Former CNN anchor Chris Cuomo sparked a wide-ranging debate about modern political identity and patriotism during a recent podcast appearance with progressive commentator Brian Tyler Cohen. What began as a discussion about ideology and messaging soon shifted into a deeper conversation about how different political factions perceive the country — its flaws, its strengths, and what it means to express national pride in 2025.
Cuomo, who has rebuilt his media presence through his own show and frequent guest appearances, did not mince words. He questioned whether many prominent Democrats still articulate a clear sense of affection for the United States, or whether their criticisms have begun to overshadow any expression of gratitude or pride. His blunt question — “When’s the last time you heard Democrats say something good about this country?” — quickly set the tone for the rest of the exchange.
Cuomo’s Personal Context: Heritage, Identity, and Patriotism
To frame his point, Cuomo invoked his family background. Though he acknowledged the privileges associated with being a white man in America, he stressed that his father, former New York Gov. Mario Cuomo, had not always been viewed as fully accepted within mainstream American society.
“What did my father have?” he began. “Okay, I know I’m a white guy… My father was not considered a white guy. He was considered an ethnic, okay? He had that other thing going.”
Cuomo described his father as someone who understood exclusion firsthand — someone who knew what it felt like to be marginalized for his heritage, accent, and origins. Yet, he insisted, this marginalization did not translate to resentment toward the country itself.
“He was an other,” Cuomo said. “And he hated it. And he hated the people who got to decide that, and who kept opportunities from him. So he was a real one… But he loved the country. That’s the part that you guys, in my opinion, don’t get right.”
Cuomo argued that historic struggles, discrimination, and frustration with institutions can coexist with patriotism — and that his father exemplified this duality. For Cuomo, this is where he believes some modern Democrats fall short: in failing, at least publicly, to express a similar balance between critique and appreciation.
“I have a hard time believing they love the country,” he said bluntly, naming Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and other progressive figures. “I think they hate more about it than they love about it. And that may be unfair. But if it is unfair, it’s because of how they’ve made their own case about themselves.”
Cohen Pushes Back: Is Patriotism “Performative”?
Progressive host Brian Tyler Cohen offered a sharply different viewpoint. While he did not defend every criticism leveled by high-profile Democrats, he argued that patriotism in America has become heavily “performative” — a set of rituals and symbols that people display not necessarily out of deep loyalty, but out of social expectation.
Cohen pointed to customs like the Pledge of Allegiance and flag rituals, noting that these traditions often seem “foreign” to people in other countries, where national loyalty isn’t typically expressed in scripted or ceremonial ways.
To Cohen, this raises the question: if patriotism is expressed mainly through symbolism, how genuine is it? And does criticizing flaws in the system make someone any less patriotic if their goal is improvement?
He suggested that the left’s expressions of patriotism simply look different — more focused on critique, reform, and inclusivity rather than iconography and slogans.
Cuomo’s Counterargument: Who “Surrendered” the Symbols of Patriotism?
While Cuomo acknowledged that dissent and critique are essential components of a healthy democracy — even calling them a classic form of patriotism — he argued that progressive circles have gone too far in distancing themselves from patriotic symbols altogether.
That distancing, Cuomo said, has allowed the political right to dominate public expressions of national pride without competition.
“Here’s my point: Why are people surprised when they see an American flag on my truck, or in front of my house?” Cuomo asked. “Why were the Democrats okay with that becoming a party symbol for the GOP?”
He framed the issue not as an ideological debate, but as a strategic and cultural one. In his view, Democrats did not intentionally give up the territory of patriotic symbolism — they simply failed to maintain it, or dismissed it as outdated or problematic, leaving a void the Republican Party filled.
“You are absolutely right,” Cuomo told Cohen, “that dissent and criticism of your government is one of the strongest forms of patriotism… But I don’t think that’s an open question. The question is why your side doesn’t also take ownership of loving the country out loud.”
This distinction — between critiquing America and celebrating it — sat at the center of Cuomo’s argument.
A Broader Cultural Disconnect
The exchange touched on a broader tension shaping American politics: the divide between symbolic patriotism and substantive patriotism.
Symbolic patriotism includes:
- Flags, anthems, and pledges
- Public displays of national pride
- Respect for military traditions
- Rituals and ceremonies tied to the nation
Substantive patriotism includes:
- Criticizing policies to make the country better
- Demanding reforms for justice and equality
- Participating in civic processes
- Holding leaders accountable
Cuomo seemed to suggest that the left has embraced the latter while abandoning the former — and that this imbalance sends a message many Americans interpret as indifference or disdain.
Cohen, meanwhile, argued that focusing on symbolism can obscure genuine systemic issues that deserve attention.
Why Cuomo’s Question Resonated
Cuomo’s question — “When’s the last time your side said something good about America?” — was not simply a rhetorical jab. It reflected a sentiment held by many voters: that expressions of national pride have become politically polarized, and that criticism sometimes overshadows acknowledgment of progress or values.
In recent years, public debates around patriotism have intensified. High-profile protests, debates over historical narratives, and disputes over national symbols have led to a cultural environment where nearly every expression of patriotism is interpreted through a partisan lens.
This polarization has practical consequences:
- People assume political affiliation based on simple symbols like flags or bumper stickers.
- Cultural expressions such as standing for the anthem are seen as statements of ideology.
- Policy debates are overshadowed by emotional reactions to symbolic gestures.
Cuomo’s remarks tapped directly into these dynamics, using his own political evolution and personal background to challenge what he sees as an uneven approach to national pride across the political spectrum.
Can Patriotism Be Rebalanced?
The conversation concluded without a definitive resolution, but it raised important questions about how Americans should express their relationship to the nation. The exchange suggested that both sides may be missing opportunities:
- The left risks appearing uninterested in patriotic expression.
- The right risks conflating patriotism solely with symbolism.
- Both sides risk losing the nuance that allows love of country and critique of government to coexist.
As Cuomo argued, patriotism does not require blind loyalty, nor does critique require cynicism. But in a polarized environment, many public figures struggle to articulate both at once.
Conclusion
Chris Cuomo’s confrontation with Brian Tyler Cohen reflects a larger cultural debate: What does patriotism look like in modern America? Is it flags and rituals, or critique and reform? Can the two coexist without political baggage?
Whether one agrees with Cuomo, Cohen, neither, or both, the exchange highlights a growing disconnect between how different political groups express national identity. For many Americans, the challenge ahead is not choosing one form of patriotism over the other — but finding a way to recognize that love of country can take many shapes, even when expressed through disagreement, debate, or demands for change.
