As the 2024 U.S. presidential election draws near, political tensions continue to rise. One of the most recent episodes of heightened anxiety among the political elite was sparked by an emotional meltdown from actor and Democrat strategist James Carell. During a late-night Zoom call, Carell issued a passionate and alarming plea to young voters, warning them that if Donald Trump wins again, the country could be heading toward a theocracy. The fear in his voice was palpable, reflecting the rising panic among many Democrats, especially as President Biden’s approval ratings continue to drop and Trump’s popularity surges.

In what can only be described as a last-ditch effort to galvanize voters, Carell suggested that the outcome of the 2024 election would determine whether Americans would be left with “no government left” and “no rights left,” claiming that the country would be at risk of falling under Christian nationalism. His rant was filled with desperation, as he urged young people to vote, suggesting that if they failed to act now, they would find themselves living under a regime that would strip away their freedoms. For Carell, the stakes couldn’t be higher: “You will live under theocracy. You’ll end up Christianism,” he warned.

While his dramatic warning was designed to stir fear and urgency, it’s hardly the first time that Democrats have used fear tactics to motivate voters. As the election looms, the Democratic Party has been increasingly focused on spooking its base with dire predictions about the future of the country. They’ve warned that a second term for Trump would lead to the erosion of rights and liberties, casting his leadership as a direct threat to the very fabric of American democracy. But is this fear-mongering tactic effective, or is it simply fueling further division?

Enter Greg Gutfeld and the hosts of The Five. As expected, they didn’t shy away from calling out Carell and his fellow Democrats for their fear-driven narrative. Gutfeld, who is known for his sharp wit and no-holds-barred commentary, was quick to point out the hypocrisy in Carell’s words. He emphasized that the Democrats are the ones who have consistently pushed for more government intervention in every aspect of citizens’ lives, including healthcare, education, and even private business. Gutfeld was quick to remind his audience that it is the left, not the right, that has been championing the expansion of government control, especially through policies like “woke” culture and increasing federal oversight.

While Carell’s rhetoric seems to echo the larger Democratic strategy of warning voters about the supposed threat of a right-wing takeover, Gutfeld’s response cuts through the noise. He points out that the very thing that Carell and others fear—an authoritarian government—may very well be the result of the policies the left is advocating for. In Gutfeld’s view, the left is paradoxically pushing for bigger government while simultaneously warning about the dangers of government overreach. It’s this kind of contradictory logic that has left many voters questioning the true intentions of the Democratic Party.

The reality, according to Gutfeld, is that the Democratic Party has been far more interested in painting a dystopian picture of America under Trump than actually addressing the real issues facing the country. He argues that the left has spent years focusing on past grievances, instead of moving forward and offering new ideas or solutions for the future. This obsession with looking backward, coupled with the rise of “woke” ideology within the party, has left many Americans feeling alienated and disillusioned with the direction of their country.

As Gutfeld sees it, the Democrats have effectively chased out intellectuals, creators, and independent thinkers, replacing them with individuals whose sole focus seems to be tearing things down rather than building anything positive. The focus on destroying institutions, such as the family unit, law and order, and traditional gender roles, has left the party without a coherent vision for the future. Rather than offering solutions to problems like inflation, crime, and immigration, the left has been more focused on making noise about cultural issues, often alienating a large swath of the electorate in the process.

And yet, despite these shortcomings, the Democrats are still hoping to rally voters with fear. Carell’s fiery call to action is just the latest example of this tactic, and Gutfeld is skeptical that it will have the desired effect. He points out that the fear tactics are becoming increasingly predictable and, to some, even pathetic. In his view, the left has become so obsessed with pushing its narrative of doom and gloom that it has failed to offer any real optimism or hope for the future. Instead of providing voters with a vision of a better America, the Democrats have become the party of fear—constantly warning of the worst-case scenario while offering no concrete solutions.

It’s no surprise, then, that Gutfeld has little faith in the effectiveness of the left’s fear-mongering strategy. As he sees it, the constant stream of panic-inducing messages has only served to erode trust in the political system, pushing voters toward alternatives. The more the left focuses on scaring people, the less they are able to address the underlying issues that matter to voters. Gutfeld’s argument is simple: If you want to win over the electorate, you need to offer hope, not fear.

The meltdown from Carell and others on the left is symptomatic of a larger problem within the Democratic Party. The party has lost its way, and its message is now dominated by panic, division, and ideological extremism. As Gutfeld aptly points out, the Democratic Party’s obsession with government intervention and its failure to offer any real solutions to the country’s problems is what will ultimately drive voters away. The left’s narrative of fear may have worked in the past, but in the face of rising skepticism, it is becoming increasingly ineffective.

In the end, the question remains: Will young voters buy into the narrative of doom, or will they reject the fear-driven rhetoric in favor of a more optimistic, forward-looking vision for the future? As the election nears, it’s clear that both parties will need to work hard to offer a compelling message. For now, it seems that Gutfeld and others on the right are betting that the fear tactics of the left will fail to resonate with a majority of voters. Only time will tell if they’re right.

As the political landscape continues to shift, the question isn’t whether Carell’s warnings will come true, but whether the left can find a way to offer a more compelling message—one that isn’t based on fear but on the promise of a better tomorrow. Until that happens, Gutfeld’s critique will continue to ring true: Fear is a powerful motivator, but hope is what really wins elections.