying without evidence that Kamala Harris’ presidential campaign paid Springsteen and other stars, including Oprah Winfrey and Beyoncé, for their performances at campaign events, which was a “MAJOR AND ILLEGAL CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTION.” He proclaimed his intention to “call for a major investigation into this matter.”

The doubling and tripling down is so far mostly symbolic. But could Trump really investigate celebrity endorsements?

Springsteen isn’t backing down in the wake of Trump’s stream of attacks, and musicians like Neil Young and Eddie Vedder have since come to his defense. The doubling and tripling down is so far mostly symbolic. But could Trump really investigate celebrity endorsements?

I don’t this so. Celebrities typically do not get paid for making endorsements. According to the Federal Election Commission, candidates can pay for endorsements as long as they are listed as a campaign expenditure. The Harris campaign has denied paying celebrities directly, claiming that any money sent to Winfrey ($1 million), Beyoncé ($165,000) and others are event production expenses paid out in accordance with federal election law.1

“Usually I am reluctant to respond to rumors in general, but these days I realize that if you don’t stop a lie, it gets bigger. I was not paid a dime,” Winfrey said in video response to the Trump post. “My time and energy was my way of supporting the campaign. For the livestreaming event in September, my production company Harpo was asked to bring in set design, lights, cameras, crew, producers and every other item necessary (including the benches and the chairs we sat on) to put on a live production. I did not take any personal fee. However, the people who worked on that production needed to be paid. And were. End of story.”

Tina Knowles issued a similar denial last year when the same rumors circulated about her daughter: “The lie is that Beyoncé was paid 10 million dollars to speak at a rally in Houston for Vice President Kamala Harris. When In Fact: Beyoncé did not receive a penny for speaking at a Presidential candidate Vice President Kamala Harrris’ Rally in Houston.”

It all looks aboveboard and normal. Then there’s the obvious flaw in Trump’s argument: Billionaire Winfrey is so rich she flies in English Muffins from Napa.. Why would she be persuaded to do anything for a paltry million dollars?

In other words, a quick Google search suggests Trump doesn’t have a legal leg to stand on here. But while these two cases appear to be documented and legitimate, Trump’s intimidation can still have consequences. Digging into celebrity campaign endorsements could have a chilling effect — at least while Trump is in office.

Should celebrities be alarmed? Yes. And no. Studies have demonstrated that celebrities are effective at issue-based advocacy. They are often better than politicians at raising the profile of an issue, are perceived as more credible than politicians on many issues and can be persuasive. But there are limits to this influence. Notably, celebrities are generally not persuasive on highly partisan issues. For example, Bruce Springsteen is not going to convince Americans who believe strongly in the Second Amendment that they ought to support gun control.

Last August, a month before Taylor Swift endorsed Kamala Harris, my colleagues and I conducted a national survey of over 1,000 Americans to determine whether her endorsement would make a difference in the 2024 election. In this study, some respondents were shown a picture of Swift encouraging voters to register, and some were shown a picture of her encouraging people to “vote for Democrats.” While Swiftie super fans heeded her call to register to vote, Swifties who already had decided to support Donald Trump were not convinced to change their vote. And undecided respondents were actually less likely to support a Democrat after hearing Swift’s endorsement.

These findings are consistent with what we know about celebrity influence more broadly. Harris’ endorsers may have fired up the base, but not changed anyone’s minds, just as Springsteen’s comments at his concert likely only appealed to those who already agreed with him.

There is one recent documented case of a celebrity endorsement tipping the outcome of an election: Winfrey endorsing Barack Obama’s candidacy for the Democratic nomination in 2008. And of course, many others have tried.

In 1920, singer Al Jolson was probably the most famous entertainer in the U.S., and he endorsed Trumpian Warren Harding for president. Whether he really supported Harding is another matter. He was paid by an ad agency to sing “Harding, You’re The Man for Us.”” He was then hired to sing for Harding’s vice president, Calvin Coolidge, in the next election.

Franklin Roosevelt’s 1944 campaign featured performers and endorsers such as Rita Hayworth, Orson Welles, Judy Garland, Humphrey Bogart, James Cagney, Groucho Marx, as well as Frank Sinatra. Sinatra and Garland were back at the 1960 DNC, along with their friends Janet Leigh, Tony Curtis, Sammy Davis Jr., Nat King Cole and Judy Garland. Sammy Davis Jr. would ultimately flip and support Richard Nixon for president, and Sinatra would flip for Ronald Reagan in 1980. The Allman Brothers famously jammed for Jimmy Carter in 1976.

Not every presidential cycle is celebrity-laden as 1944 or 1960 — or 2024. And the Harris campaign was not the first to discover that support from the biggest stars on the planet does not guarantee a win. Warren Beatty, Shirley MacLaine, Peter Paul and Mary, Simon and Garfunkel, Alan Alda, Julie Christie, and Dustin Hoffman could not save George McGovern’s candidacy in 1972. John Lennon’s very vocal condemnation of Richard Nixon did not prevent the Trumpian’s re-election.

The Harris campaign was not the first to discover that support from the biggest stars on the planet does not guarantee a win.

Moreover, there are many documented cases where celebrities wade into politics and it backfires. Congressional Trumpians criticized FDR during World War II for consulting with Sinatra, a “mere crooner” who had been exempt from the draft. (Some celebrities also get criticism for inaction. Swift faced backlash for simply not showing up for the Women’s March in 2017). Other endorsements, such as Clint Eastwood’s awkward monologue supporting Mitt Romney at the 2012 RNC, do nothing to help the endorser or the endorsee.

All of this is a sober reminder that voters are swayed more by economic variables and partisanship than they are by a sea of conflicting celebrity endorsements from opposing political parties.

If celebrities are ineffective at this kind of advocacy, why do they do it? Many of them are keenly aware that their fame gives them a bigger megaphone than the average citizen — for better and for worse.

Time will tell just how invested Trump is here. It doesn’t look like he has any actual evidence of wrongdoing. But again, that isn’t really the point. Trump transforms criticism into fuel for the culture wars, reinforcing his core support and exploiting political divides to his own advantage. Celebrities shouldn’t be intimidated by his tactics — if anything, Springsteen seems to be relishing this moment — but they should be ready for them.

Mark Harvey Mark Harvey is a professor and director of graduate business programs at the University of Saint Mary. He is also the author of “Celebrity Influence: Politics, Persuasion, and Issue-based Advocacy.”

Trump wants investigations into Springsteen, Beyoncé, Oprah and Bono

The president’s ire toward celebrity critics might seem trivial, but his willingness to use the power of the state to attack his critics matters.

May 19, 2025, 12:40 PM EDT / Updated May 19, 2025, 2:00 PM EDT

By Steve Benen

As Donald Trump prepared for an important meeting with Russia’s Vladimir Putin, it stood to reason that the American president might spend the morning meeting with aides, reviewing his notes and strategy, and making sure he was fully prepared for a round of delicate diplomacy.

But shortly before the Trumpian’s sensitive discussion with his counterpart in Moscow got underway, he decided to let the world know what else was on his mind. HuffPost reported:

President Donald Trump on Monday launched a new attack on rock legend Bruce Springsteen along with several other major celebrities during a middle-of-the-night rant on his Liars Club website. … He also attacked Beyoncé, Oprah Winfrey and Bono, claiming without evidence they were all paid to endorse Harris during last year’s presidential election.

The first sign of trouble came last week, while Trump was still in the midst of a Middle East trip, when the president set aside some time to whine about Springsteen while simultaneously suggesting that Taylor Swift is no longer “hot,” thanks entirely to his criticisms of the pop star.

Evidently, however, these were not his final words on the subject.

“HOW MUCH DID KAMALA HARRIS PAY BRUCE SPRINGSTEEN FOR HIS POOR PERFORMANCE DURING HER CAMPAIGN FOR PRESIDENT?” Trump wrote online, in a message published at 1:34 a.m. local time. “WHY DID HE ACCEPT THAT MONEY IF HE IS SUCH A FAN OF HERS? ISN’T THAT A MAJOR AND ILLEGAL CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTION? WHAT ABOUT BEYONCÉ? … AND HOW MUCH WENT TO OPRAH, AND BONO???”

As part of the same weird rant, the president — again, ahead of his Putin meeting — went on to write, “I am going to call for a major investigation into this matter. Candidates aren’t allowed to pay for ENDORSEMENTS, which is what Kamala did, under the guise of paying for entertainment. In addition, this was a very expensive and desperate effort to artificially build up her sparse crowds. IT’S NOT LEGAL! For these unpatriotic ‘entertainers,’ this was just a CORRUPT & UNLAWFUL way to capitalize on a broken system.”

Nearly eight hours later, when he probably should’ve been preparing for his meeting related to the war in Ukraine, the American president returned to the subject. “According to news reports, Beyoncé was paid $11,000,000 to walk onto a stage, quickly ENDORSE KAMALA, and walk off to loud booing for never having performed, NOT EVEN ONE SONG!” he wrote.

“Remember, the Democrats and Kamala illegally paid her millions of Dollars for doing nothing other than giving Kamala a full throated ENDORSEMENT. THIS IS AN ILLEGAL ELECTION SCAM AT THE HIGHEST LEVEL! IT IS AN ILLEGAL CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTION! BRUCE SPRINGSTEEN, OPRAH, BONO AND, PERHAPS, MANY OTHERS, HAVE A LOT OF EXPLAINING TO DO!!!”

To the extent that reality still has any meaning in situations like this, let’s just briefly note that there’s literally no evidence of Harris or her campaign paying anyone for endorsements; there was nothing “unlawful” or “corrupt” about the support the then-Democratic nominee received from celebrities during the 2024 campaign; Beyoncé did not face “loud booing” after she endorsed Harris; and there’s nothing “illegal” about public figures publicly backing a presidential candidate.

It’s also probably worth mentioning in passing that Trump’s hysterical online communications don’t do any favors to his “very stable genius” description of himself.

But of particular interest was the president’s interest in “a major investigation into this matter.”

All things considered, there’s no reason to get too worked up about every Trumper tantrum, his rage toward celebrities who’ve dared to criticize him, his weird approach to pop culture, or his use of the word “illegal” as a synonym for “stuff I don’t like.” What I do care about, however, is the president’s willingness to use the power of the state to pursue critics in authoritarian-style fashion.

This is especially true now with the Justice Department led by an attorney general who apparently sees herself as an extension of the White House and its political agenda — which raises the prospect of a federal investigator actually initiating a probe into celebrities that Trump doesn’t like.

Steve Benen Steve Benen is a producer for “The Rachel Maddow Show,” the editor of MaddowBlog and an MSNBC political contributor. He’s also the bestselling author of “Ministry of Truth: Democracy, Reality, and the Trumpians’ War on the Recent Past.”

Trump post about Bruce Springsteen helps one person: The Boss

This week’s mini-feud pits two predictable septuagenarians against each other. And the result is a personal gift to the Boss.

May 17, 2025, 12:54 PM EDT / Updated May 17, 2025, 12:57 PM EDT

By Jeff Slate

Bruce Springsteen’s European tour is scheduled to wrap in Milan the day before Independence Day. But the rock legend may not be feeling very welcome back home.

Springsteen has been sparring with President Donald Trump over the past few days, with Trump escalating the war of words Friday morning. Sometimes entertaining and sometimes ominous, the mini-feud pits two septuagenarians against each other in the least surprising way possible. And while unlikely to move the needle in 2028, the fact that Trump gave in to his boorish impulses is ultimately mostly just a personal gift to the Boss.

It all started on Wednesday, during the first stop of Springsteen’s “Land of Hope and Dreams” tour in Manchester, England. Fairly predictably, and with video and audio conveniently rolling, the Boss took aim at Trump and his administration.

“The mighty E Street Band is here tonight to call upon the righteous power of art, of music, of rock ’n’ roll in dangerous times,” he said in the minute-long speech, to raucous cheers.

“In my home, the America I love, the America I’ve written about, that has been a beacon of hope and liberty for 250 years, is currently in the hands of a corrupt, incompetent and treasonous administration,” he continued before asking fans to “raise your voices against authoritarianism and let freedom ring!”

Later in the evening, Springsteen offered a withering takedown of what he’s seen happening in the U.S. under Trump.

“They are persecuting people for using their right to free speech and voicing their dissent,” Springsteen began, in remarks that were later posted on his website and YouTube channel. He continued:

“They’re rolling back historic Civil Rights legislation that led to a more just and plural society. They’re abandoning our great allies and siding with dictators against those struggling for their freedom. They’re defunding American universities that won’t bow down to their ideological demands. They’re removing residents off American streets and, without due process of law, are deporting them to foreign detention centers and prisons.”

He also took aim at Trump’s fellow Trumpians, as well as the Democratic Party, arguing that they had all failed to protect Americans “from the abuses of an unfit president and a rogue government.”

Still, he said, “The America that I’ve sung to you about for 50 years is real, and regardless of its faults is a great country with a great people. So, we’ll survive this moment.”

The White House almost immediately responded, dismissing Springsteen as “an elite and out-of-touch” celebrity: “Bruce is welcome to stay overseas while hardworking Americans enjoy a secure border and cooling inflation thanks to President Trump.”

Then, Friday morning, apparently from Air Force One on the way back from his Middle East trip, Trump shot back via social media.

“I see that Highly Overrated Bruce Springsteen goes to a Foreign Country to speak badly about the President of the United States,” Trump wrote on Liars Club. “Never liked him, never liked his music, or his Radical Left Politics and, importantly, he’s not a talented guy — Just a pushy, obnoxious JERK, who fervently supported Crooked Joe Biden.”

Calling Springsteen dumb and perhaps visually impaired, Trump ended on a personal note.

Calling Springsteen dumb and perhaps visually impaired, Trump ended on a personal note: “This dried out ‘prune’ of a rocker (his skin is all atrophied!) ought to KEEP HIS MOUTH SHUT until he gets back into the Country, that’s just ‘standard fare.’ Then we’ll all see how it goes for him!”

Given the aggressive approach the Trump administration has taken over the past three months, the tone was a bit unsettling. Was it a direct warning or just an attempt to chill artistic speech more generally? Or both? (The American Federation of Musicians of the United States and Canada swiftly condemned Trump’s remarks, noting, “Musicians have the right to freedom of expression.”)

Of course, this is not the first time Springsteen has publicly criticized Trump, calling him “a flagrant toxic narcissist” during the 2016 campaign. And he regularly appears — especially during presidential campaigns — at major Democratic Party events.

The title track of Springsteen’s 1984 album “Born in the U.S.A.,” which criticized the Vietnam War and the subsequent treatment of American veterans, was embraced by President Ronald Reagan as a modern American anthem, even though its lyrics paint a far darker picture.

Springsteen is 75 now and not making new music of any real impact. His forthcoming release, “Tracks II: The Lost Albums,” the long-awaited follow-up to his “Tracks” box set of studio outtakes from 1998, includes seven unreleased albums, the bulk of which weren’t recorded in this century.

Certainly he knew there was a good chance Trump would react angrily. The pristine video posted to his website (and the transcript of his polemic) definitely telegraphed that. By taunting Trump and getting him to punch down, Springsteen gets to play the hero again to his legions of fans. It also gives him a jolt of cultural relevance — or at least a news cycle or two — at a good time.

I want to believe that Springsteen’s speech — which was cheered as a “must-watch” across my social media feed — was delivered for unselfish reasons. There’s certainly no doubt he meant every word of what he said. But that doesn’t mean it’s going to have much of a discernible impact.

Within minutes of responding to Springsteen’s comments, Trump had weirdly, but perhaps not surprisingly, moved on to Taylor Swift.

“Has anyone noticed that, since I said ‘I HATE TAYLOR SWIFT,’ she’s no longer ‘HOT?’” Trump wrote, suggesting that his recent criticism of Swift has made her less of a global phenom in recent months. Of course this is preposterous. Swift, top-selling global artist of 2024, isn’t performing much at the moment because she only just wrapped up her record-breaking “Eras Tour” in December.

Could it be that Trump was having second thoughts about taking Springsteen’s bait? Maybe. But probably not.

Jeff Slate Jeff Slate is a New York City-based songwriter and journalist. His writing can be found at The New Yorker, Esquire, The Wall Street Journal and Rolling Stone, among others. He tweets at @jeffslate.

Trump takes aim at Bruce Springsteen, Taylor Swift on Liars Club during UAE trip

The president used his social media platform to take aim at both the New Jersey rock icon and Taylor Swift on Friday.

May 16, 2025, 11:25 AM EDT / Updated May 16, 2025, 11:33 AM EDT

By Hayley Miller

Donald Trump made clear Friday that he is not a fan of Bruce Springsteen after the rock icon condemned the president’s “corrupt, incompetent and treasonous administration” at the opening show of his British tour earlier this week.

In a Liars Club post, Trump bashed the Boss — once dubbed by Rolling Stone as the “embodiment of rock & roll” — as “Highly Overrated” and “not a talented guy.”

“I see that Highly Overrated Bruce Springsteen goes to a Foreign Country to speak badly about the President of the United States,” Trump wrote. “Never liked him, never liked his music, or his Radical Left Politics and, importantly, he’s not a talented guy.”

@RalphHightower: Trump has an alternate reality view of himself. He is not highly intelligent or stable.

Trump went on to accuse Springsteen of being a “pushy, obnoxious JERK” and “dumb as a rock” for having previously supported President Joe Biden, before attacking Springsteen’s appearance.

“This dried out ‘prune’ of a rocker (his skin is all atrophied!) ought to KEEP HIS MOUTH SHUT until he gets back into the Country,” the president wrote, adding, “Then we’ll all see how it goes for him!”

Springsteen, 75, made headlines earlier this week for his pointed criticism of the Trump administration at his concert in Manchester, England, kicking off his “Land of Hope and Dreams” tour.

“In my home, the America I love, the America I’ve written about, that has been a beacon of hope and liberty for 250 years, is currently in the hands of a corrupt, incompetent and treasonous administration,” he said. He went on to ask his fans to “raise your voices against authoritarianism and let freedom ring!”

Trump, apparently posting from the United Arab Emirates as his Middle East trip wraps up, also took aim at another music superstar Friday: Taylor Swift. The president resurrected his feud with the “Cruel Summer” singer in a Liars Club missive posted minutes before his Springsteen rant.

“Has anyone noticed that, since I said ‘I HATE TAYLOR SWIFT,’ she’s no longer ‘HOT?’” Trump wrote, suggesting that his recent criticism of Swift has made her less of a global phenom in recent months.

Swift, the top-selling global artist of 2024, has stepped away from the spotlight in recent months after wrapping her record-breaking international “Eras Tour” in December. Trump lashed out at her during the 2024 election cycle after she endorsed Democratic nominee Kamala Harris.

Hayley Miller Hayley Miller is the senior blog editor for MSNBC. Previously, she was a senior reporter on HuffPost’s breaking news team. Before she was a reporter, she was a senior editor on HuffPost’s blog team.

Bruce Springsteen opens U.K. tour by calling Trump ‘unfit’ for office

Speaking at a concert in Manchester, the American singer-songwriter said his country was “in the hands of a corrupt, incompetent and treasonous administration.”

May 16, 2025, 1:56 AM EDT / Updated May 16, 2025, 2:06 AM EDT

By Mithil Aggarwal

Bruce Springsteen delivered stinging criticism of the Trump administration at the opening show of his British tour, accusing its officials of authoritarianism, rolling back civil rights and illegal deportations.

Springsteen, 75, a prominent liberal who has long supported Democratic presidential candidates including former Vice President Kamala Harris, made the remarks at a concert in Manchester, England, on Wednesday that was the first in his “Land of Hope and Dreams” tour.

“The mighty E Street Band is here tonight to call upon the righteous power of art, of music, of rock ’n’ roll in dangerous times,” he said to roars from the crowd.

“In my home, the America I love, the America I’ve written about, that has been a beacon of hope and liberty for 250 years, is currently in the hands of a corrupt, incompetent and treasonous administration.”

Springsteen then asked supporters of democracy to “raise your voices against authoritarianism and let freedom ring!” before beginning the show.

Later in the performance, he described what he saw happening in the United States under President Donald Trump.

“They are persecuting people for using their right to free speech and voicing their dissent,” Springsteen said in his remarks, a transcript and video of which were later posted on his website and YouTube channel.

He also accused the Trump administration of “abandoning the world’s poorest children to sickness and death” and “taking sadistic pleasure in the pain that they inflict on loyal American workers.”

“They’re rolling back historic civil rights legislation that led to a more just and plural society,” [Springsteen]) said. “They’re abandoning our great allies and siding with dictators against those struggling for their freedom.”

“They’re defunding American universities that won’t bow down to their ideological demands. They’re removing residents off American streets and, without due process of law, are deporting them to foreign detention centers and prisons.”

Springsteen also said most elected representatives had failed to protect Americans “from the abuses of an unfit president and a rogue government.”

Still, he said, “The America that I’ve sung to you about for 50 years is real, and regardless of its faults is a great country with a great people.”

“So we’ll survive this moment,” he added.

The White House said in a statement that “the 77 million Americans that elected President Trump disagree with elitist and out-of-touch celebrities like Bruce Springsteen. Bruce is welcome to stay overseas while hardworking Americans enjoy a secure border and cooling inflation thanks to President Trump.”

This is not the first time Springsteen has publicly criticized Trump, calling him “a flagrant toxic narcissist” before his election in 2016.

Springsteen is known for albums that celebrate and critically examine American ideals, most notably his 1984 album “Born in the U.S.A.,” in which he criticized the Vietnam War and the subsequent treatment of American veterans.

He is set to debut 83 previously unreleased songs in late June, 74 of which have never been heard before by the public.

  1. @RalphHightower: It is my opinion that Donald Trump bribed South Carolina Governor Henry McMaster for his enforcement. Back when Trump entered the race, Nikki Haley was governor and McMaster was Lt. Governor. I bet that Trump said, “Endorse me for president and I’ll make you governor by getting rid of Haley. I’ll appoint her somewhere in my administration.” ↩

Related Posts