MSNBC host Ali Velshi has stirred controversy, urging his audience to turn Thanksgiving into a platform for political conflict, specifically regarding Donald Trump’s potential third presidential run. In his segment titled “How We Prepare,” Velshi laid out a four-point plan that he believes will help counter Republican influences on future elections. This approach raises eyebrows, especially given its call for confrontation within families during a holiday traditionally meant for gathering and gratitude.

Velshi’s first recommendation emphasizes confronting family members during Thanksgiving discussions. He asserts that public engagement can deter what he perceives as Republican efforts to undermine democracy. “When people actually show up, that’s what works,” he exclaimed, referencing the chaotic efforts in 2020 to challenge election results. His comments suggest a belief that an engaged public can thwart attempts at political subversion, echoing a tone that veers into paranoia.

His second recommendation involves the creation of “voter buddy systems.” Velshi expresses concern over the intimidation of vulnerable voting populations, particularly Latino voters, by ICE agents at polling places. He implies that this intimidation leads to a climate of fear, claiming it affects not only Latino voters but anyone who “looks a little bit brown.” This statement acknowledges real concerns while contributing to a broader narrative of fear surrounding voting.

Next, Velshi proposes forming “rapid-response teams” of ordinary citizens to monitor polling locations and voter drop boxes. He presents this idea not merely as civic engagement but as a kind of grassroots surveillance initiative. “A physical presence is a deterrent to improper and illegal behavior,” he argues, calling for participation in an almost activist capacity. This recommendation shifts the focus from simply casting votes to a more combative stance aimed at election monitoring.

Finally, Velshi stresses the importance of addressing discussions about Trump’s eligibility for a third term directly, urging viewers to counter any mention of it with a pocket Constitution. He categorically states, “A third presidential term is illegal. Full stop.” His insistence on having constitutional references during family debates indicates a heightened urgency to reaffirm legal boundaries in the political landscape.

The recent trend of using family gatherings for contentious political discussions isn’t new. Previous liberal media narratives have similarly pushed for individuals to challenge conservative views during Thanksgiving. In 2019, similar articles appeared in various outlets, advocating for confrontational conversations, even suggesting that family gatherings could serve as arenas for political battles.

In drawing from these historical perspectives, Velshi’s advice marks a significant departure from the spirit of holiday gatherings. His urgent call to arms—framing Thanksgiving dinner as a battleground for political ideology—could polarize family dynamics, replacing traditional joy with divisive arguments. It serves as a reminder of how political discourse can seep into personal spaces, reshaping the very definition of community and connection during what should be a season of unity.