President Trump’s current standing among Latinos has regressed back to where it was when he lost to Joe Biden in 2020. Photo: Jason Armond/Los Angeles Times/Getty Images
In June, the Pew Research Center’s analysis of validated voters in 2024 gave us the most definitive information on how Donald Trump won the presidency over Kamala Harris and all the underlying trends. And it left little doubt that the most important gains Trump made between his 2020 defeat and his 2024 win were not among young voters or Black voters or white working-class voters, but among Latino voters:
In 2020, Joe Biden won Hispanic voters by 25 percentage points, and Hispanic voters supported Hillary Clinton by an even wider margin in 2016. But Trump drew nearly even with Kamala Harris among Hispanic voters, losing among them by only 3 points.
This big shift among Latinos voters was decisive. And since Latinos make up the most rapidly growing segment of the electorate, a lot of the “realignment” talk surrounding Trump’s return to power stemmed from a theory that Latinos were undergoing a sort of delayed ideological sorting out that meant they might keep trending Republican and become a solid part of the GOP coalition. If true, that might have been disastrous for Democrats.
But a new study from Pew, long an authority on Latino voters, suggests otherwise. Trump’s appeal to Latinos is clearly sagging and could erode even further if he doesn’t change his policies on immigration and the economy:
70% of Latinos disapprove of the way Trump is handling his job as president.
65% disapprove of the administration’s approach to immigration.
61% say Trump’s economic policies have made economic conditions worse.
Even among the Latinos who voted for him in 2024, Trump’s job-approval rating has dropped from 93 percent at the beginning of the year to 81 percent right now. Fully 34 percent of these Trump voters say his second-term policies “have been harmful” to Latinos. And 2024 Harris voters seems to loathe him universally. Overall, Latino voters view what’s happening under Trump 2.0 with great trepidation:
Hispanics are pessimistic about their standing in America. About two-thirds (68%) say the situation of U.S. Hispanics today is worse than it was a year ago, while 9% say it’s better and 22% say it’s about the same.
This is the first time that most Hispanics say their situation has worsened in nearly two decades of Pew Research Center Hispanic surveys. When we asked this question in 2019, late during Trump’s first administration, 39% said the situation of U.S. Hispanics had worsened and in 2021, 26% said this.
When asked about how the Trump administration’s policies impact Hispanics overall, far more say they harm Hispanics than help them (78% vs. 10%).
That’s a significantly darker outlook than Latinos had in 2019, shortly before they gave Joe Biden 61 percent of their votes.
Since Latinos trended away from Biden in 2024 in no small part because of his economic policies, this finding could be especially important:
When asked about the overall U.S. economy, Hispanics’ views are mostly negative and unchanged from 2024. Some 78% say the economy is in only fair or poor shape, while 22% say it’s in excellent or good shape. In 2024, 76% gave the economy a negative rating.
Unsurprisingly, Trump’s mass-deportation policies are distinctly unpopular among one of ICE’s chief target populations, as it has become clear that they are not at all focused on “violent criminals”:
52% of Latino adults say they worry a lot or some that they, a family member or a close friend could be deported. This is up from 42% in March …
19% say they have recently changed their day-to-day activities because they think they’ll be asked to prove their legal status in the country.
11% say they now carry a document proving their U.S. citizenship or immigration status more often than they normally would.
Yes, concerns about Trump’s immigration policies vary among those with different countries of origin, but the overall picture remains negative:
Across Hispanic origin groups, about two-thirds of Central Americans and Mexicans disapprove of the administration’s approach to immigration. By comparison, 63% of South Americans, 58% of Puerto Ricans and 50% of Cubans say the same.
Puerto Ricans are by definition American citizens by birth, and Cuban Americans, long a Republican stronghold, are increasingly either American born or were naturalized some time ago. But Republican hopes for big Mexican American voting margins in states like Texas and Arizona may be in vain as long as Stephen Miller is in charge of deliberately cruel immigration policies.
Even if Trump manages to improve his current standing among Latinos, the idea that they are in the process of permanently trending Republican like the white Southerners of an earlier generation seems delusional. And if current trends persist, Latinos could contribute to a significant Democratic midterm victory in 2026.
On Saturday, the Academy Award nominee announced his endorsement for the Democratic nominee and her running mate in two heartfelt video statements explaining why others should vote for the vice president as well.
“I’m Harrison Ford, doing something I never thought I’d do: telling people I’ve never met who I’m voting for and why I think they might do the same,” he said in a video for Rolling Stone. “This election, I’m casting my ballot for Kamala Harris and Tim Walz. Do I agree with every one of their policies? Of course not. Do I think they’re perfect? Come on, for crying out loud, they’re people just like you and me.
“But these two people believe in the rule of law. They believe in science. They believe that when you govern, you do so for all Americans. They believe that we are in this together. These are ideas I believe in. These are people I can get behind. Look, I’m frustrated about a lot of things in this country. I’m sure you are too. But the other guy, he spent four years turning us against each other while embracing dictators and tyrants around the world. That’s not who we are. We don’t need to ‘make America great again.’ Come on, we are great. What we need is to work together again. What we need is a president who works for all of us again,” added Ford.
In a second video, Ford called attention to Trump’s former staff that has since come out against him. “When dozens of former members of the Trump administration are sounding alarms, saying, ‘For God’s sake, don’t do this again’ — you have to pay attention. They’re telling us something important,” he said.
Noting that many of them are voting against the Republican party for the first time “because they know this really matters,” Ford added: “Kamala Harris will protect your right to disagree with her about policies or ideas. And then, as we have done for centuries, we’ll debate them, we’ll work on them together, and we’ll move forward. The other guy, he demands unquestioning loyalty, says he wants revenge. I’m Harrison Ford. I’ve got one vote, same as anyone else, and I’m going to use it to move forward. I’m going to vote for Kamala Harris.”
The Shrinking star’s endorsement comes as Harris makes one final push for undecided voters, concluding her historic $370 million paid media campaign with ‘Brighter Future‘, an ad running across CBS and Fox during the 1pm ET slate of NFL games on Saturday.
Ford previously endorsed Joe Biden during his 2020 campaign against Trump.
St. Louis rap sensation Sexyy Red has caused quite a stir on social media after backtracking on her endorsement of former President Donald Trump in favor of Kamla Harris. “Don’t tell us what to do with our c**chies!” wrote the Hood’s Hottest [Political] Princess.
Source: Rodin/Eckenforth/ Prince Williams/WireImage/Derek White / Getty
In a surprising twist on Friday, Sexyy announced that she voted for Vice President Kamala Harris, aligning herself with other high-profile artists showing support for the Democratic nominee.
About a year ago, Sexyy Red’s comments on Trump caught widespread attention. During an appearance on Theo Von’s This Past Weekend podcast, she openly praised the pandemic-era stimulus checks and loans, suggesting that they had changed how some in the Black community perceived Trump’s presidency. Her candid comments resonated with some of her fans who felt similarly, and she became known for expressing opinions that, at times, went against the mainstream of the hip-hop community.
“I like Trump… once he started getting Black people out of jail and giving people that free money,” she reportedly said. “Aww baby, we love Trump. We need him back in office. We need him back because, baby, them checks. Them stimulus checks. Trump, we miss you.”
In the months following her podcast appearance, Sexyy Red seemed to lean into her Trump endorsement. Earlier this year, she performed at the Governor’s Ball Music Festival in New York City wearing a giant inflatable red hat that humorously read, “Make America Sexyy Again.”
However, as the 2024 election season has heated up, Sexyy Red recently took to X (formerly Twitter) and Instagram to reveal her change of heart. In a pair of posts featuring “I Just Voted” stickers placed on her sweatsuit, the rapper showed her support for Vice President Kamala Harris, who is running for the presidency.
“I just voted!!! Don’t tell us what to do with our c**chies!! #Kamala4President,” wrote the rapper.
Fans and followers noticed the pivot and flooded her comment section with both excitement and surprise.
One user applauded the rapper’s shift, saying, “Glad she not only showing the young ladies how to twerk, but also to vote!!!!” Another chimed in, “Okayyyy glad she educated herself and switched it up.”
Sexyy Red’s endorsement of Harris places her among a growing number of music artists who are backing the vice president in the upcoming election. Harris has already received support from industry heavyweights like Beyoncé, Cardi B, Megan Thee Stallion, Kelly Rowland, Stevie Wonder, Common, Jennifer Lopez, and Quavo.
With Harris gaining momentum in the cultural and hip hop sphere, Sexyy Red’s support could increase a wider trend among younger artists and influencers leaning toward the Democratic ticket in 2024.
(CNN) — Jennifer Lopez, campaigning with Kamala Harris on Thursday in Nevada, said Donald Trump’s campaign had offended “every Latino in this country” with his Sunday rally at Madison Square Garden, where a comedian mocked Puerto Rico.
The pop star and actress’ comments at Harris’ rally in Las Vegas came as outrage continues to reverberate over the pro-Trump comedian calling the US island territory of Puerto Rico — where Lopez’s parents were born — a “floating island of garbage.”
“At Madison Square Garden, he reminded us who he really is and how he really feels,” Lopez said of Trump. “It wasn’t just Puerto Ricans who were offended that day, OK? It was every Latino in this country, it was humanity and anyone of decent character.”
Harris’ stop in Las Vegas with Lopez came during a swing through the hotly contested Western battlegrounds of Arizona and Nevada — where CNN polls released earlier this week showed exceedingly close races with no clear leader.
The vice president has deployed a growing list of celebrities and musicians with huge social media followings in the race’s closing days, as her campaign seeks to turn out key constituencies — including Black voters in Georgia and Latinos out West. That list ranges from music legends Stevie Wonder and Bruce Springsteen, who have performed at Harris events in Georgia, to the stars of Marvel’s “Avengers” movies, who backed the vice president on social media Thursday.
But the most impactful support might come from Puerto Rican stars like Lopez, who have grown more vocal since Trump’s Madison Square Garden rally.
“This is our country, too,” Lopez said Thursday night.
At one point, she fought back tears.
“You know what? We should be emotional. We should be upset. We should be scared and outraged. We should. Our pain matters. We matter,” Lopez said. “Your voice and your vote matters.”
Other Puerto Rican celebrities have also been critical of Trump in recent days.
Bad Bunny, one of the world’s biggest Latin music stars, shared Harris’ platform for Puerto Rico on social media on Sunday. And reggaeton star Nicky Jam, who had previously appeared onstage with Trump, withdrew his endorsement of the former president, saying, “Puerto Rico should be respected.”
Trump has long sought to make inroads with Black and Latino men. In the critical swing state of Pennsylvania, in particular, a sizable portion of the rapidly growing Latino population is of Puerto Rican heritage.
Harris’ campaign on Thursday launched a Spanish-language ad, aimed at reaching Latino voters, that highlighted comedian Tony Hinchcliffe’s remark at the Trump rally.
“Puerto Rico is an island of scientists, poets, educators, stars and heroes,” the narrator of the ad says in Spanish. “We’re not trash, we’re more.”
The Trump campaign has sought to distance itself from Hinchcliffe, with Trump campaign spokesperson Danielle Alvarez saying in a statement after the rally, “This joke does not reflect the views of President Trump or the campaign.”
And Trump’s campaign has sought to turn attention to another “garbage” remark — pointing to President Joe Biden’s comment on Tuesday night that many interpreted as referring to Trump supporters as “garbage.” (The White House and Biden quickly tried to clean up the comment, saying that the president was referring to “supporter’s,” as in the comedian, and the rhetoric at the Madison Square Garden rally.)
Harris, in Las Vegas, said Trump is “all about hate and division.” She said if he is elected again, he would reinstate a policy that led to migrant families being separated at the US-Mexico border.
Lopez repeatedly said Harris “gets it” — and said she understands what it means for immigrant families to chase the American dream, because her parents were also immigrants.
She also said she believes “in the power of women.”
“Women have the power to make the difference in this election,” Lopez said.
The singer’s comments came the same day Harris seized on Trump’s remark in Wisconsin the night before that he will protect women, “whether the women like it or not.” He said he would protect them “from migrants coming in” and “from foreign countries with missiles and lots of other things.”
The vice president told reporters on Thursday that Trump’s comment is “very offensive to women, in terms of not understanding their agency, their authority, their right and their ability to make decisions about their own lives, including their own bodies.”
She pointed to Trump’s appointment of three conservative Supreme Court justices who helped undo Roe v. Wade’s national abortion rights protections. Trump said earlier this month he would veto a national abortion ban, but has waffled on the issue in the past, and many Republican-led states have imposed their own restrictive laws.
Polls show this year’s election could see a historic gender gap, with a majority of men backing Trump and women supporting Harris — a reality that helps explain Harris’ emphasis on an issue that has proven potent with voters, particularly women, since the Supreme Court’s 2022 decision.
As she campaigned in Reno, Nevada, on Thursday, Harris again raised Trump’s remarks, which she called “outrageous.”
“This is someone who simply does not respect the freedom of women or the intelligence of women to make decisions about their own lives,” she said.
There are only five (!) days left before the 2024 election (presumably) comes to an end, and the only guarantee we can make about the outcome at this point is that nobody actually knows what that outcome will be. In the meantime, Kamala Harris and Donald Trump are spending their final days on the campaign trail, the early votes are piling up, and a new Taylor Swift rumor is afoot. If you’re having trouble keeping track of all the election news, we’re here to help. Below are live updates, commentary, and analysis.
A week before Election Day, an estimated 47 million votes have already been cast in the presidential race between Kamala Harris and Donald Trump. It’s possible the polls are wrong, but it’s unlikely they will change much before this long and winding campaign cycle ends. Polling analysts, who have varying methods of averaging polls, have slightly different takes on the race. But without splitting hairs, it’s hard to see this as anything other than an incredibly close race where late turnout trends and polling errors wind up telling us what we cannot know right now: the identity of the 47th president.
In national polling averages, Kamala Harris leads by 1.5 percent per FiveThirtyEight; 1.2 percent per Nate Silver; 2 percent according to the Washington Post (which rounds numbers) and one percent according to the New York Times (which also rounds numbers). RealClearPolitics, which unlike the other outlets doesn’t weigh polls for accuracy or adjust them for partisan bias, shows Trump leading nationally by an eyelash (0.1 percent).
While national polls can help us understand trends and underlying dynamics, mostly because they tend to have larger samples, the fact that they have been so very close for weeks if not months suggests they can’t tell us who will actually win. The best we can do is extrapolate, based on the relationship between the national popular vote and the electoral vote count in previous election. It makes Democrats nervous to see Harris leading Trump by under 2 percent in the national polls because Hillary Clinton lost in 2016 while winning the national popular vote by 2.1 percent, while Joe Biden barely won in 2020 despite winning the popular vote by 4.5 percent. But we have no idea if Trump will again have an Electoral College advantage, and if so how large it might be. (Harris might actually perform better in the Electoral College than in the popular vote, as Barack Obama did in 2012.) And while we don’t know how polling errors will cut, it does seem the overall quality of polls this year is higher than in recent presidential elections.
So it’s a better idea to focus on polls in the seven battleground states. But they too are crazy close overall. You can identify leaders in all seven if you get down to fractions. FiveThirtyEight currently shows Trump leading in five of those seven states (Arizona, Georgia, Nevada, North Carolina, and Pennsylvania), but by less than a single point in Nevada and Pennsylvania. Harris leads in Michigan and Wisconsin, but again, it’s by less than one percent. A look at the rounded battlefield-state numbers in the New York Times averages is eye-opening: It shows four battleground states (Nevada, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin) as “even,” with Harris leading in Michigan by less than one percent, Trump leading in Georgia by one percent, and Trump leading in Arizona by 2 percent. A one percent uniform swing could give Harris 308 electoral votes or Trump 312 electoral votes. The Washington Post’s battleground-state averages make the same point in a slightly different way. They show Harris leading in four states (Michigan by 2 percent, Nevada by less than one percent, Pennsylvania by one percent, and Wisconsin by one percent) and Trump in three (Arizona by two percent, Georgia by two percent, and North Carolina by one percent). But then the Post makes this crucial observation: “Every state is within a normal-sized polling error of 3.5 points and could go either way.”
Both national and state polls suggest that the dynamics of the Harris-Trump contest remain reasonably clear. On the issues, Trump is very strong with voters who care most about immigration and continues to lead in most polls (though by shrinking margins) among voters focused on the economy. Meanwhile, Harris has a big lead among voters worried about abortion rights. If you start with the Biden-Trump divisions in the electorate from 2020, Harris has improved the Democratic performance among college-educated white voters, while Trump has improved the Republican performance among Black and Latino voters. Unsurprisingly, this puts a small thumb on the scales for Harris in the states with relatively low nonwhite voting blocs (e.g., Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin), and helps Trump in Sun Belt states like Arizona, Georgia, Nevada, and North Carolina. But there are some contradictory undercurrents, with the Harris campaign working hard to bring Black men back into her column, while Trump’s entire get-out-the-vote strategy is based on mobilizing low-propensity voters from his core demographic groups (especially non-college-educated white voters). The significant reaction this week of opinion leaders to slurs about Puerto Ricans (a crucial swing demographic in extremely close and pivotal Pennsylvania) offered up by a comedian at Trump’s wild New York City rally shows that campaign-trail events can still affect the outcome.
So it’s a good idea to keep an eye on late-breaking polls during the final days of the campaign, and to try not to get too distracted by potentially misleading data points and claims. There’s a lot of scrutiny of early voting trends, for example. But aside from reflecting a general drop in voting by mail since the pandemic election of 2020, and the efforts of Republicans to encourage early in-person voting in particular by their partisans, it’s hard to know what the numbers mean since most early voters would otherwise be voting on Election Day and Democrats tend to be relatively “late” early voters. Some of the old reliable indicators of presidential-election outcomes are of limited use. Yes, the president’s job-approval rating is currently at a terrible 39.5 percent (per FiveThirtyEight), but then Kamala Harris has done a reasonably good job of presenting herself as a “change” candidate despite her own incumbency. And yes, Harris has a small but steady advantage over Trump in personal favorability (FiveThirtyEight has her ratio at 46.3 per cent favorable to 47.5 unfavorable, while Trump’s is 43.5 percent favorable to 52.1 percent unfavorable), but so did Hillary Clinton in 2016.
If you had to pick a likely winner at this point, the official forecasters all lean toward Trump by the narrowest of margins (The Economisthas the most robust Trump win probability, at 56 percent; Nate Silver and Decision Desk HQ have Trump at 54 percent; FiveThirtyEight shows him at 53 percent). Some analysts look at the race in terms of Electoral College scenarios that aren’t very clear; here’s the New York Times’ characterization of the overall race: “Neither candidate currently holds a polling lead in enough states to reach 270 electoral votes. Polls in the tipping point states are essentially tied.” Larry Sabato’s Crystal Ball expresses contradictory “gut feelings,” citing trends favoring Trump but noting a sense of déjà vu from 2022 that favors Harris.
Elon Musk is full of ideas this month. He promoted his concept of a department of government efficiency (DOGE) at Sunday’s Madison Square Garden Trump rally, debuted a MAGA hat to sell to goths, and has been making 69 jokes on his platform X. These things all may be immature for a 53-year-old billionaire, but they are not illegal — unlike, potentially, the daily voter lottery that Musk’s super-PAC announced last week. His group, America PAC, vowed to give away $1 million to lucky voters in swing states who sign a petition supporting the First and Second Amendment. The group also offers guaranteed sums of $100 to registered voters in Pennsylvania who sign the petition and another $100 for referring more PA voters to sign. Already, the PAC has cut checks to voters in Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, and Michigan.
If you’re wondering whether such a promotion violates federal election laws against paying off Americans to register or vote, so are law professors, some of whom have opined that the giveaway falls in a dark-gray area. Despite a letter last week from the Justice Department informing the PAC that its promo may be illegal, Musk’s group has continued to give money away.
With Democratic senators calling for a DOJ investigation into this giveaway from a major Trump donor, Philadelphia’s district attorney, Larry Krasner, has taken action, seeking an injunction from a Pennsylvania court to block the lottery and voter payoffs. “America PAC and Musk are lulling Philadelphia citizens — and others in the Commonwealth (and other swing states in the upcoming election) — to give up their personal identifying information and make a political pledge in exchange for the chance to win $1 million,” his civil lawsuit states. “That is a lottery. And it is indisputably an unlawful lottery. Under unambiguous Pennsylvania law, all lotteries in Pennsylvania must be regulated by the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania.”
Musk has not yet commented on the lawsuit, but he is surely going to be upset by its source — a progressive DA whose campaign was funded by George Soros and who has been painted by conservative politicians as soft on crime. He has defended the giveaway on X, stating that “you can be from any or no political party and you don’t even have to vote” to win. That bipartisan spirit has not been extended to the PAC’s page on X, which called Kamala Harris the “c-word” in a now-deleted tweet.
There are eight days remaining in the 2024 Presidential Election for Vice President Kamala D. Harris and former President Donald J. Trump. In the last week, Vice President Harris visited Clarkston, an enclave bordered by Decatur to the west and Stone Mountain to the east. Friday, Harris visited Houston, Texas to campaign alongside U.S. Represntative Colin Allred, Kelly Rowland, and Beyoncé. Saturday, Michelle Obama joined Harris to rally voters in Kalamazoo, Michigan. Meanwhile, Trump headlined a rally at Madison Square Garden and is set to return to Atlanta tonight at Georgia Tech.
What do we know about the race with one week to go?
First, the early voting turnout in Georgia has surpassed the levels from 2020. As of 6am Monday morning, 38.9% of Georgia’s registered voters have made their choice in this year’s presidential election. More than 2.81 million voters have cast their ballot. Black voters make up nearly 34% of that turnout. The general rule of thumb is if more than 30% of Black voters vote for the Democratic Party, it bodes well for their chances. In the cases for Cobb, DeKalb, Douglas, Fulton and Henry Counties, total turnout has been north of 40% during the early voting period.
Additionally, 71,000 Georgians who were registered to vote in 2020, but did not cast a ballot in that election, have already cast a ballot this year during the first week of early voting. Among newly-activated voters, Democrats currently hold an edge.
Every single survey has Harris and Trump locked in a dead heat in Georgia.
Maya Harris speaks during a campaign rally for Vice President Kamala Harris on Friday, October 18, 2024 in Atlanta, Georgia. (Photo: Itoro N. Umontuen/The Atlanta Voice)
A Woman’s Right to Choose is central to Democrats closing message
During each campaign stop, one message was clear: reproductive freedom for women is true freedom for all Americans. The stories of the pain and suffering were told in an effervescent manner. Thursday, the family of Amber Nicole Thurman attended the Harris rally in Clarkston. Friday, Harris rallied voters in Houston on her pledge to codify Roe v. Wade into federal law. Texas, like Georgia, abortion procedures are prohibited at six weeks – before many women know they are pregnant – with exceptions only if the mother’s life is in danger.
“So do you think Donald Trump is thinking about the consequences for the millions of women who will be living in medical deserts,” asked Michelle Obama during her speech in Houston. “Does anyone think he has the emotional maturity and foresight to come up with a plan to protect us?”
During an event hosted by Maya Harris, the women backing the Vice President Harris urged attendees to vote early and in person, emphasizing the significance of youth and diverse voter engagement. Maya Harris also underscored the Vice President’s commitment to reproductive freedom. The message was clear: individual efforts can make a significant impact, and the collective goal is to ensure Kamala Harris becomes the next President.
Objectives for enshrining Roe
Vote for Kamala Harris in the upcoming election, as she has pledged to protect reproductive rights and expand access to healthcare.
Women must have open and honest conversations important men in their lives to make it clear that protecting women’s health and rights is a priority. Urge the gentlemen to vote accordingly.
Encourage women, especially first-time voters, to exercise their right to vote and make their voices heard on these critical issues.
Support efforts to pass legislation that would restore nationwide protections for reproductive rights.
Advocate against policies and politicians that seek to restrict or undermine access to reproductive healthcare, including abortion, contraception, and maternal care.
Maya Harris takes a selfie with a crowd during a campaign rally for Vice President Kamala Harris on Friday, October 18, 2024 in Atlanta, Georgia. (Photo: Itoro N. Umontuen/The Atlanta Voice)
“It is why she has spent her entire life fighting for each of us to be able to have that freedom,” explained Maya Harris. “To put a fine point on it, like the freedom to make our own decisions about our health, our families and our futures. Which includes our reproductive freedom, which is a defining issue, not just in this election, but for our entire country. And certainly for this room in so many ways. It’s an issue that Kamala has been the strongest, most vocal champion of this issue since the overturning of Roe v Wade.”
Puerto Rico, an American territory, MAGA’s latest target
While Kamala Harris was in Philadelphia on Sunday, Donald Trump staged a rally at Madison Square Garden in New York City. It was apropos for Trump to hold such an event on an NFL Sunday. Trump notoriously failed in his attempt to buy the Buffalo Bills and the NFL put the former United States Football League out of business in the 1980s.
As for modern times, Trump and his surrogates put on a rally that was red meat for conservatives living on Long Island and Staten Island. Comedian Tony Hinchcliff warmed up the crowd by dehumanizing Puerto Ricans when he said, “I don’t know if you know this but there’s literally a floating island of garbage in the middle of the ocean right now. I think it’s called Puerto Rico.” That joke did not go over well for U.S. Senator Rick Scott, a Republican from Florida currently fighting to keep his seat.
The problem for Scott is that every speaker was vetted by Team Trump. Scott is locked in a battle with Debbie Mucarsel-Powell for his seat in November’s elections. Florida is home to the largest number of Puerto Ricans in the United States outside of the island itself.
Conversely, Marc Anthony, Bad Bunny, Jennifer Lopez, Ricky Martin, Luis Fonsi and others have shared a post by Kamala Harris which outlines her plans for Puerto Rico. Each person is supporting Harris in the election.
Notably, about 100,000 Puerto Ricans live in Georgia. Also notable, it took the Trump team six hours to clean up the disastrous fallout from the joke. “This joke does not reflect the views of President Trump or the campaign,” says Trump campaign Senior Advisor Danielle Alvarez. I mean, this too is a lie because Trump spent the week calling America a ‘garbage can.’ Trump also wanted to swap Puerto Rico for Greenland in 2020.
Trump does nothing to distance himself from the fascist labels
David Rem, a Trump surrogate, called Vice President Harris ‘the antichrist’. Tucker Carlson referred to Harris as, ‘a Samoan, Malaysian, low IQ former California prosecutor.’ Stephen Miller said, ‘America is for Americans and Americans only.’ That quote was directly lifted from Adolf Hitler’s speech in 1934 when he said, ‘Germany is for Germans and Germans only.’ No coincidence here. The Nazi Party held a rally at the World’s Most Famous Arena in 1939, espousing similar views.
This story will not directly discuss Trump’s former Chief of Staff John Kelly proclaiming that his former boss is a fascist and wishes he had generals that are loyal to him like Hitler’s. However, Miller’s quote is directly reminiscent of Joseph Goebbels, the philosopher of the Nazi Party. Goebbels drafted its literature which was cloaked in antisemitism.
For Trump, he realized his dream of seeing his name in lights on Sunday. Like his rally in Traverse City on Friday, Trump showed up hours late for his event. Trump labeled the Democrats as ‘the enemy from within’ because he believes they’ve done terrible things to America. Trump rattled through his greatest hits Sunday. He attacked the media and referred to America’s generals as ‘weak, stupid people’. Trump also said FEMA’s response to Hurricane Helene in Georgia, North Carolina and South Carolina was worse than Hurricane Katrina because FEMA paid out money to undocumented immigrants. That is an outright lie.
Subsequently, his followers left MSG after they could not sit around any longer.
Black Men and the Vote
Former U.S. President Barack Obama speaks during a campaign event for Democratic presidential nominee, U.S. Vice President Kamala Harris, at the James R Hallford Stadium on October 24, 2024 in Clarkston, Georgia. (Photo: Itoro N. Umontuen/The Atlanta Voice)
During Sunday night’s WinWithBlackMen call, it emphasized the importance of increasing Black voter turnout in key battleground states. Key metrics included Black women voting 34-56 points above Black men in some states, and over 65% of Black voters aged 65+ having already voted. In Georgia, 38% of Black men have voted in the 2024 Elections.
Many leaders on the call were emphasizing to young voters that their vote can make a critical difference. For example, The Collective PAC is hiring up to 15,000 voting ambassadors in key swing states, including Georgia, to organize their friends and family. They are encouraging young people to sign up as ambassadors and leverage their personal networks to drive voter turnout.
The idea that Black men are not turning out for Harris is a myth. 72% of Black men are supporting Harris according to a Pew Research Center survey. However, misogyny is what is driving conversation. It is not a myth that misogyny by some Black men are being platformed by the Republican Party. Those pleas got hollowed out when “Dixie” was played before the U.S. Representative, Byron Donalds, was introduced in New York City Sunday afternoon.
The finish line is approaching
With eight days remaining, the Harris campaign has momentum. They are packing out stadiums. If polling data is not to be trusted, follow the money. The Harris campaign raised more than $1 billion in the period before September 30th, according to official filings.
Conversely, the Trump campaign is resigned to using racism and threats of violence. Trump even winked at the U.S. House Speaker, Mike Johnson, saying: “I think with our little secret we are gonna do really well with the house. Our little secret is having a big impact. He and I have a little secret. We will tell you what it is when the race is over.” Trump hopes the Election has enough chaos that it shall be thrown into the House of Representatives.
Donald Trump pledges to use the Alien and Sedition Acts of 1798. It was created to deport individuals during war with France, to deport undocumented immigrants from the United States. While Trump’s surrogates are making jingoistic and xenophobic remarks, Vice President Kamala Harris is shoring up support within Latino communities in Philadelphia.
The case for both candidates is now in the collective hands of Georgia voters.
The Washington Post, where “democracy dies in darkness,” is sitting out the 2024 presidential endorsement race. For the first time since the 1988 election, the paper’s editorial board won’t be making an endorsement for president. Publisher-CEO Will Lewis announced the move to readers on Friday as “returning to our roots of not endorsing presidential candidates.”
Not surprisingly, there’s apparently (a lot) more to this story, which comes a few days after the Los Angeles Times announced a similar move at the behest of its billionaire owner Patrick Soon-Shiong, prompting the publication’s editorials editor and two members of its editorial board to resign.
An endorsement of Harris had been drafted by Post editorial page staffers but had yet to be published, according to two sources briefed on the sequence of events who spoke on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak publicly. The decision not to publish was made by The Post’s owner — Amazon founder Jeff Bezos — according to the same sources.
“This is cowardice, a moment of darkness that will leave democracy as a casualty. Donald Trump will celebrate this as an invitation to further intimidate The Post’s owner, Jeff Bezos (and other media owners),” former Post executive editor Martin Baron, who led the paper while Trump was president, said in a text message to The Post. “History will mark a disturbing chapter of spinelessness at an institution famed for courage.”
NPR reports that editorial-page editor David Shipley broke the news internally at a “tense meeting” shortly before Lewis made his announcement:
Shipley had approved an editorial endorsement for Harris that was being drafted earlier this month, according to three people with direct knowledge. He told colleagues the decision was to endorse was being reviewed by the paper’s billionaire owner, Jeff Bezos. That’s the owner’s prerogative and is a common practice. On Friday, Shipley said that he told other editorial board leaders on Thursday that management had decided there would be no endorsement, though Shipley had known about the decision for awhile. He added that he “owns” this outcome. The reason he cited was to create “independent space” where the newspaper does not tell people for whom to vote.
Here is Bezos’s last tweet, sent after Trump was nearly assassinated in July:
Lewis’s stated rationale has been met with skepticism by others in the business:
Current staffers at the Post are also expressing alarm and/or outrage over the move:
Editor-at-large Robert Kagan has resigned:
The Post’s union says its “deeply concerned,” too:
Over a period of several weeks, a Post staffer told me, two Post board members, Charles Lane and Stephen W. Stromberg, had worked on drafts of a Harris endorsement. (Neither was contacted for this article.) “Normally we’d have had a meeting, review a draft, make suggestions, do editing,” the staffer told me. Editorial writers started to feel angsty a few weeks ago, per the staffer; the process stalled. Around a week ago, editorial page editor David Shipley told the editorial board that the endorsement was on track, adding that “this is obviously something our owner has an interest in.”
“We thought we were dickering over language—not over whether there would be an endorsement,” the Post staffer said. So the Post, both news and opinion departments, were stunned Friday after Shipley told the editorial board at a meeting that it would not take a position after all.
One frightening pre-Halloween occupation for political junkies is speculating about Donald Trump’s exact plans for challenging another election defeat. There is zero doubt he will challenge a loss but much less clarity on how he will go about it thanks to several important changes since 2020: Trump is not in control of the federal government; Trump’s party is decidedly not in control of the vice-presidency, the office that supervises the January 6 joint session of Congress to confirm the winner; and the Electoral Count Act of 2022 pretty much closed off Trump’s favorite election-reversal strategies in 2020, notably the fake-elector and vice-presidential coup gambits.
Politico has a new report out offering the latest and by far the most detailed Trump Electoral Coup scenario, raising some possibilities I hadn’t thought about. You should read the whole thing because it nicely illustrates the many inflection points our system creates between Election Night and Inauguration Day on January 20, 2025 (the two dates about which there is complete certainty). The report also emphasizes two points that have probably been underdiscussed and are worth considering.
First, there’s the fringe constitutional-law argument (advanced as a secondary line of attack by Trump lawyer John Eastman) that the Electoral Count Act of 1887 (which the 2022 legislation amended) is an unconstitutional abridgment of the explicit constitutional powers of state legislators to name presidential electors as they wish. This hasn’t been tested by the U.S. Supreme Court, but if it is and is upheld, the Electoral Count Reform Act scheme of ruling out any electoral vote award not made by the state-designated chief executive officer (usually either the governor or secretary of state) would fall and Republican legislators (where they are in power after the 2024 election) would be newly invited to wreak havoc.
Second, Politico explores in some detail the potentially disruptive role of House Speaker Mike Johnson, a Trump vassal of the highest order and a congressional field commander of the 2020 bid to overturn the results:
If Johnson believes, like Eastman, that the laws governing the joint session are unconstitutional, he could assert unprecedented authority to affect the process — all under the guise of following the Constitution. That could include taking steps to ensure that pro-Trump electors embraced by state legislatures get an up-or-down vote, even if they conflict with slates endorsed by governors. It could include permitting hours of floor time to air theories of voter fraud, while holding the presidency in limbo. It could also include lobbying allies to reject pro-Harris electors in order to prevent either candidate from receiving 270 Electoral College votes. And it could also include simply gaveling the House out of session to prevent the joint session from continuing. Each move would likely trigger intense legal battles, putting the courts — and most likely the Supreme Court — in the position of deciding how to resolve unprecedented power plays by the most prominent actors in government.
The Supreme Court, of course, is dominated by a bloc of hardcore conservatives aligned with and partially appointed by Donald Trump and is likely more inherently partisan than the Court that awarded George W. Bush the presidency in 2001. And if Johnson in any manner manages to blow up an electoral-vote majority for Kamala Harris, the presidency would be determined by Johnson’s very own House, where it’s near-certain that Republicans will control a majority of state delegations and would return power to Trump via the peculiar rules of a “contingent” election (not used in a presidential contest since 1825, when a multicandidate field meant no one had an Electoral College majority).
Scary, eh? So too is this detail from the Politico article:
[T]o a person, election observers, elected leaders, and some of Trump’s own allies agree on one operating premise: On Election Night, no matter what the results show, how many votes remain uncounted, and how many advisers tell him otherwise, Donald Trump will declare himself the winner.
Halloween definitely won’t be the only ghoulish day left on this year’s calendar.
Alexis Skyy Switches Up Her Stance On Donald Trump
Roommates, if y’all remember, Alexis previously said she was all in for Donnie during her interview with KISS 104.1. But on Saturday, October 19, she updated her IG followers, saying her interview happened before Trump announced his plans to close the Department of Education if he wins the election.
“The interview I did regarding voting was done prior to Trump’s statement on the Department of Education. Initially, I wanted to vote for Trump for my own personal reasons. After familiarizing myself with both candidates, I will no longer be voting for him,” Alexis wrote on her IG Story.
Social Media Reacts
Whew, chile! The Roomies, didn’t hold back in The Shade Room comment section, calling out Alexis for not doing her homework. Some even said folks should just keep their voting choices to themselves from now on.
Instagram user @kshiday wrote, “The first mistake was ignorantly about to cast your vote without educating yourself in the first place!”
Instagram user @watchherthrone wrote, “So she didn’t think to familiarize herself with the candidates before speaking?”
While Instagram user @bashirahkmua wrote, “She’s the reason they don’t need to cancel the Dept of Education 😂”
Then Instagram user @shamar.l wrote, “Remember when we didn’t publicly say who we were voting for?”
Another Instagram user @kelcaesar wrote, “Y’all bullied that girl into making a sound decision. Good for y’all!”
Lastly, Instagram user @love.le.le wrote, “Girl bye! you said what you said, and you wasn’t expecting all the backlash!!”
Here’s What Alexis Previously Said About Trump
Recently, TSR shared a video clip of Alexis’ interview with KISS 104.1. While chatting at the station, the reality star said she planned to vote for Donald Trump on November 5th. She acknowledged that “people have their opinions of him,” and she knows that Trump has the tendency to be “a little extra.” But she believes that Donnie makes things happen and thinks he brought “more money” into the economy while in office.
“I’m voting for Trump! I’m gonna get right to the point. I’m voting for Trump! I just feel like when Trump was around, things were [different], Sky said during the radio interview.
Trump Shares New Plan For Department Of Education
On Friday, October 18, Donald Trump sat down with Fox News’ ‘Fox and Friends’ for an interview. ABC 7 News reports that during the chat, the politician criticized how education is handled in our country. He also stated his intention to dismantle the Department of Education and cut funding for public schools that teach certain subjects.
“We’re going to take the Department of Education and close it. I’m going to close it,” Trump said.
Trump spent his Friday morning on Fox & Friends, joining his favorite Fox News program in-studio rather than calling in as he typically does. The former president was in town after speaking at the annual Al Smith charity dinner in Manhattan Thursday evening.
Trump’s appearance was typically all over the place, with the former president talking about defunding the Department of Education, expressing an openness to campaigning with Nikki Haley, and even knocking Fox News for airing negative ads against him.
When one host complimented Trump’s jokes at the Al Smith dinner and asked who wrote them, the former president said he had a surprising answer. “I had a lot of people helping, a lot of people. A couple of people from Fox. Actually, I shouldn’t say that, but they wrote some jokes. And, for the most part, I didn’t like any of them,” he said.
A spokesman for Fox News denied Trump’s claim in a statement to CNN. “FOX News confirmed that no employee or freelancer wrote the jokes,” it read.
There was also a moment when Trump claimed that cows would cease to exist under a Harris presidency.
Trump ended the interview by saying he was planning to pay a visit to Rupert Murdoch. “I’m gonna tell him very simple because I can’t talk to anyone else about it. Don’t put on negative commercials for 21 days,” he said, referring to the span of time before Election Day. “And don’t put on their horrible people that come and lie. I’m gonna say, ‘Rupert, please, do it this way,’ and then we’re gonna have a victory.”
The panel was hosted by Natalie Murdock, a state senator and a local political director of the Harris/Walz campaign. Photo by Carla Peay/The Atlanta Voice
GREENSBORO – The theme was “A Different Brunch”, a callback to the popular television show “A Different World,” which aired from 1987 to 1993, and showed a lot of young people what life at an HBCU could be like – culture, community, and camaraderie – as well as a good education.
Held at the Doubletree Inn in Greensboro, the event was a brunch, followed by a panel of speakers who addressed issues that affect Black voters, and the issue of engagement among young people.
The panel was hosted by Natalie Murdock, a state senator and a local political director of the Harris/Walz campaign. Her opening question to the panel was about the oft-discussed topic of young people and how to get them engaged in the political process, especially in an election so crucial to our future.
“We have to be as active and as proactive as we can be,” said state senator Gladys Robinson. She shared the story of her granddaughter, who dropped out of a PWI (Predominantly White Institution) to attend an HBCU, Bennett College in Greensboro, NC. “She told me ‘Now I understand what HBCU’s do.’ They grab our students and let them know what they can be. They create leaders.” Robinson reminded the group the importance of voting and working the polls if possible, and that local elections, including the NC governor’s race, are just as critical as the presidential race.
Photo by Carla Peay/The Atlanta Voice
“We need to make sure that people are protected when they go to vote,” she said.
NC representative Amos Quick, a graduate of UNC Wilmington, said he wished he had attended an HBCU when he was young. Addressing the issue of whether or not black men are supporting Kamala Harris, Quick said there is a lot of disinformation being spread.
“I don’t know why it’s out there that 20 percent of black men are supporting Trump,” Quick said. “They are not in the barber shops I go to. I think people need to understand that when we vote for Harris, we are not just voting for a person, we are voting for a set of ideals.” He added that we should not be afraid to advocate for a black agenda.
“We need diversity, not just in skin color, but in thought of mind,” Quick said. “My kids have lived through a global pandemic, 911, and feeling like a school building isn’t safe. They know how important the right leadership is, because they have seen what happens when you pick the wrong leadership.”
Veleria Levy, Executive director of the NC AIDS Action Network, talked about the importance of “othering.”
“A lot of Republicans are still othering people they believe are not like them – particularly the LGBTQ+ community,” Levy said. “Before that, they were othering black people, and they still are.” She spoke of her college-age son, and how proud she is of his desire to serve.
“We need to let our young people know what they can get out of this election,” Levy said. “Our young people don’t watch the news; they get their news from social media and from their friends. But they are smart. We need to ask them what is important to them.”
North Carolina Court of Appeals judge Carolyn Thompson relayed a story of how her student loans were forgiven by the Biden/Harris administration, and to reach young people by telling them stories that matter to them. She also gave a warning about believing in poll numbers.
“When I see a poll in my email, I delete it,” she said. “We are the polls. If people vote, we can move these poll numbers. That’s why it’s so important to get engaged in this election. Representation matters.”
NCAA Alum Joi Bass stressed the importance of meeting young people where they are. “We have to make sure our voices are heard. Kamala Harris isn’t just talking about equality, but equity.”
Billed as the special guest of the event was radio and television host Claudia Jordan, who once worked with Donald Trump when she hosted the Miss Universe pageant in 2009 and said she has watched his transformation up close. Her advice to the group was to not get frustrated.
“I just use the platform I have and try to celebrate these young people. I was happy to see the engagement of the young people in this election,” Jordan said. She is currently working on a show she says is designed to make politics more fun. She also relayed a story about the importance of choice, and the perils of having choice taken away. “Young girls today have less rights than their mothers. Choice is not a woman’s issue, it’s a life issue.”
Seated at a table in the back of the room were two long-time political activists and HBCU grads, enjoying the brunch and the messages of the speakers. They both joked that they were tired, and ready for the young people to take over the fight.
Guilford County resident Roslyn Smith-McLean, 85, a graduate of Bennett College, says she has lived to see some unusual political events.
“This is the time for our young people to take over the fight, and I would like to see them show out and show up,” said Smith-McLean. “Seeing the number of young people here today really makes your heart swell. I’m going to be doing my part as long as I live.”
Ernestine “Tina” Taylor, a graduate of Texas Southern in her 70’s, has been a North Carolina resident for 25 years. Asked why this election is so important, Taylor said “I do not want my grandchildren returned to slavery. I never focused on a party; I focus on character. There is no way Trump should have been president the first time, let alone be re-elected. If you want to talk about character and brilliance and experience, that is all wrapped up in Kamala.”
Harris was the first US official to say anything on camera about the monumental occasion. President Joe Biden, who was aboard Air Force One jetting toward Germany, had drafted a paper statement with his team hailing Sinwar’s death and calling for renewed ceasefire talks.
Biden’s statement hit inboxes at 2:10 p.m. ET. Harris walked out to cameras five minutes later. The moment was carefully coordinated between aides to the president and vice president.
The one-two step was a glimpse into the methodical approach to the conflict taken by Harris, who has been under scrutiny for her approach to the war but unwilling to break from Biden’s strategy.
For Harris, the complicated politics of the Middle East are unlikely to be made much easier by Sinwar’s demise. Standing outside the campaign event in Wisconsin where she was speaking Thursday, demonstrators kept up their pro-Palestinian chants.
And as she headed to Michigan a day later for a three-stop swing, the fraught politics were likely to continue dogging her. The Israel war has proven a complicating factor as the vice president looks for votes among the state’s large Arab- and Muslim-American population in the Detroit metro area.
Many in that community have said they cannot vote for Harris, angry over the Biden administration’s largely unequivocal support for Israel and refusal to limit most weapons to the country.
Despite the swell of political pressure, Harris has resisted describing how she might approach the conflict differently. She has instead pointed to the nascent ceasefire and hostage negotiations, which have been stalled for weeks.
Earlier this month, Harris met with Arab-American leaders in Michigan, where participants encouraged her to distance herself from Biden’s approach to the conflict.
On Thursday, however, there was little daylight in Biden and Harris’s approach. Both used Sinwar’s death to make renewed calls for restarting the hostage talks.
“This moment gives us an opportunity to finally end the war in Gaza,” Harris said during her three-minute speech, delivered carefully from a script and ended without taking any questions.
She said the war “must end such that Israel is secure, the hostages are released, the suffering in Gaza ends and the Palestinian people can realize their right to dignity, security, freedom and self-determination.”
“It is time for the day after to begin,” she said.
Speaking hours later on the tarmac in Berlin, Biden said he’d congratulated Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu but also told him “now is the time to move on” from the war in Gaza.
“I talked with Bibi about that. We’re going to work out what is the day after now, how do we secure Gaza and move on,” he said.
People cheer at a Trump rally in Aurora, Colorado, on October 11, 2024. Photo: Michael Ciaglo/Getty Images
It’s been clear for some time that Donald Trump is laying the groundwork to attempt to deny and challenge an election defeat. But Team Trump is also working to ensure that he won’t have to deny the results — and not just by convincing more voters that his policies are better for America. To put it very simply, the Trump campaign, the Republican Party, and its super-PAC allies are devoting a lot of resources to suppressing the Democratic vote in key states. These strategies include:
Insisting on voter-roll purges to eliminate people who don’t respond quickly to official verification inquiries, whether or not they are appropriate. (In the past, overzealous purges have disqualified hundreds of thousands of eligible voters, most notably in Florida in 2000.)
Promoting ridiculously strict rules for mail ballots that don’t have anything to do with their integrity (e.g., tossing them out due to extremely minor address or date errors without the possibility of curing them).
Flooding the polling places with poll watchers trained to challenge individual ballots that might go to Kamala Harris on a variety of sketchy grounds.
In addition to reducing the Harris vote (via a combination of ballot-eligibility challenges or heavy-handed intimidation of voters), all these MAGA boots on the ground can help build the post-election case that a Harris win was tainted with fraud. This time, Team Trump’s legal team will be much more organized than Rudy Giuliani’s Keystone Cops ensemble, which tried to capitalize on scattered election-fraud rumors and social-media claims in 2020. With so many campaign operatives working as election administrators or observers, there will be plenty of election-fraud allegations to fuel Trump lawsuits, with or without merit.
All this activity, along with years of Trump claims that Democrats cannot beat him without cheating, will predispose his MAGA base to accept whatever he chooses to claim about the “integrity” of the election. As the initial votes come in on Election Night, he may repeat his premature victory claim from 2020 and demand that vote counting stop with him slightly ahead (if indeed that “red mirage” reappears before it’s dispelled by the “blue shift” of mail ballots). If he does, we could see on-the-ground Trump operatives and volunteers demand that state- and county-election offices “stop the steal.” He will have another moment of truth if the Associated Press and other major media outlets call the race for Harris, which will be deemed conclusive by most people outside MAGA-land.
Trump will ultimately have to decide whether to concede or remain defiant on December 11, the federal deadline for state certifications of the vote. The Electoral Count Reform Act of 2022 was designed to minimize the odds of any challenge to the results after that date.
But whether or not the 45th president has a workable strategy for turning defeat into victory after Election Day, there’s no question his minions are trying hard to twist the system to maximize the possibility that Trump will win without having to stage another insurrection. If Trump does wind up back in the White House, he may interrupt his cries of triumph and threats of vengeance long enough to utter pieties about wanting to be the president of all the people. That ought to include not just letting them, but encouraging them, to vote.
According to NBC News, Trump has been told that his safety can’t be guaranteed, so he’s temporarily choosing life over one of his favorite pastimes:
Trump has not played golf since an apparent assassination attempt near one of his courses on Sept. 15, and he will not do so until after the election, according to a person close to the campaign and another person familiar with the situation. A third person familiar with the conversations said Trump was told that federal agents could not ensure his safety to a degree that they were comfortable with if he were to play. The concerns were conveyed in two conversations with Trump since the September incident: one with Ronald Rowe, the acting director of the Secret Service, and the other with officials from the national intelligence director’s office.
He and his campaign aren’t just worried about golf courses. Per the Washington Post, the Trump campaign has asked for a number of additional protective measures while he’s on the trail — apparently including the Air Force:
Trump’s campaign requested military aircraft for Trump to fly in during the final weeks of the campaign, expanded flight restrictions over his residences and rallies, ballistic glass pre-positioned in seven battleground states for the campaign’s use and an array of military vehicles to transport Trump, according to emails reviewed by The Washington Post and people familiar with the matter.
The requests are extraordinary and unprecedented — no nominee in recent history has been ferried around in military planes ahead of an election. But the requests came after Trump’s campaign advisers received briefings in which the government said Iran is still actively plotting to kill him, according to the emails reviewed by The Post and the people familiar with the matter, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to describe sensitive discussions. Trump advisers have grown concerned about drones and missiles, according to the people.
Donald Trump’ll make you (jump, jump). Photo: Jim Watson/AFP via Getty Images
Elon Musk joined the MAGA circus in person on Saturday night, literally jumping on stage with Donald Trump during the former president’s big rally return to the same Butler, Pennsylvania fairgrounds where he was nearly assassinated in July. After Trump introduced Musk as a “truly incredible guy” who “saved free speech,” the tech billionaire emerged and awkwardly jumped up and down with his arms up behind Trump, who then shouted for him to “take over” the mic. Musk looked like he was trying to become a human MAGA meme.
“As you can see, I’m not just MAGA, I’m dark MAGA,” Musk told the crowd, apparently referring to his black MAGA hat. He then said it was “an honor” to be there before launching into a short speech in which he both celebrated Trump and demonized Democrats.
Musk especially praised Trump for his reaction to getting grazed by a bullet back in July, even imitated Trump by shouting “Fight! Fight! Fight!” for the crowd.
They shook hands after Trump introduced Musk. He’s wearing an “OCCUPY MARS” shirt. Photo: Jim Watson/AFP via Getty Images
Otherwise, Musk mostly echoed the same hyperbolic rhetoric that has long been standard at Trump rallies regardless of who’s speaking.
“President Trump must win to preserve the Constitution. He must win to preserve democracy in America, this is a must-win situation,” the X owner said. He also told the crowd that Democrats want “to take away your freedom of speech, they want to take away your right to bear arms, they want to take away your fight to vote, effectively,” and after asking rally attendees to help get out the vote, offered the apocalyptic warning that “this will be the last election” if Trump doesn’t win.
Other images from Saturday might have worked even better, if the goal was to capture the now special bond between Musk and Trump:
It wasn’t always like this. Not that long ago, Musk had seemed skeptical of Trump’s candidacy and he initially backed Trump rival Ron DeSantis in the GOP primary. But in recent months, the notoriously unfiltered Musk has gone all-in. The Tesla and SpaceX head endorsed Trump in the aftermath of the July assassination attempt, and now backs the PAC which the Trump campaign has outsourced its swing-state ground game to. Musk also interviewed Trump on X; regularly promotes pro-Trump conspiracy theories, racism, and political attacks; and he (very creepily) went after Taylor Swift after she endorsed Kamala Harris. If Trump loses next month, expect Musk to hop on Trump’s “stolen election” bandwagon, too.
Donald Trump and Kamala Harris may not debate again before Election Day, but their running mates certainly will. On Tuesday night, CBS News will host the one and only vice-presidential debate between Senator J.D. Vance and Governor Tim Walz, and things are bound to get heated — if not weird — between the two Midwesterners. It might even be the first time in American history that two vice-presidential candidates debate the pros and cons of pet cats. Here’s what to know.
When is the debate?
The vice-presidential debate will begin at 9 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, October 1, live from the CBS Broadcast Center in Manhattan. It’s expected to last 90 minutes with two four-minute commercial breaks.
Where can I watch the debate on TV?
It will be broadcast on CBS, as well as simulcast on numerous other networks, including PBS, NBC, CNN, C-SPAN, Fox News, MSNBC, and more.
CBS Evening News anchor Norah O’Donnell and Face the Nation host Margaret Brennan will moderate.
Will the candidates’ mics be muted?
The candidates’ microphones will remain on by default — but CBS says it reserves the right to turn them off if needed.
Will the candidates’ statements be fact-checked?
CBS says the moderators won’t be focused on live fact-checking what the candidates say, but it is embedding a QR code, the New York Times points out:
A QR code — the checkerboard-like, black-and-white box that can be scanned by a smartphone — will appear onscreen for long stretches of the CBS telecast. Viewers who scan the code will be directed to the CBS News website, where a squad of about 20 CBS journalists will post fact-checks of the candidates’ remarks in real time. The code will appear only on CBS; viewers who tune in on a different channel will not see it.
Will there be a studio audience?
No. As at this year’s two presidential debates, there will be no live studio audience.
What are the other debate rules?
Per CBS News:
• The topics and questions will not be provided to the candidates in advance, and only the moderators are allowed to ask questions.
• There will be no opening statements, but each candidate will be able to give a two-minute closing statement. After winning a coin toss, Vance elected to deliver his closing statement last.
• The candidates will be given two minutes to answer each question, one minute for rebuttals, and, potentially, one minute each for follow-ups at the moderators’ discretion.
• The candidates will not be allowed to interact with their campaign staff during the two commercial breaks.
• Vance and Walz will be standing at identical lecterns with Walz on the left side of the stage and Vance on the right.
• Props and pre-written notes are forbidden. Each candidate will be given a blank notepad, a pen, and a bottle of water.
Not very much, typically, but it’s at least possible this VP debate could. Unless Harris and Trump both agree to another debate, this will be the last time the campaigns face off directly on prime-time television. It’s a very close race, so swaying even a small number of voters in a key battleground state could make a real difference. And these two particular vice-presidential candidates have each made a surprising amount of national news in recent months. If the past year in politics has taught us anything, it’s to expect the unexpected.
Will Walz or Vance wear a secret earpiece, use AI contact lenses, or be subject to hostile stage lighting?
It’s 2024, so there will undoubtedly be some wild conspiracy theories circulating online soon after the debate, suggesting that one of the candidates was given some unfair advantage via technical wizardry and/or partisan spycraft. It was rigged, someone always says, while pointing to some elaborate subterfuge. But please exercise healthy skepticism when encountering such theories, particularly if shared by a certain very online billionaire.
The world’s richest man stood steps away from the US-Mexico border, adjusting the brim of his black cowboy hat.
“As an immigrant to the United States, I am extremely pro-immigrant,” Elon Musk said, “and I believe that we need a greatly expanded legal immigration system, and that we should let anyone in the country who is hardworking and honest and will be a contributor to the United States.”
But in the September 2023 video from Eagle Pass, Texas, Musk said limits are needed, too.
“By the same token, we should also not be allowing people in the country if they’re breaking the law,” he said. “That doesn’t make sense. The law’s there for a reason.”
Since that border visit a year ago, Musk’s critiques of illegal immigration have become a prominent part of his online presence. And he’s an increasingly powerful force shaping and amplifying conversations around the issue — especially since his 2022 takeover of Twitter, now known as X, and given his huge audience on the platform.
Immigration is a top topic on voters’ minds heading into the 2024 presidential election, and it was a major focal point of the August 12 conversation Musk hosted on X with former President Donald Trump.
The tech magnate’s more than 195 million followers on X frequently see him sharing posts endorsing conspiracy theories that claim the Biden administration has deliberately allowed undocumented immigrants to cross the border to gain political advantage. It’s also common to see posts referring to his own background as an immigrant and advocating for increased legal immigration to the US.
But it’s far less common to hear Musk talking about a chapter of his family’s immigration story that’s been described by his younger brother in several interviews — an anecdote that raises questions about the billionaire tech tycoon’s own immigration status when he was starting his first company in the United States.
Kimbal Musk: ‘We were illegal immigrants’
Elon Musk, 53, was born in Pretoria, South Africa, and moved to Canada shortly before his 18th birthday, acquiring citizenship there through his mother, a Canadian citizen. According to numerous biographies and profiles of him published in recent years, he had an enterprising spirit from a young age and his sights set on immigrating to the United States.
It’s been more than three decades since Musk came to the US in 1992 for his junior year as a transfer student at the University of Pennsylvania. Since then, he’s founded several high-profile Silicon Valley startups. And today he’s the CEO of Tesla Motors, the CEO of SpaceX and the chairman and chief technology officer of X. Forbes estimates his net worth at nearly $270 billion, placing him atop the magazine’s real-time billionaires list.
But his first company’s origins were humble.
He’s described its early days in numerous speeches and interviews — as has his younger brother, Kimbal Musk, a cofounder of the startup that set them both on a path to success in the United States.
In 1995, Musk moved to Palo Alto, California, where he planned to begin a Ph.D. program at Stanford. But shortly after the school year started, according to Walter Isaacson’s 2023 biography, Musk decided he’d rather capitalize on the emerging dotcom market and focus on founding a company with Kimbal.
During 2013 remarks at the Milken Institute Global Conference, an annual gathering of business executives and thought leaders, the brothers described details they’ve often shared about how they kept living expenses low by eating at Jack in the Box — and by living at their office.
“It was cheaper to rent the office than to rent an apartment. So we just rented the office, and slept in the office, and showered at the YMCA,” Elon Musk recalled, drawing laughs from the crowd.
At the 2013 event, the brothers also touched on a topic they’ve discussed less frequently in public: their immigration status during the company’s founding.
In early 1996, their startup, an early online city guide and mapping tool, got a $3 million infusion from venture capitalists. The investors soon found themselves surprised, according to Kimbal Musk’s account captured in a video of the 2013 event posted on the Milken Institute’s YouTube page.
“When they did fund us,” Kimbal Musk recalled, “they realized that we were illegal immigrants.”
“Well…” Elon Musk interjected.
“Yes, we were,” Kimbal Musk pushed back.
Video of the remarks shows Elon Musk laughing as he jumped in with a different interpretation: “I’d say it was a gray area.”
He didn’t elaborate, and it’s unclear what Elon Musk meant by that characterization. The Musk brothers haven’t responded to CNN’s requests for comment on the exchange, nor to reports earlier this year quoting it on the tech website Gizmodo and in The Los Angeles Times.
Other accounts they’ve shared in public, and descriptions in biographies of the billionaire entrepreneur, don’t specify what kind of visas they had when founding the company or at later points — key details that would reveal what requirements they would have needed to meet to maintain a legal status in the US.
Two biographies of Musk, Isaacson’s eponymous tome and Ashlee Vance’s 2015 “Elon Musk: Tesla, SpaceX and the Quest for a Fantastic Future,” state that investors in the startup went on to help both brothers obtain visas.
It’s unclear what kind of visa Elon Musk had when the brothers and their friend Greg Kouri started the company eventually dubbed Zip2, and what path he went on to take to become a legal resident and citizen of the United States.
How experts interpret Elon Musk’s ‘gray area’ description
According to Isaacson’s biography and an Esquire magazine profile of Musk, he became a US citizen in 2002 — 10 years after he arrived in the country — in a ceremony at the Los Angeles County fairgrounds.
But exactly what steps he took to reach that point after his years as a student are unclear.
In response to questions from CNN, US Citizenship and Immigration Services says the agency can’t “share, confirm, or deny immigration information about specific individuals” due to privacy considerations.
Elon Musk has not responded to CNN’s questions about his immigration journey, but he’s referenced it in multiple online posts.
But why did he describe his prior immigration status as a “gray area” back in 2013?
A 2016 Snopes article found “little evidence that he was ever in the U.S. without documentation,” citing previous articles about the tech tycoon and a 2007 PBS interview where he described himself as a legal immigrant.
But immigration experts who spoke with CNN said the way Elon Musk responded when the issue was brought up publicly in 2013 suggests another possibility.
“Actually, there are no gray areas in immigration,” says Charles Kuck, an Atlanta immigration attorney. Instead, Kuck says, there are people who get caught for violations, and people who don’t.
Jennifer Minear, an immigration attorney who focuses on employment issues, points out that given that Musk is now a US citizen, “obviously he did something to regularize his status.”
“But that doesn’t mean that there wasn’t a period of time that he was without (legal) status. … It sounds like there was a little bit of wonkiness in his past with immigration,” says Minear, a past president of the American Immigration Lawyers Association.
That’s not uncommon, Kuck says.
“Our immigration laws are so strict that, regardless of how perfect you try to be, many people would find themselves in this same gray area, in the context of, you probably did something that would make you deportable at some point during your immigration journey,” he says.
That assessment, he says, is based on the law at the time and the law today.
“I will tell you, as somebody who’s done immigration law for 35 years, that a lot of immigrants leave their immigration history behind, right? They want to move on to their new life,” Kuck says. “But when you speak out against other people’s immigration journey, then yours becomes subject to scrutiny. … If you live in a glass house, you shouldn’t throw stones.”
Student visas come with strict requirements about work
The 2013 Milken Institute event isn’t the only time the brothers’ early immigration status in the US has come up.
“America forces you to be illegal if you want to start a company as an immigrant. I know. That’s how I did it,” Kimbal Musk wrote on Twitter, now X, in 2017.
In addition to that post, the younger Musk, who’s now a SpaceX and Tesla board member and also an entrepreneur behind a number of restaurants and food-related ventures, also brought up the issue during a 2020 appearance on Third Row Tesla, a podcast created by fans of the electric vehicle company.
In the interview, Kimbal Musk again recalled the early days of their startup.
“I don’t know if you were, but I was not legally in America. So I was illegally there,” he said, looking across the table at his brother.
“I was legally there,” Elon Musk responded, “but I was meant to be doing student work.”
A few moments later, describing early conversations with the venture capitalists who helped fund Zip2, Kimbal Musk reiterated details he’d shared in his 2013 remarks: “We had to break the news to them that … we don’t have a car, and we don’t have an apartment, and we are illegal.”
This time, Elon Musk denied the description applied to him.
“You’re illegal,” he said, eliciting laughs from the Tesla fans sitting beside him. “I was legal, but my visa was going to run out in two years.”
During the interview, Elon Musk said that at the time he had a “student work visa.” He also noted that he had decided to defer his Stanford enrollment that year “a couple days into the semester.”
The Musk brothers haven’t responded to CNN’s requests for comment on this exchange either.
Experts who spoke with CNN say these descriptions of what occurred also raise questions about what kind of work authorization Elon Musk had and which institution helped him get it. The description “student work visa” could be referring to various programs, they said, but it’s not an official term. Student visas are generally strict about how much off-campus work is permitted, and that work authorization is directly tied to the academic institution where a student is enrolled.
The complexities are something today’s international students, and the administrators who advise them, follow closely, according to Hunter Swanson, associate director of the Center for International Education at Washington and Lee University in Virginia.
A work permit for optional practical training connected to a student’s areas of academic focus can be granted after graduation, or possibly before graduation if the student is maintaining a full course of study. It’s also possible during an academic program to get permission to work for course credit. Grace periods after graduation allow someone to stay in the United States for a period of time, but no work is allowed in that window.
A foreign student failing to follow these rules today runs the risk of jeopardizing their future in the United States, Swanson says.
“Most international students are very conscientious. They ask people in my position a lot of questions before they do things like accept a job…or even an unpaid internship,” he says. “They’re scared to death of losing their visa status.”
Swanson, who also helps with training as an e-learning dean for an association that represents international educators, says it’s likely regulations weren’t enforced as strictly during Elon Musk’s time as a student. Enforcement of student visa restrictions, and the systems officials use to monitor compliance, intensified dramatically after the September 11 terror attacks, Swanson says. That was years after Elon Musk’s college graduation.
Without more information about what visas and work authorization he had — and when he had them — it’s impossible to draw conclusions about Elon Musk’s immigration journey, Swanson says. “It’s very unclear.”
“It does raise questions,” Swanson says, “but it doesn’t mean what he did wasn’t legal.”
Minear, the former American Immigration Lawyers Association president, also says it’s impossible to know Elon Musk’s immigration path without access to the paper trail in his government file. It’s possible he followed the requirements of his student visa, or that he was granted an exception allowing him to work.
Which institution was connected to his student visa, and when, are key details we don’t know, she said.
If his student visa was tied to a graduate program at Stanford, Minear said, he would have to be actively studying there to remain in status.
And if his work authorization was a form of optional practical training tied to his undergraduate studies at Penn, Minear says that typically would have required him to have graduated — something that Vance’s biography indicates Elon Musk did not do until 1997, well after Zip2 had been established. It would also require Musk to work in a field connected with his degrees, according to Minear.
University of Pennsylvania spokesman Ron Ozio confirmed to CNN that Musk officially graduated in 1997 with degrees in economics and physics.
In Vance’s biography, Musk is quoted stating he didn’t graduate in 1995 due to English and History coursework requirements he hadn’t completed. His degrees, he told Vance, were ultimately granted in 1997 because the requirements had changed.
Asked about reports that Musk deferred his Stanford enrollment days into the fall 1995 semester or dropped out of the school, an official at the university told CNN there’s no record he ever enrolled.
“We can confirm that Mr. Musk applied and was accepted to Stanford’s Materials Science and Engineering graduate program,” Stanford Engineering Associate Dean of Communications and Alumni Affairs Julie Greicius wrote in an email, “but we don’t have any record of him enrolling.”
‘What if Elon Musk had to go through the regular channel?’
Looking at the bigger picture, experts who spoke with CNN also noted that Elon Musk’s story is a telling example of the value immigrants bring to the country.
“The fact that he had any difficulty at all in getting to where he is because of immigration barriers, or (the possibility) that he was out of status at any time and unable to pursue his entrepreneurial goals…is a poor reflection on our current system and speaks to the need for it to be updated and changed,” Minear says.
It’s common for foreign students who dream of becoming entrepreneurs to face immigration hurdles, according to Rajshree Agarwal, director of the Ed Snider Center for Enterprise and Markets at the University of Maryland. Many are forced to pursue paths that require them to continue their studies or work in a lower-level position rather than striking out early on their own, she says.
Musk’s investors reportedly helping him obtain a visa “made him unconstrained from immigration much earlier than is the norm,” Agarwal says. His swift success shows how valuable such support can be, she says, and raises questions about what might have happened if he hadn’t gotten it.
Agarwal says based on her research and observations during her 30-year career as a professor, it’s typical for foreign students to face delays of up to 10 years between when they graduate and when they get a green card, the legal step that allows them to start a new venture. Exactly how much time the process can take varies depending on factors like caps on the number of visas issued and country of origin, she says.
“What if Elon Musk had to go through the regular channel and wait the average of 8 to 10 years … as opposed to being a founder that’s able to make decisions and get right to stakeholders already? Zip2 would not have been created. … What would have been the loss to this country?” she says.
Or, Agarwal asks, what would have happened if Musk had been deported or forced to return to Canada or South Africa?
He wasn’t, and in 1999, Compaq purchased Zip2 for more than $300 million in cash — a deal that provided Elon Musk with more than $20 million and a launch pad for his next entrepreneurial venture. Later that year, he became a cofounder of the online banking system that eventually became PayPal.
How Elon Musk’s views on immigration are shaping the conversation
His business successes since then are well documented — as are his increasingly pointed opinions about immigration.
A CNN analysis of Elon Musk’s posts on X found a marked increase in the number and frequency of his immigration-related posts starting around the time of his border visit last year. This year alone, he’s authored at least 150 immigration-related posts.
That tally, based on a search of immigration-related terms, doesn’t reflect times when Musk has simply shared others’ immigration-related posts or responded to them without directly mentioning words related to the topic — a common approach for Musk, according to Mert Can Bayar, a postdoctoral scholar at the University of Washington who studies conspiracy theories and misinformation.
Immigration-related posts from Musk in the past month include a question about whether Arizona is refusing to remove undocumented voters from its rolls, a message slamming unchecked illegal immigration as “civilizational suicide” and multiple posts arguing Democrats are deliberately importing migrants and pushing to legalize their status in order to secure political control.
But that hasn’t stopped Musk from focusing on the issue. And his posts have a particularly wide reach, Bayar says.
“He’s the most followed account on X. Every post he does gets millions of views. … When he points out something, it’s a disproportionate number of views, and a disproportionate amount of attention,” says Bayar, who’s traced Elon Musk’s role in spreading a resurgent rumor and a misleading video about non-citizens voting in US elections.
Zachary Mueller, senior research director for the immigrant advocacy organization America’s Voice, says Musk’s posts frequently echo the “great replacement theory,” which argues that elites are intentionally facilitating an invasion of non-White migrants to replace the power of White people.
“He’s amplifying it to a new level, and he becomes part of the problem,” Mueller says.
Musk has denied that he’s pushing the racist theory with his posts.
“I don’t subscribe to that. I’m simply saying there is an incentive here. … The more that come into the country, the more they’re likely to vote in that direction. It is, in my view, a simple incentive to increase Democratic voters,” he told Don Lemon earlier this year after the former CNN anchor pointed out that only US citizens can vote in federal elections.
But Mueller says there’s a dehumanizing and racist undertone to many of Musk’s immigration-related posts that shouldn’t be overlooked.
He called Musk’s recent remarks during a live conversation on X with Trump “quite disgustingly notable,” pointing out that Musk compared migrants at the border to a “World War Z zombie apocalypse.”
While some have downplayed the significance of Musk’s intensified focus on immigration, the entrepreneur’s frequent posts about the issue have caught the attention of policy experts like David Bier, director of immigration studies at the libertarian CATO Institute.
When Musk shared a post earlier this year stating that Democrats would not deport migrants because “every illegal is a highly likely vote at some point,” Bier responded with links to numerous articles refuting the claim. “This couldn’t be more wrong,” he wrote, pointing out not only the federal law establishing that only US citizens can vote in federal elections, but that most naturalized citizens don’t vote and that most formerly undocumented immigrants who received amnesty in the 1980s didn’t become citizens for decades, even though they were eligible.
Bier told CNN he felt like he had to chime in. Musk’s inaccurate political framing of the issue, he argues, overlooks the clear reality that economic forces are driving most migration.
“You can’t just totally ignore what he’s saying, because so many people are going to see everything he says,” Bier says. “And he’s a world-renowned entrepreneur. He does have some more clout, I think, than just a politician, who people are kind of more skeptical of.”
Beyond social media, there are signs Musk’s views on immigration and other issues are becoming more influential in the halls of power, too.
Trump has said that if he’s reelected, Musk could play a role in his next administration, as an advisor or in a Cabinet position helping improve government efficiency.
Rep. Joe Wilson, R-South Carolina, cited Musk in March remarks on the House floor.
“Yesterday Elon Musk shocked America,” Wilson began. He went on to quote one of Musk’s posts on X, which warned “it is highly probable that the groundwork is being laid for something far worse than 9/11. Just a matter of time.” The post included a link to an article describing flights of migrants into the US. Neither the article nor Musk’s post mentioned the flights were part of a government program that aims to create more pathways for migrants to enter the US legally and reduce pressure at the border.
Recent posts focus on pioneering space exploration — and more earthly concerns
A SpaceX rocket successfully launched into orbit for the first time on September 28, 2008 — the first time a privately funded rocket had done so. That achievement, and the intense fact-based research and development process at the company, were documented in a glowing GQ profile of Musk that year. The magazine noted that Musk’s companies were trying to find solutions — with solar power, space travel and electric cars — to what he saw as the major challenges of our time.
But on the 15th anniversary of that rocket launch — a major milestone in Musk’s entrepreneurial life — the billionaire was a world away from the SpaceX conference room where GQ had marveled at his ambitions.
On September 28, 2023, Elon Musk’s focus was decidedly earthbound, as he stood beside officials at the US-Mexico border and held his phone in the air.
“We’re just going to go around and talk to the major officials and law enforcement and whatnot that are here, and just kind of eyeball the situation, and get a sense of what’s going on, so you can get kind of, like, the real story,” he said in the live video he shared on X.
Critics argued Musk’s September 2023 border visit, while billed as unfiltered reality, only showed one, slanted side of the issue. But officials who spoke with Musk that day praised him.
“At least he showed up. … You’re talking about a person that can put out the truth and touch the world. I think that’s what Elon did whenever he visited the border, and we appreciate that,” Medina County Sheriff Randy Brown told Fox News.
Elon Musk hasn’t responded to questions from CNN about what he hopes others will see in his immigration story, or why he’s become increasingly focused on immigration.
A year later, there’s no sign Musk’s gaze has shifted.
As SpaceX’s Polaris Dawn mission began earlier this month, he posted frequently on X, touting the company’s space exploration efforts. But between posts about pioneering missions to the stars, he’s shared just as many messages about immigration and the US border.
Regardless of his motivations or the path he took to get here, it’s clear Elon Musk has added another item to his list of the world’s biggest challenges.
One of the game-changing events of this presidential election that didn’t change much. Photo-Illustration: Saul Loeb/AFP/Getty Images
By most conventional standards, the 2024 presidential contest has been wild and crazy. What began as a likely ho-hum rematch of the 2020 nominees went sideways pretty early on when Donald Trump, originally facing 12 primary opponents, started getting indicted for criminal offenses in multiple venues. Despite constant claims that he was finally losing his magic, he crushed his intraparty opposition almost effortlessly, and his legal problems — which included multiple reminders of what he was up to on January 6, 2021, and how he has treated women for many years — seemed to help him politically.
The day he clinched the GOP nomination (March 12), he led Joe Biden in the RealClearPolitics polling averages by 2.1 percent. The day after Biden’s terrible debate performance on June 27, Trump’s lead was actually smaller, at 1.9 percent. His lead over Biden peaked at 3.4 percent on July 6 and ended at 3.1 percent on July 21 when the president dropped out of the race. That’s not a great deal of variation.
The midsummer replacement of Biden by Kamala Harris, an epochal event with no precedent in U.S. history (much like Trump’s criminal charges), at first didn’t shift the polls much at all; Trump maintained a lead in the RCP averages until August 4. Harris then built a modest lead that hasn’t changed in any significant way despite the novelty of her campaign, a clear debate victory on September 10, and two attempted Trump assassinations. She led Trump by 1.5 percent the day after the debate and leads him by 2 percent now. Yes, there are some shifts in support under the surface that have made the seven battleground states as close as or even closer than the national race, but all in all, the picture we have is of two big coalitions of equal size that neither grow nor shrink enough to change the equation. Even another historic development — the emergence and then the eclipse of the largest non-major-party presidential candidacy since 1992 — really didn’t change the balance of power between the two major-party candidates.
To get a sense of how impervious this race has been to the wild dynamics underlying it, let’s compare this year’s polling variation to that of other recent presidential cycles. In 2020, Biden led by 4.4 percent on May 11, by 10.2 percent on June 22, by 5.8 percent on September 16, by 10.3 percent on October 10, and by 7.2 percent in the final averages (he won the national popular vote by 4.5 percent). That’s a pretty good amount of bouncing around. But there was even more in 2016. Hillary Clinton led Trump by 11.2 percent on March 23, Trump led by 0.2 percent on May 23, Clinton rebuilt a 6.8 percent lead on June 26, but Trump regained the lead by 1.1 percent a month later. In the home stretch, Clinton led by 7.1 percent on October 17, but her lead dropped to 1.3 percent by November 2 and her final polling margin was 3.2 percent. She actually won the national popular vote by 2.1 percent. That’s a lot of volatility.
Going further back, we tend to remember the Obama-Romney contest of 2012 as a long, hard slog without that much movement. To some extent, that’s accurate, but Barack Obama led by 4.7 percent on August 11, the two candidates were tied on September 4, and Mitt Romney was up by 1.5 percent on October 9 and by 1 percent on October 26. Obama led in the final averages by 0.7 percent, and he actually won the national popular vote by 3.9 percent. In 2008, Obama led John McCain by 7.5 percent on June 23, McCain led Obama by 2.9 percent on September 7, but then Obama led by 7.6 percent in the final averages (very close to his actual 7.3 percent national popular-vote margin). And going all the way back to 2004, John Kerry led George W. Bush by 2.5 percent on August 11, but by September 8, Bush was up by 7.6 percent. In the final averages, Bush led by only 1.5 percent, a bit short of his actual margin of 2.4 percent. Election Night 2004 saw some bonus volatility as the exit polls were badly flawed and Team Kerry thought it had won.
So with all the volatility of the 2024 contest — its indictments, its candidate switch, its decisive debates, and whatever surprises lie ahead — the race has been a testament to fairly stable public sentiment and, most likely, partisan polarization. It’s so very close that it’s tempting to look ahead to the next development (e.g., next week’s vice-presidential debate) as a potential game changer, but we probably won’t know what most influenced the outcome until it’s all over. With luck, that will be long before the presidential electors meet on December 17.
![Hood’s Hottest [Political] Princess: Sexyy Red Joins Team Blue, Backs Kamala Harris After Dropping Donald Trump](https://reportwire.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/28/2024/07/17199509059682.jpg?strip=all&quality=80)
