Kamala Harris and Donald Trump Exchange Sharp Accusations in Heated First Debate of the 2024 Presidential Election

In their first face-off of the 2024 US presidential election, Kamala Harris and Donald Trump engaged in a fiery debate filled with mutual accusations, highlighting their sharply contrasting visions for America’s future. Both candidates accused each other of weakness and dishonesty throughout the exchange, reflecting the intense stakes of the race.

Debate Over Leadership and Accomplishments

In their closing statements, Harris emphasized her focus on the future, pointing to plans that she believes will steer the country forward. Trump countered by questioning her effectiveness as Vice-President, suggesting that if she had concrete plans, she should have already implemented them during her current tenure.

Contention Over Afghanistan

The debate heated up when the topic shifted to Afghanistan. Harris criticized Trump’s approach of meeting with the Taliban, arguing that it undermined U.S. credibility. In response, Trump defended his actions, insisting that the Biden administration mishandled the pullout deal he had orchestrated, leading to a chaotic withdrawal.

Clashing Views on Israel and Middle East Policy

On the issue of Israel, Trump asserted that there would be no war if he were still president, positioning himself as a strong leader on foreign policy. Harris, in contrast, called for a “two-state solution” and an end to ongoing conflicts, signaling a more diplomatic approach to resolving tensions in the region.

January 6 Riot and Calls for Accountability

When asked about the January 6 Capitol riot, Trump refused to express any regrets about his actions or statements surrounding the event. Harris, however, condemned the chaos of that day and urged the nation to “turn the page” and move forward, presenting herself as a candidate who seeks healing and unity.

Debate Over Abortion Rights and State Autonomy

On the contentious issue of abortion rights, Trump highlighted his role in returning the issue to the states, framing it as a victory for state autonomy. Harris, however, criticized this position by referencing Project 2025, arguing that state-level bans deny women essential healthcare, painting Trump’s stance as a direct threat to women’s rights.

Exchange of Insults Over Foreign Policy and Leadership

The debate reached a peak when Harris accused Trump of being soft on Vladimir Putin, stating, “Putin is a dictator who will eat you for lunch.” Trump fired back, labeling Harris “the worst vice-president in history,” underscoring the personal animosity between the two candidates.

As the 2024 presidential race unfolds, this debate has set the stage for a bitter contest where both candidates are prepared to go head-to-head on critical issues facing the nation, from foreign policy and national security to reproductive rights and the future of democracy.

Kamala Harris and Donald Trump Prepare for High-Stakes Debate with Starkly Different Strategies

Kamala Harris and Donald Trump are preparing for Tuesday’s presidential debate, employing vastly different approaches that highlight their contrasting political styles and visions for the nation. The vice president is taking a meticulous, focused approach, while Trump has opted for a more improvisational strategy, relying on instinct over extensive preparation.

Harris has chosen a historic hotel in downtown Pittsburgh as her base, where she can concentrate on crafting precise two-minute responses, in line with the debate’s rules. Aides have been working with her since Thursday, and her chosen location offers the additional benefit of allowing her to engage with voters in the crucial swing state.

Meanwhile, Trump, the Republican candidate, has largely dismissed traditional debate preparation. Instead of intensive rehearsals, he continues to attend campaign events, believing he will be prepared once he steps on stage at the National Constitution Center in Philadelphia.

“You can go in with all the strategy you want, but you have to sort of feel it out as the debate’s taking place,” Trump remarked during a town hall hosted by Sean Hannity on Fox News. He reinforced his point by quoting former boxing champion Mike Tyson, saying, “Everybody has a plan until they get punched in the face.”

Harris is well aware of Trump’s potential to throw insults and misrepresent facts during the debate. However, her campaign sees value in remaining focused on issues that matter to middle-class Americans, such as economic growth and the nation’s future.

“We should be prepared for the fact that he is not burdened by telling the truth,” Harris noted in a radio interview with the Rickey Smiley Morning Show. “He tends to fight for himself, not for the American people, and I think that’s going to come out during the course of the debate.”

In her preparation, Harris has been working with Philippe Reines, a Democratic consultant and former aide to Hillary Clinton, who is standing in as Trump during her practice sessions. Harris has frequently criticized Trump’s approach, accusing him of following a “playbook” of falsehoods used against prominent Democrats like Clinton and Barack Obama.

Harris also claims that she understands Trump’s mindset on a psychological level, which has shaped her strategy for confronting him in the debate. During speeches such as her remarks at the Democratic National Convention, she has sought to position herself as a stronger leader than Trump, a direct challenge to his focus on projecting strength.

Trump’s debate against President Joe Biden on June 27 reshaped the election, ultimately leading Biden to step aside as the Democratic nominee and throw his support behind Harris. Both campaigns are aware that Tuesday’s debate could be a pivotal moment in what has become a closely contested race.

Trump, who has repeatedly questioned the impartiality of the media, is already criticizing the ABC News moderators set to oversee the debate. Nevertheless, he insists he will let Harris speak, just as he did during his debate with Biden. “I let him talk. I’m gonna let her talk,” Trump said during the Hannity town hall.

Despite the lack of formal preparation, Trump’s team insists he is ready for the debate. According to his aides, the strategy will be similar to his approach in the previous debate—no stand-ins, no mock debate setups, and no elaborate rehearsals.

Trump’s aides point to his frequent appearances in interviews, long press conferences, and podcasts as his method of staying sharp on the issues. These informal sessions, they argue, help keep him well-versed in the topics that could arise during the debate.

“We have meetings on it. We talk about it. But there’s not a lot you can do. You either know your subject or not. You either have good policy or not,” Trump said in a New Hampshire radio interview.

Ahead of the previous debate, Trump prepared with prominent Republicans like Senator Marco Rubio, who was then under consideration as a potential running mate. This time, his team has turned to Tulsi Gabbard, the former Democratic congresswoman and presidential candidate who is now backing Trump. Gabbard, who debated Harris during the 2020 Democratic primary, has been brought in to help Trump fine-tune his strategy. She also recently hosted a town hall with Trump in Wisconsin.

Trump’s campaign is intent on putting Harris on the defensive, portraying her as too liberal and connecting her policies to Biden’s economic record. They plan to highlight her shifting stances on issues such as her previous support for a fracking ban, which she has since renounced.

“We look forward to the opportunity for Americans to see her on stage, incapable of defending her policies and flip-flops,” said Trump campaign spokeswoman Karoline Leavitt. “The president’s proven he has a command of the issues, she does not.”

Harris’s team is betting that Trump will come across as too extreme during the debate. They hope to use the event to build on the momentum generated by her relatively brief campaign. Over the weekend, the campaign plans to hold 2,000 events across the country, aiming to reach more than one million voters.

“With hundreds of offices and thousands of staff across the battlegrounds, we are able to harness all the buzz around the debate and break through to hard-to-reach voters,” Dan Kanninen, the campaign’s battleground states director, said in a statement.

The debate is shaping up to be a critical moment in the election, with both candidates keen to capitalize on the opportunity to sway undecided voters. For Trump, the goal is to paint Harris as out of touch with middle America, while Harris aims to show she is a more credible leader with a vision for a stronger, more united country.

As both candidates gear up for the high-stakes debate, their divergent approaches reflect not only their individual personalities but also the broader ideological battle at the heart of this election. Harris, with her disciplined preparation and focus on policy, is preparing to meet Trump’s unorthodox, instinct-driven approach head-on. The outcome of their clash could have far-reaching implications for the future of American politics.

Goldman Sachs Analysts Predict Economic Impact of Potential Trump Presidency

Analysts from Goldman Sachs have issued a warning that former President Donald Trump’s return to office and the implementation of his proposed economic policies could result in a decline in U.S. economic performance. In particular, they highlighted that Trump’s plans to impose stricter immigration policies and levy new tariffs on Chinese goods could significantly reduce the country’s gross domestic product (GDP) growth.

Goldman Sachs’ forecast suggests that if Trump wins the 2024 election, the U.S. economy could experience a reduction in GDP growth by about half a percentage point in the latter half of 2025. However, the report also indicated that the economy could see some recovery the following year. “We estimate that if Trump wins in a sweep or with divided government, the hit to growth from tariffs and tighter immigration policy would outweigh the positive fiscal impulse,” Goldman analysts wrote in their analysis on Tuesday.

According to their predictions, Trump’s economic policies, particularly those focused on tariffs and immigration, would have a greater negative impact on growth than the potential benefits from any fiscal stimulus measures his administration might introduce. The Goldman analysts were cautious about how these proposals could affect broader economic conditions, particularly in relation to international trade and labor markets.

Trump’s proposal to increase tariffs on Chinese imports, aimed at reducing America’s trade deficit, was a key point in his economic agenda during his previous tenure. However, while such measures may aim to protect American industries, they also risk escalating trade tensions with China, one of the United States’ largest trading partners. These tariffs could lead to increased costs for U.S. consumers and businesses, which might slow down economic growth.

Moreover, the report raised concerns about Trump’s intention to tighten immigration laws. Restrictive immigration policies could limit the availability of labor, particularly in industries that heavily rely on immigrant workers, such as agriculture, construction, and healthcare. A shortage of workers in these sectors could disrupt supply chains and drive up wages, leading to inflationary pressures.

On the other hand, Goldman Sachs analysts provided a contrasting economic outlook in the event of a Harris presidency, particularly if Vice President Kamala Harris were to win the 2024 election with Democratic control of Congress. They predicted that her economic policies could lead to more favorable growth outcomes, with spending initiatives and tax credits acting as significant drivers of economic expansion.

Goldman analysts argued that Harris’s proposed policies would “more than offset” the negative impact of a higher corporate income tax rate, which she has suggested raising to 28 percent. The analysts believe that these spending initiatives would stimulate the economy by boosting investments in infrastructure, education, and healthcare, among other areas.

The corporate tax rate has been a contentious issue in U.S. politics. Trump’s 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act reduced the corporate tax rate from 35 percent to 21 percent, a move that was designed to spur business investment and economic growth. However, Harris, like President Biden, has called for the corporate tax rate to be increased to 28 percent to fund social programs and reduce the national deficit. Biden’s recent budget proposal also included this tax increase as a way to balance the government’s fiscal policies.

In a scenario where Harris wins the presidency but Congress remains divided between Republicans and Democrats, Goldman Sachs predicted a more neutral outcome for the economy. In this case, policy changes would likely be minimal, resulting in little to no effect on GDP growth. “Policy changes would be small and have a neutral effect on GDP,” the Goldman report stated.

The Harris-Walz campaign expressed optimism about their economic vision. Joseph Costello, a spokesperson for the Harris-Walz campaign, highlighted the positive impact their policies could have on middle-class families and small businesses. “Vice President Harris has a positive vision to strengthen the economy by building up the middle class, cutting taxes and lowering costs for working families and small businesses, and creating opportunities for all Americans to get ahead. On the economy, the choice could not be any more clear this November,” Costello said.

Despite the attention on Trump’s and Harris’s policies, the Trump campaign has yet to provide a response to Goldman Sachs’ predictions. The analysis of the economic outlook for a potential Trump presidency comes at a time when the country is already facing numerous challenges, including inflation, labor shortages, and fluctuating job market conditions.

In addition to concerns about the long-term economic policies of the next administration, Goldman Sachs also pointed out the potential impact of short-term monetary policy changes under the Federal Reserve. The Federal Reserve is widely expected to lower interest rates in September, marking the first rate cut in over five years. According to the CME Fed Watch tool, as of Wednesday, there is a 57 percent chance of a quarter-point rate cut.

A report from the U.S. Labor Department released on Wednesday, which showed weaker-than-expected job openings, has increased the likelihood of a more significant rate cut. However, most analysts believe that a quarter-point reduction remains the most probable scenario.

This news follows the release of the July jobs report, which revealed a slight increase in unemployment, rising from 4.1 percent to 4.3 percent. While this uptick is modest, it has raised concerns about the overall strength of the labor market. A slowdown in hiring, combined with ongoing inflationary pressures, could influence the Federal Reserve’s decisions in the coming months.

Further complicating the economic picture is the ongoing behavior of bond markets, where yield curves are beginning to show signs of renormalization. Yield curves, which plot the interest rates of bonds of varying maturities, have been inverted for the past two years. An inverted yield curve, where short-term bonds yield more than long-term bonds, is often seen as a signal of an impending recession. However, the bond market is now showing signs that this inversion may be coming to an end, with the 10-year Treasury yield starting to pay out more than the 2-year Treasury yield.

Despite these warning signs, a recession has yet to materialize, leaving some market analysts cautiously optimistic. Nevertheless, the outcome of the 2024 election could significantly shape the future economic landscape, as the next president will inherit an economy facing numerous challenges, from inflation to labor shortages to international trade tensions.

As the election approaches, voters will have a stark choice between two very different economic visions. While Trump’s policies focus on protecting American industries through tariffs and reducing immigration, Harris has positioned herself as a champion of the middle class, advocating for higher corporate taxes and increased government spending to stimulate economic growth.

Ultimately, the direction of the U.S. economy in the coming years will depend not only on the policies of the next president but also on global economic conditions and domestic market dynamics. As Goldman Sachs analysts have shown, the economic consequences of the 2024 election could be significant, making it a critical issue for both policymakers and voters alike.

Trump Sentencing Delayed Until After Presidential Election

A New York judge on Friday granted former President Donald Trump a delay in his sentencing until November 26, ensuring that he will not face any criminal penalties before the 2024 presidential election. This development is part of a broader legal strategy Trump has employed in hopes of postponing or dismissing his criminal cases while seeking to reclaim the White House.

Trump has faced multiple criminal cases, three of which have already been deferred or entangled in pretrial matters beyond the election. The Friday ruling provided a similar outcome for Trump in the hush money case, which stands as the only one resulting in a guilty verdict thus far.

The sentencing for this case, originally scheduled for September 18, was postponed by Judge Juan Merchan. The decision came after Trump argued that a delay was necessary for various reasons, including his intent to appeal if Merchan did not dismiss the 34-count conviction on the grounds of presidential immunity. The ruling offers Trump yet another legal victory in his ongoing efforts to manage his court proceedings while campaigning for the presidency.

In explaining the delay, Merchan stressed the importance of not allowing the case to influence the outcome of the upcoming election or to be influenced by it. “This matter is one that stands alone, in a unique place in this Nation’s history,” Merchan wrote, emphasizing that he had presided over the case from its start and that careful consideration would be necessary moving forward.

Judge Merchan added, “Were this Court to decide, after careful consideration of the Supreme Court’s decision in Trump, that this case should proceed, it will be faced with one of the most critical and difficult decisions a trial court judge faces — the sentencing of a defendant found guilty of crimes by a unanimous jury of his peers.”

Trump has a long history of seeking to delay legal proceedings against him. Despite numerous efforts to postpone his hush money trial, including an attempt to move the case to federal court, most of these efforts have been unsuccessful. A federal judge swiftly rejected Trump’s attempt to transfer the case, stating that the former president had failed to demonstrate “good cause.”

However, following a recent U.S. Supreme Court ruling that carved out certain protections for former presidents, Trump has experienced new success in slowing the legal processes against him. This ruling established that former presidents have presumptive criminal immunity for official acts carried out during their time in office. Any protected actions cannot be presented as evidence in related cases.

Reacting to the delay, Trump posted on his Truth Social account, expressing his belief that the case should be dismissed entirely. “This case should be rightfully terminated as we prepare for the Most Important Election in the History of our Country,” Trump wrote.

The case involves 34 charges of falsifying business records, linked to hush money payments made during Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign. Merchan initially scheduled sentencing for July, with Trump’s legal team not objecting at the time. However, after the Supreme Court’s ruling on presidential immunity, Trump’s lawyers pushed for further delays, which Merchan granted, rescheduling the sentencing for September. The defense team argued that the jury had improperly seen social media posts, ethics documents, and testimony from White House aides, which they claimed were protected by presidential immunity.

Judge Merchan was originally expected to rule on Trump’s immunity arguments by September 16, raising concerns about potential last-minute legal challenges before the sentencing. Trump’s legal team filed a request for a further delay, citing the limited time available to protect Trump’s rights. “A single business day is an unreasonably short period of time for President Trump to seek to vindicate these rights, if he must, in order to avoid the ‘prospect of an Executive Branch that cannibalizes itself’ in future generations,” his attorneys wrote.

With the new delay in place, Merchan is set to rule on Trump’s immunity claims by November 12, just days after the presidential election. If the conviction is not overturned, sentencing will proceed on November 26.

In justifying the delay, Merchan emphasized that the court must remain impartial and independent. “The Court is a fair, impartial, and apolitical institution,” Merchan wrote, adding that the delay would avoid any suggestion that the court’s decisions could influence the political landscape. “Adjourning decision on the motion and sentencing, if such is required, should dispel any suggestion that the Court will have issued any decision or imposed sentence either to give an advantage to, or to create a disadvantage for, any political party and/or any candidate for any office,” he stated.

Following the judge’s decision, Steven Cheung, a spokesperson for Trump’s campaign, reiterated that there should be no sentencing at all in this case. He cited the Supreme Court’s decision on presidential immunity, arguing that Trump’s hush money case and other legal challenges should be dismissed. On the other hand, a spokesperson for the Manhattan District Attorney’s office pointed to the unanimous conviction by a New York jury, affirming the case’s legitimacy. “The Manhattan D.A.’s Office stands ready for sentencing on the new date set by the court,” the spokesperson said.

Prosecutors did not oppose the delay but deferred to Judge Merchan, citing logistical challenges and security concerns. They also highlighted issues in Trump’s previous delay efforts, including claims regarding the judge’s daughter’s work at a progressive digital agency, which had been rejected. While prosecutors expressed reservations about some of Trump’s arguments, they ultimately deferred to the court’s decision. “The People respectfully defer to the Court on the appropriate post-trial schedule,” they wrote.

This delay continues a pattern in Trump’s legal strategy, as he seeks to defer proceedings until after the 2024 election, hoping to regain political power and potentially shield himself from further prosecution. The delayed sentencing now leaves Trump with time to focus on his campaign, while the courts continue to navigate the complexities of his legal battles.

Trump’s Legal Battle Over January 6 Prosecution Returns to Courtroom Amid Immunity Debate

Former President Donald Trump’s legal team and federal prosecutors faced off in court on Thursday, marking a significant moment in the ongoing legal battle over his January 6th-related criminal prosecution. The case had been on hold for months as Trump appealed to the Supreme Court, arguing that presidential immunity protected him from prosecution. The Supreme Court’s ruling in July left it to U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan to decide the extent of Trump’s immunity, leading to Thursday’s hearing—the first in nearly a year where both sides returned to her courtroom.

At the conclusion of the hearing, Chutkan stated she would issue an order later that day outlining the case’s next steps. However, she refrained from setting a final trial date, suggesting it would be an “exercise in futility” given the uncertain circumstances surrounding the case, including Trump’s ongoing appeal and the upcoming presidential election.

Who Should Go First?

The proceedings started with Trump’s legal team formally entering a not-guilty plea to the new version of his indictment. Much of the hearing was then consumed by the question of which side should initiate further arguments on the Supreme Court’s ruling about presidential immunity.

The Supreme Court had clarified that core presidential actions were immune, with other official acts being presumptively immune, while private conduct was not protected. Now, Judge Chutkan must decide which parts of Trump’s conduct fall into each category.

Prosecutor Thomas Windom, representing special counsel Jack Smith’s team, suggested that the prosecution should go first in presenting arguments to defend the indictment. Windom proposed, “We would set forth for the court why we believe the conduct in the brief is private in nature and therefore not subject to immunity.”

However, Trump’s attorney, John Lauro, argued that it would be prejudicial to allow the prosecution to start. He insisted that Trump’s legal team should make the first move, suggesting they should file a motion to dismiss the new charges in the superseding indictment—a move that could halt the case entirely. Lauro stated, “We want an orderly process that does honor to the Supreme Court ruling,” while pointing out that it was “a very sensitive time in our nation’s history.”

Judge Chutkan reacted with a slight, soft “oh” at one point during Lauro’s comments and swiveled her chair, suggesting that Lauro might be thinking about the upcoming presidential election. She speculated that Trump’s team wanted to avoid the public release of evidence before Election Day—a notion Lauro denied. Chutkan responded firmly, “This court is not concerned with the electoral schedule. That’s nothing I’m going to consider.”

The Pence Factor

One key issue in Trump’s indictment revolves around the pressure campaign he allegedly waged against then-Vice President Mike Pence. Trump’s attorney, Lauro, contended that Trump’s conversations with Pence should be protected under the Supreme Court’s presidential immunity ruling. Lauro emphasized his stance, saying, “I’m an originalist,” and took the ruling “literally.”

Judge Chutkan, however, swiftly corrected him, asserting that the Supreme Court did not give blanket immunity to Trump for his communications with Pence. She reminded Lauro that the justices left it to her to determine the application of immunity in this case. “They sent it back to me to figure that one out,” she said.

Lauro argued that the Pence-related allegations are a “gateway legal issue,” meaning that if Trump’s efforts to pressure Pence to certify fake electors are deemed immune, it could unravel the entire indictment. However, prosecutor Windom pointed out that the defense seemed to be selectively interpreting the Supreme Court’s ruling, saying the court did not suggest the indictment would disappear even if Trump’s conversations with Pence were deemed immune.

Evidence in Focus

The hearing also touched on how evidence would be handled moving forward. Windom clarified that the government would not push for a so-called minitrial, which would include live witness testimony. Instead, they were prepared to present their case on paper, offering a factual basis that could include grand jury transcripts, documents, and exhibits that had not yet been made public.

Lauro, in response, expressed that Trump’s team would need time to thoroughly review the discovery materials, suggesting that the government had not yet turned over all the evidence they were entitled to. Prosecutors, however, dismissed this claim, with Windom stating, “You can set a deadline for today,” and adding that the government had already fulfilled its discovery obligations.

Challenge to Special Counsel’s Authority

Trump’s legal team also plans to file a motion challenging the legality of Jack Smith’s appointment as special counsel, echoing a strategy they successfully employed in Trump’s Florida-based classified documents case. In that case, Judge Aileen Cannon ruled that Smith’s appointment was unlawful, although Smith has since appealed the decision.

This move has surprised some legal experts, as it challenges 50 years of legal precedent regarding special counsel appointments. Lauro pointed to a concurring opinion from Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, which raised questions about special counsel authority. Lauro claimed Thomas “in effect directed us” to pursue this argument.

However, Judge Chutkan indicated she might not view the argument favorably, noting that she didn’t find Cannon’s ruling persuasive. “You want me to go against binding circuit precedence?” she asked, referring to Thomas’s remarks as “dicta in a concurrence,” which means they were merely passing comments and not binding.

At one point during this discussion, Smith was seen smiling and laughing, while Lauro continued to outline his legal strategy, also signaling plans to cite a recent Supreme Court ruling that limited the use of obstruction charges against January 6 defendants—a charge that Trump himself faces.

Setting a Trial Date?

Towards the end of the hearing, Chutkan declined to set a trial date for Trump’s case, predicting further delays as Trump’s legal team is expected to file more appeals. She noted that any decision she made would likely be appealed, which would almost certainly prolong the case.

Chutkan acknowledged that the upcoming 2024 presidential election could complicate the case’s timeline, especially if Trump wins the election and his Justice Department moves to dismiss the charges against him. Nevertheless, she reiterated that the election itself is “not relevant” to the court’s proceedings and will not influence her decisions.

Reunion in the Courtroom

Thursday’s hearing also marked a rare reunion between Trump’s legal team and prosecutors, with both sides returning to Chutkan’s courtroom for the first time in nearly a year. Jack Smith attended the hearing, sitting in the front row of the courtroom gallery, though Trump was absent, as the judge had accepted his waiver for not appearing.

Trump’s attorneys have had several tense exchanges with Chutkan in the past, even asking for her recusal. Despite these disagreements, the hearing on Thursday also had its lighter moments. When Chutkan entered the courtroom, she joked, “You look rested, Mr. Lauro,” to which Lauro humorously responded, “Life was almost meaningless without seeing you.”

However, the tension soon returned as Chutkan expressed skepticism about many of Lauro’s arguments, at one point telling him, “I don’t need any more rhetoric on how serious and grave this is.” Lauro replied, “It’s not rhetoric, it’s called legal argument.”

The court proceedings continue as both sides brace for what promises to be a long and contentious legal battle.

Kamala Harris Calls for Action on Gun Violence After Georgia School Shooting

Democratic presidential candidate and current Vice President Kamala Harris, on September 4, made an impassioned plea for Americans to put an end to the “epidemic of gun violence” in the country. This call to action came in response to a mass shooting that took place at Apalachee High School in Winder, Georgia, which claimed the lives of four individuals. Harris used the occasion to once again push for stricter gun safety measures, including a ban on assault weapons, despite the staunch opposition from Republican leaders.

Speaking at a rally in New Hampshire, Harris expressed her deep sorrow over the shooting in Georgia, which added to the growing number of mass shootings across the nation in recent years. “This is just a senseless tragedy, on top of so many senseless tragedies,” Harris stated, reflecting the emotions of many Americans who have become all too familiar with the frequent news of gun violence.

The mass shooting at the Georgia high school was one of the hundreds of such incidents that have rocked the United States in 2024 alone. Harris pointed to this tragic reality, acknowledging the fears that parents across the country experience daily. “It’s just outrageous that every day in our country, in the United States of America, that parents send their children to school worried about whether or not their child will come home alive,” she said. Harris emphasized that while these mass shootings have become alarmingly common, they do not represent an inevitable reality for the country. “We have to end this epidemic of gun violence in our country once and for all. It doesn’t have to be this way,” she stressed.

In the wake of this tragedy, Harris renewed her call for stronger gun control measures, specifically advocating for a ban on assault weapons. Such a position has drawn fierce resistance from many Republicans who argue that it infringes on the rights of gun owners. Despite this opposition, Harris remains committed to her stance on gun control, echoing a sentiment she has shared throughout her political career. She highlighted the need for Congress to pass a new assault weapons ban, similar to the one that had been enacted in 1994 during President Joe Biden’s time as a senator. That law had expired in 2004, and efforts to reinstate it have repeatedly stalled in Congress since then.

Harris didn’t stop at the assault weapons ban. She also called for universal background checks, a policy that would ensure all firearm buyers undergo a criminal history review, regardless of where they purchase their guns. In addition, she advocated for the adoption of “red flag” laws, which would allow authorities to prevent individuals deemed dangerous from buying or possessing firearms. These red flag laws, known as state protective orders, aim to reduce gun violence by proactively identifying potential threats before they escalate into tragedy.

“It is a false choice to say you’re either in favor of the Second Amendment or you want to take everyone’s guns away,” Harris said, addressing a long-standing argument from gun rights advocates. Harris has repeatedly argued that common-sense gun control laws can coexist with the constitutional rights of Americans to bear arms. “I’m in favor of the Second Amendment, and I know we need reasonable gun safety laws in our country,” she added.

Meanwhile, former President Donald Trump, Harris’ main Republican opponent in the upcoming election, responded to the shooting with a message of condolence. Trump, who is widely recognized as a champion of gun rights by his party, expressed his sorrow over the incident. He took to social media to post, “Our hearts are with the victims,” and went on to describe the shooter as a “sick and deranged monster” responsible for taking the lives of “cherished children…far too soon.” Trump, however, stopped short of endorsing any new gun control measures, reflecting his strong alignment with Republican opposition to such regulations.

Gun control has long been a divisive issue in American politics, with advocates for stricter laws arguing that they are necessary to reduce the frequency of mass shootings and gun-related deaths, while opponents, particularly within the Republican Party, argue that such laws infringe on constitutional rights and fail to address the root causes of violence. This ideological clash has contributed to the political deadlock that has stymied legislative efforts to pass comprehensive gun reform at the federal level.

Harris, a former prosecutor and California Attorney General, has positioned herself as a vocal advocate for gun safety laws throughout her career. She has often pointed to her experience in law enforcement as evidence of her understanding of the complexities of the issue. Her support for gun control has been consistent, even as the debate over gun rights continues to polarize American voters. Harris’ background in law enforcement also lends credibility to her arguments for reasonable restrictions on firearms without compromising the constitutional rights of responsible gun owners.

As the presidential race heats up, gun violence is emerging as a key issue on the campaign trail. With hundreds of mass shootings taking place in the U.S. each year, the debate over how to address gun violence has gained renewed urgency. For Harris, this issue is a central part of her campaign platform, and she has promised to make gun safety reforms a priority if she is elected president.

Despite the broad public support for some gun control measures, such as background checks, the political landscape remains challenging for those advocating for stricter laws. The powerful gun rights lobby, particularly the National Rifle Association (NRA), continues to wield significant influence over Republican lawmakers, making it difficult for Democrats like Harris to advance their proposals.

Harris’ campaign message is clear: gun violence in America has reached an unacceptable level, and immediate action is necessary to prevent further tragedies. She believes that by implementing measures such as an assault weapons ban, universal background checks, and red flag laws, the country can significantly reduce the number of mass shootings and protect innocent lives.

In contrast, Trump and other Republican leaders argue that the focus should be on mental health and other factors contributing to violent behavior rather than restricting access to firearms. The division between these two perspectives is likely to remain a contentious point throughout the 2024 election cycle.

With the Georgia shooting fresh in the minds of many voters, Harris’ appeal for action on gun violence may resonate with those seeking solutions to an issue that has long plagued the nation. As the election draws closer, both candidates will likely continue to address the topic, albeit from very different viewpoints, making gun control a central issue in the race for the White House.

Trump Shifts Focus in Battleground States as Kamala Harris Gains Ground in Polls

Former President Donald Trump is adjusting his campaign strategy, scaling back efforts in key states he had aggressively targeted just six weeks ago. This shift reflects how Vice President Kamala Harris’ rise in the polls has reshaped the dynamics of the 2024 presidential race.

Key Adjustments in Trump’s Strategy

The Trump campaign is pulling back from New Hampshire, Minnesota, and Virginia. Instead, it is concentrating resources on Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin, commonly referred to as the “Blue Wall” states. These states are critical for both Republicans and Democrats in securing the White House.

Additionally, Trump is refocusing on North Carolina, Arizona, and Nevada. These states were initially considered strongholds for Trump before Harris entered the race, making them much more competitive.

This stands in stark contrast to late July when Trump, fresh off the Republican National Convention in Milwaukee, appeared to have a smooth path toward a potential victory. At that time, the Trump campaign was optimistic about its chances in Minnesota and Virginia, even claiming that both states were “prime opportunities to flip.”

However, the political landscape changed significantly when President Joe Biden exited the race, and Kamala Harris emerged as the presumptive Democratic nominee, putting Trump on the defensive.

New Hampshire: A Shift in Focus

In New Hampshire, the Trump campaign is notably drawing down its operations. A volunteer within the campaign shared in an email that the state was no longer viewed as a battleground and urged staff to shift their focus to Pennsylvania.

The campaign has denied this claim, maintaining that their Manchester, New Hampshire office remains fully operational. However, this volunteer’s statement highlights the changes in the campaign’s strategic approach.

Minnesota: Mixed Signals

In Minnesota, the situation is more complex. Trump’s campaign initially saw the state as a prime battleground and planned an extensive ground game. Following the Republican convention, Trump and his running mate, Ohio Senator JD Vance, held a rally in St. Cloud, Minnesota. At that time, the campaign was confident, announcing plans to open eight campaign offices and expand staff in the state.

Despite these bold claims, most of the roughly dozen campaign offices were established before Harris and Minnesota Governor Tim Walz, her running mate, joined the Democratic ticket. Since then, the campaign has hired only two full-time staff members—a state director and a senior advisor. However, a spokesperson for the Minnesota Republican Party confirmed that at least 14 full-time staffers are currently dedicated to Trump’s reelection efforts.

Minnesota Republican Party chair David Hann admitted that “the [state] party and Trump campaign have been working jointly with our local organizations to get those [offices] staffed up.” He emphasized that the campaign remains invested in the state and cited strong voter outreach efforts and volunteer engagement.

Virginia: Early Momentum Fades

In Virginia, Trump and Vance both held rallies earlier in the summer before Harris entered the race. Trump appeared in Chesapeake on June 28, just one day after his debate with Biden. Vance made his first solo appearance as the vice-presidential nominee in Radford, Virginia, on July 22, shortly after the GOP convention.

Although Trump’s campaign has continued to express optimism about winning Virginia, polls now show that Harris has overtaken Trump’s lead, securing a small but significant advantage in the state. “I truly believe we’re going to win the state,” Eric Trump said recently.

However, in the last six weeks, Trump has not held a rally in Virginia, and the campaign has seemingly ceased issuing memos touting internal polling data that once suggested the state was flippable. This quiet retreat from the state suggests that the campaign may be rethinking its earlier confidence.

Renewed Focus on the Blue Wall States

Meanwhile, Trump’s campaign has dramatically increased its spending on advertising in Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin, indicating the importance of these Blue Wall states to his strategy. The campaign has also ramped up spending in states that were once considered safe for Trump but are now becoming more competitive due to Harris’ growing momentum.

In North Carolina, for instance, both Trump’s campaign and MAGA Inc., a super PAC supporting him, have collectively spent over $16 million on ads, a sign of how seriously they are taking Harris’ growing appeal in the state.

What Trump’s Campaign is Saying

Trump’s campaign remains publicly optimistic despite these changes in focus. Rachel Reisner, Trump’s battleground states director, emphasized that the campaign continues to build a powerful ground operation. “Team Trump continues to build out the most robust and modern ground game ever,” Reisner told Axios.

Reisner also highlighted the campaign’s steady growth, stating, “Our team is only expanding—we have new staff, offices, and volunteers weekly—with more enthusiasm, energy, and support from people and states Democrats take for granted.”

While the campaign insists that it is continuing to expand its operations and volunteer base, the shift away from earlier targeted states such as New Hampshire, Minnesota, and Virginia shows that the political landscape has changed. The rise of Kamala Harris as a competitive contender has forced Trump to refocus his efforts on crucial battleground states that will likely determine the outcome of the election.

Trump’s campaign strategy has undergone significant recalibration in response to Harris’ ascent in the polls. While the campaign was once confident in its chances of flipping traditionally Democratic states, the current focus is now on fortifying support in key battleground states where Harris’ competitiveness has shifted the dynamics. With both campaigns pouring resources into the Blue Wall and other critical states, the battle for the presidency is far from settled.

Father Arrested After Son’s School Shooting in Georgia Leaves Four Dead, Nine Injured

On Thursday, Georgia state authorities arrested the father of a 14-year-old boy suspected of carrying out a tragic school shooting that killed four people and injured nine others at Apalachee High School in Winder. Officials said the father, Colin Gray, 54, knowingly allowed his son to possess the weapon used in the massacre.

The Georgia Bureau of Investigation (GBI) announced that Colin Gray was charged with four counts of involuntary manslaughter, two counts of second-degree murder, and eight counts of cruelty to children. Chris Hosey, director of the GBI, said, “These charges stem from Mr. Gray knowingly allowing his son Colt to possess a weapon.”

Colt Gray, 14, was charged with four counts of felony murder and is set to be tried as an adult. His arraignment is scheduled for Friday morning, where he will appear before a Georgia Superior Court judge via video from Barrow County.

The younger Gray allegedly used a semi-automatic rifle, described as an “AR platform style weapon,” to carry out the attack. The victims of the shooting included two teachers, Richard Aspinwall, 39, and Cristina Irimie, 53, as well as two 14-year-old students, Mason Schermerhorn and Christian Angulo. Authorities are still investigating how the teen came into possession of the weapon, though the details remain unclear.

The incident, which marks the first mass shooting on a U.S. campus this school year, has reignited national debates surrounding gun control and school safety. Grieving communities and the nation at large are once again confronted with the devastating aftermath of such violence.

Barrow County Sheriff Jud Smith said two teachers and seven students were injured in the attack, some of whom have already been discharged from the hospital. “The nine injured, I am very happy to say, will make a full recovery,” Smith stated during a press conference.

The events at Apalachee High School unfolded in Winder, a city of approximately 18,000 people located about 50 miles northeast of Atlanta. With the 2023 school year recently underway, the tragedy has deeply shaken the local community.

The decision to arrest and charge the father, Colin Gray, reflects a shift in legal approaches to school shootings in the United States. Holding parents accountable for their children’s actions is not a common legal strategy, but it may become more frequent as officials look for new ways to address the epidemic of school shootings.

The precedent for charging parents in school shootings was set earlier this year in Michigan, where the parents of a teenager convicted of killing four classmates were sentenced to between 10 and 15 years in prison. In that case, Jennifer and James Crumbley were convicted of manslaughter after their son, Ethan, committed the murders at Oxford High School in 2021. This was the first time that parents were held legally responsible for their child’s role in a school shooting, a significant step toward holding gun-owning parents more accountable.

Gun safety advocates see these cases as crucial milestones in ensuring parents take responsibility for securing firearms in their homes. Studies conducted by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security reveal that around 75% of school shooters obtain their weapons from their own homes, often through unlocked or unsecured firearms.

In the case of the Gray family, both father and son were previously interviewed by law enforcement in May 2023 in relation to online threats made on the social media platform Discord about carrying out a school shooting. Those threats had been flagged by officials in a neighboring county. However, according to investigators, both Grays denied making the threats, and the case was closed after authorities found no conclusive evidence linking them to the Discord account.

At the time, Colin Gray told officials from the Jackson County Sheriff’s Department that while he owned hunting guns, they were securely locked in a safe, and his son did not have access to them. This assertion led investigators to close the case without pursuing further action. Sheriff Janis Mangum of Jackson County explained, “This case was worked, and at the time the boy was 13, and it wasn’t enough to substantiate. If we get a judge’s order or we charge somebody, we take firearms for safekeeping.”

Despite this earlier investigation, Wednesday’s attack at Apalachee High School occurred, bringing renewed scrutiny to the family’s access to firearms. Law enforcement officials are now investigating whether Colin Gray’s actions in allowing his son to access the gun contributed to the tragedy.

The shooting has once again drawn attention to the widespread and long-standing problem of gun violence in schools across the United States. In the last two decades, there have been hundreds of shootings at schools and colleges, resulting in numerous casualties. These incidents have fueled ongoing debates over gun control and the Second Amendment, which grants U.S. citizens the right to bear arms.

Wednesday’s shooting at Apalachee High School was the first planned attack at a U.S. school this fall, according to David Riedman, who runs the K-12 School Shooting Database. Riedman pointed out that while some students in the United States have just started their school year, others, like those at Apalachee, had been back in class for weeks before the shooting occurred.

The rise in school shootings has placed increasing pressure on lawmakers to enact stronger gun control measures, though the issue remains politically divisive. Supporters of stricter gun laws argue that such measures are necessary to prevent future tragedies, while opponents emphasize the constitutional right to bear arms.

The case in Georgia, much like the earlier case in Michigan, may signal a growing trend of holding parents legally accountable when they fail to take necessary precautions to prevent their children from accessing firearms. For the families of the victims, however, such legal action offers little solace in the face of their immense loss.

The community of Winder is left mourning the senseless deaths of two young students and two educators, while those injured in the attack continue to recover. As investigators work to uncover more details about the weapon used and the motive behind the attack, the nation is once again reminded of the devastating toll that gun violence in schools can exact.

Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson Open to Enforceable Supreme Court Ethics Code

Supreme Court Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson recently expressed her openness to the idea of an “enforceable” code of ethics for the Supreme Court. In an interview aired on “CBS News Sunday Morning,” CBS’s Norah O’Donnell asked Jackson if she supports President Biden’s proposal for a binding code of ethics that would enforce disclosure of gifts and recusals for Supreme Court justices. This proposal comes amidst growing scrutiny of some justices for not disclosing luxury gifts and trips.

Justice Jackson responded to O’Donnell’s question by highlighting the standard nature of a binding code of ethics for judges. “So, you know, a binding code of ethics is pretty standard for judges. And so I guess the question is, ‘Is the Supreme Court any different?’ And I guess I have not seen a persuasive reason as to why the court is different than the other courts,” she said.

When pressed further by O’Donnell on whether she would support an enforcement mechanism for the justices, Jackson indicated her general support. “I am considering supporting it as a general matter. I’m not gonna get into commenting on particular policy proposals. But from my perspective, I don’t have any problem with an enforceable code,” Jackson stated.

Justice Jackson’s remarks follow similar comments made by Justice Elena Kagan, who last month called for a way to enforce the Supreme Court’s code of ethics. At an annual judicial conference held by the 9th Circuit, Kagan emphasized the need for such a system. “Both in terms of enforcing the rules against people who have violated them but also in protecting people who haven’t violated them — I think a system like that would make sense,” Kagan said, as reported by The Associated Press.

The Supreme Court had already adopted a code of ethics last year after some justices faced criticism for not disclosing gifts and trips. However, the current code does not include an enforcement mechanism, which has led to calls for further reforms.

In July, President Biden proposed a three-part plan for the Supreme Court that includes implementing term limits for justices, establishing a binding code of ethics, and introducing a constitutional amendment to counteract the Supreme Court’s recent decision on presidential immunity. While Biden’s proposals align with calls from other Democrats for reforms to the Supreme Court, these measures are likely to face significant challenges in getting enacted.

Jackson’s willingness to consider an enforceable code of ethics signals a potential shift in the Court’s approach to transparency and accountability, an issue that has gained increasing attention in recent years.

Trump Reverses Stance on Florida Abortion Measure Amid Backlash from Conservatives

Donald Trump has announced his intention to vote against a ballot measure in Florida designed to protect abortion rights, following criticism from conservative supporters. This announcement came just one day after an NBC News interview where Trump seemed to endorse the measure, prompting a strong backlash from anti-abortion activists.

In a Friday interview with Fox News, Trump expressed his belief that Florida’s six-week abortion ban is excessively restrictive. Despite this, he confirmed he would vote “no” on the ballot measure that aims to amend the state’s constitution to safeguard abortion rights. “You need more time than six weeks,” Trump remarked. “I’ve disagreed with that right from the early primaries when I heard about it.”

Trump’s opposition to the measure was explained with his unfounded claim that Democrats support allowing abortions at any stage of pregnancy. This assertion was used to justify his decision to vote against the Florida measure. According to KFF, a non-profit health organization, while abortion laws differ widely across the US, procedures performed after 21 weeks are uncommon and generally occur due to severe fetal anomalies or risks to the mother’s health.

Trump’s decision to vote against the measure followed his comments on Thursday, where he stated, “I think the six week is too short. It has to be more time. I told them that I want more weeks.” He reiterated, “I am going to be voting that we need more than six weeks” when pressed further.

Vice President Kamala Harris quickly criticized Trump’s announcement, indicating that his stance reflects a continued anti-abortion position. “Donald Trump just made his position on abortion very clear: He will vote to uphold an abortion ban so extreme it applies before many women even know they are pregnant,” she said.

Trump’s comments on Thursday, which appeared to suggest support for the constitutional amendment, were met with significant backlash from leaders within the anti-abortion movement, a key force in shaping conservative politics. Erick Erickson, a conservative commentator, criticized Trump’s position, saying, “If Donald Trump loses, today is the day he lost.” He added, “The committed pro-life community could turn a blind eye, in part, to national abortion issues. But for Trump to weigh in on Florida as he did will be a bridge too far for too many.”

Albert Mohler Jr., president of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, expressed concern that Trump’s comments seemed deliberately designed to alienate pro-life voters. “Pro-life Christian voters are going to have to think clearly, honestly, and soberly about our challenge in this election – starting at the top of the ticket,” Mohler stated.

Following the NBC interview, Trump’s campaign and his running mate, JD Vance, clarified that the former president had not yet finalized his position on the ballot initiative. Vance mentioned that Trump would make his own decision on how to vote based on “his own judgement.”

Trump had previously criticized Florida’s six-week abortion ban, calling it a “terrible mistake” when Florida Governor Ron DeSantis signed it into law. DeSantis, who was competing against Trump in the Republican primary at the time, faced this criticism from the former president.

In the broader context, the abortion laws in the US vary significantly from state to state. Following the Supreme Court’s 2022 decision to overturn the nationwide right to abortion, states like Florida implemented bans such as the six-week restriction. The proposed amendment in Florida, supported by reproductive rights advocates, seeks to protect abortion access up to the point of fetal viability, approximately 23-25 weeks of pregnancy, instead of specifying a strict timeframe.

Current opinion polls reflect significant support for abortion access among Americans. A July poll conducted by the University of North Florida showed that 69% of likely voters backed the Florida ballot measure, while 23% were opposed.

The political fallout from the end of Roe v. Wade has posed a challenge for Trump, who initially gained support from the religious right, known for its stance on restricting abortion. During his first presidential campaign, Trump promised to appoint Supreme Court justices who would overturn Roe v. Wade, a promise he fulfilled by appointing three conservative justices who ultimately voted to dismantle the precedent.

In his 2024 campaign, Trump has advocated for leaving abortion policy decisions to individual states, a stance that has led to conflicts with many conservatives who support nationwide restrictions. Despite this, the rank-and-file party members continued to support Trump at the Republican National Convention in July.

Adding another layer of complexity to Trump’s position is his recent proposal to have the government or insurance companies cover the costs of in-vitro fertilization (IVF), a procedure some anti-abortion and religious groups oppose due to its involvement with embryos.

Kamala Harris Surges Ahead of Donald Trump in Latest USA TODAY/Suffolk Poll

In a recent USA TODAY/Suffolk University Poll, Democrat Kamala Harris has taken a notable lead over Republican Donald Trump, showing a 48%-43% advantage. This represents an eight-point turnaround from late June, when Trump led President Joe Biden by nearly four points in the same survey.

The shift in the race is largely attributed to significant changes in key demographic groups that have traditionally been vital for Democrats. Harris’s lead has been notably influenced by shifts among Hispanic, Black, and young voters. For instance, among those with annual incomes under $20,000, Trump’s previous three-point lead over Biden has transformed into a 23-point lead for Harris over Trump as of August.

This development marks a significant achievement for Harris, who has managed to secure a lead over Trump, something Biden had struggled to accomplish this year. Despite the small margin, Harris’s advantage reflects a shift in momentum, particularly following the Democratic National Convention in Chicago, which had a rallying effect on party supporters.

The poll, conducted among 1,000 likely voters via landline and cellphone from Sunday to Wednesday, has a margin of error of plus or minus 3.1 percentage points. The focus on likely voters, as opposed to registered voters in previous polls, marks a shift in the survey’s methodology as the election approaches.

The detailed results, without rounding, show Harris with an edge closer to four points rather than five, at 47.6%-43.3%.

The success of Harris’s campaign strategies, particularly the targeted appeals made at the Democratic convention, is evident. David Paleologos, director of the Suffolk University Political Research Center, noted, “With the ‘Brat Summer’ of Kamala Harris emojis winding down, young people, persons of color, and low-income households have swung dramatically toward the vice president. These same demographics were emphasized and woven together by numerous speakers at the convention.”

Significant changes since June include:

– Voters aged 18 to 34 have shifted from supporting Trump by 11 points to supporting Harris by 13 points, now favoring her 49%-36%.

– Hispanic voters, a group that the Republican campaign has been actively trying to engage, have shifted from supporting Trump by two points to supporting Harris by 16 points, with a current split of 53%-37%.

– Black voters, who have traditionally been a strong Democratic base, have moved from supporting Biden by 47 points to supporting Harris by 64 points, now showing 76%-12% in her favor.

– Harris has gained support among lower-income voters, who now back her 58%-35%. She has emphasized her commitment to an “opportunity economy” that focuses on affordable housing and addressing food price gouging, although she has not yet provided detailed policy plans.

The election dynamic has evolved as Harris stands as the first woman of color and the first person of South Asian descent nominated for president by a major party. At 59, she is considerably younger than Trump, who is 78, and Biden, who is 81.

Amy Hendrix, a 46-year-old independent voter from Fort Worth, Texas, expressed her enthusiasm, saying, “I think people are cautiously optimistic that they’re going to have a lot better chance with Harris than they would have had with Biden going head-to-head with Trump. I’m very excited to vote for a woman, and that’s just the truth.”

However, not all reactions have been positive. Jason Streem, a 46-year-old dentist from the Cleveland suburbs who supports Trump, criticized the manner in which Harris became the nominee. He remarked, “She was never part of the running process. She never received the primary votes.” He described the nomination process as “the most undemocratic way of picking a nominee.”

The rapid shift in the Democratic nomination occurred after Biden’s decision to step back from his reelection bid just over a month ago, influenced by party leaders and donors concerned about his chances of winning. This unexpected move paved the way for Harris’s swift nomination.

In the USA TODAY/Suffolk poll, Biden’s support this year never exceeded 37.5%, and he trailed Trump by as little as half a percentage point in the spring, to nearly four points after the Biden-Trump debate in early summer.

This poll is the first since independent candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr. withdrew from the race and endorsed Trump. Current independent candidate Cornel West stands at 2%, while Green Party nominee Jill Stein and Libertarian candidate Chase Oliver each hold 1%. When asked about their second choice among third-party supporters, 32% preferred Harris, 24% chose West, and 15% opted for Trump.

Harris Gains Edge Over Trump in Latest Poll as Election Approaches

A recent poll released on Tuesday reveals that more Americans believe Vice President Kamala Harris has a better chance of winning the White House in November compared to former President Donald Trump. According to the Yahoo News/YouGov survey, 39 percent of respondents think Harris “has the best chance of winning” the election, which is now only 69 days away. In contrast, 36 percent believe Trump has the better chance of securing victory in the upcoming fall election.

Harris’s elevation to the top of the Democratic presidential ticket came after President Joe Biden stepped aside and endorsed her last month. This shift has generated significant enthusiasm and energy within the Democratic Party, largely due to Harris’s perceived stronger likelihood of winning this year’s election compared to Biden.

However, the survey also revealed that 25 percent of participants are uncertain about whether Harris or Trump will win the presidency in the forthcoming election.

When asked about the qualifications of the party nominees for serving in the Oval Office, 50 percent of respondents indicated they believe Harris is fit for the role. In comparison, 47 percent expressed the same view about Trump. The poll also showed that 37 percent believe Harris is not fit for the presidency, while 47 percent hold the same opinion about Trump. Additionally, 22 percent of respondents were unsure about Harris’s fitness for office, whereas 8 percent were unsure about Trump’s suitability.

In an average of national polls conducted by The Hill/Decision Desk HQ, Harris holds a 4-point lead over Trump, with the vice president receiving 49.5 percent support. The upcoming election is expected to be competitive as Trump and Harris are scheduled to face off in a debate hosted by ABC News in a few weeks. Although Trump has recently raised concerns about his participation in the debate, he stated on Tuesday that he had “reached an agreement” with what is presumed to be Harris’s campaign.

The Yahoo News/YouGov poll was carried out from August 22 to August 26, involving 1,788 participants, and has a margin of error of 2.7 percentage points.

Kamala Harris Discusses the Path Forward, Policy Changes, and Her Presidential Bid

Vice President Kamala Harris expressed deep emotion after seeing a photo of her young grandniece, in pigtails, watching her speak at the Democratic National Convention in Chicago last week. Although Harris hasn’t made it a focus, she stated her intention to run for president to represent “all Americans,” the image symbolized the potential historic nature of her candidacy. “It’s very humbling. Very humbling in many ways,” she said in an interview with CNN’s Dana Bash.

During this interview, the first she gave alongside her running mate, Minnesota Governor Tim Walz, Walz also mentioned his son Gus’s emotional reaction to his convention speech. “Our politics can be better. It can be different. We can show some of these things, and we can have families involved in this,” Walz said. He added, “I hope people felt that out there, and I hope that they hugged their kids a little tighter because you never know. Life can be kind of hard.”

Harris discussed how her positions on several issues, including fracking and border security, have evolved since her initial presidential run in 2019. She also offered a glimpse into how she plans to explain these changes to voters during her debate with former President Donald Trump and as the campaign continues. “My values have not changed,” she emphasized.

She also aimed to frame the 2024 race as an opportunity for the American people to choose “a new way forward,” moving beyond a political era dominated by Trump. Harris’ campaign has been described as one of optimism, contrasting with the former president’s darker rhetoric that often portrays political opponents, the media, and others as adversaries. Harris and Trump are both preparing for their first debate on September 10, to be aired on ABC.

Clarifying Position on Fracking

In 2019, Harris, as a presidential candidate, opposed fracking, a stance that could have negatively affected her in Pennsylvania, where fracking is a significant employer. Now, she says she supports it. “As vice president, I did not ban fracking. As president, I will not ban fracking,” Harris stated. Fracking, or hydraulic fracturing, is a method of extracting natural gas from shale rock. While progressives have opposed fracking due to environmental concerns, the Inflation Reduction Act, a $750 billion bill focused on health care, taxes, and climate change, has led to both an expansion of fracking and growth in clean energy efforts in the U.S. Harris clarified that she had already revised her stance on fracking by 2020, stating during the vice-presidential debate that Biden “will not end fracking.”

“I have not changed that position, nor will I going forward,” she reiterated. Harris pointed to the Biden administration’s actions to foster growth in clean energy, saying, “What I have seen is that we can grow and we can increase a thriving clean energy economy without banning fracking.”

Consideration of a Republican in the Cabinet

When asked if she would appoint a Republican to her Cabinet, Harris responded, “Yes, I would.” However, she did not provide specific names or potential roles. “No one in particular,” she noted. “We have 68 days to go in this election, so I’m not putting the cart before the horse. But I would.” Harris has emphasized the importance of diverse opinions in decision-making processes. “I have spent my career inviting diversity of opinion,” she explained, suggesting it could benefit the American public to have a Republican in her Cabinet.

Ignoring Trump’s Identity Politics

Harris mostly avoided addressing Donald Trump’s remarks about her racial and gender identity. Trump recently questioned her racial identity at a conference, insinuating that she had previously identified as South Asian but “happened to turn Black” for political reasons. Harris dismissed this, calling it part of Trump’s “same old tired playbook.” When pressed for further comment, she simply said, “Next question, please,” indicating her campaign’s strategy to avoid engaging with such attacks.

A Pivotal Phone Call

On the morning of July 21, Vice President Harris was at home making breakfast for visiting relatives and doing a puzzle with her nieces when she received a phone call from President Joe Biden. “It was Joe Biden, and he told me what he had decided to do,” Harris said. The call signaled Biden’s decision to end his re-election bid and endorse Harris to lead the Democratic ticket. Harris was initially more concerned about the impact on Biden, who had faced calls for resignation following a challenging debate performance. “I asked him, ‘Are you sure?’ and he said ‘Yes,’” Harris recalled.

Harris praised Biden’s presidency as “transformative” and described his decision to withdraw as reflective of his character, depicting him as “quite selfless and puts the American people first.” She also defended the administration’s achievements, including investments in infrastructure and efforts to reduce drug costs and strengthen international alliances. “I am so proud to have served as Vice President to Joe Biden,” she added.

Border Security and Criticism of Trump

Harris responded to Trump’s critiques of the Biden administration’s border policies by attributing much of the blame to Trump. She highlighted his opposition to a bipartisan border security bill that would have added 1,500 agents to the border. “He told his folks in Congress, don’t put it forward. He killed the bill — a border security bill,” she said. Harris vowed that if elected president, she would ensure such a bill reached her desk and would sign it. She also clarified her stance against decriminalizing illegal border crossings, a reversal from her 2019 position, stating, “We have laws that have to be followed and enforced that deal with people who cross our border illegally, and there should be consequences.”

Walz Reflects on Past Mistakes

Governor Walz also addressed his past misstatements, including a 2018 video where he inaccurately referenced carrying “weapons of war” during his military service, despite never being in a combat zone. He admitted to misspeaking, adding, “My wife, the English teacher, told me my grammar’s not always correct.” He also corrected a claim about using in vitro fertilization, clarifying it was another form of fertility treatment. “I certainly own my mistakes when I make them,” he stated.

Walz emphasized his commitment to civility, contrasting his approach with that of his Republican opponent, Ohio Senator JD Vance, who had made inflammatory comments about Harris. Walz stated he would not insult Republicans, highlighting the contrasting tones of their campaigns as they prepare for their October 1 debate hosted by CBS.

Looking Beyond the Trump Era

Harris acknowledged questions about why her proposed policies haven’t been implemented during her time as vice president, explaining that she was “talking about an era that started about a decade ago,” referring to Trump’s emergence in politics. She argued that leadership should be about uplifting people, not “who you beat down.” Harris concluded, “That’s what’s at stake, as much as any other detail that we could discuss, in this election.”

States and Territories Opting Out of Daylight Saving Time: A Comprehensive Overview

In the United States, daylight saving time (DST) is a common practice adopted by most states to better utilize daylight during certain parts of the year. However, a few states and territories have chosen to forgo this tradition and remain on standard time throughout the year. Here’s an exploration of which regions have opted out of DST and the reasons behind their choices.

States That Do Not Observe Daylight Saving Time

Hawaii: Known for its tropical climate and geographic isolation, Hawaii does not participate in daylight saving time. The state’s proximity to the equator results in minimal variation in daylight hours throughout the year, making clock adjustments unnecessary. As the Hawaii State government explains, “The variation in daylight hours is so minor that changing the clocks would offer little benefit.”

Arizona (except the Navajo Nation): Arizona has opted out of daylight saving time largely due to its extreme summer temperatures. By keeping the clocks on standard time year-round, the state reduces exposure to the intense heat during the hottest parts of the day, which helps to lower energy consumption for cooling purposes. As noted by an Arizona official, “By not shifting our clocks, we minimize heat exposure and reduce the need for air conditioning.” It’s important to note that the Navajo Nation, which extends into Arizona as well as Utah and New Mexico, does observe daylight saving time, differing from the rest of the state.

U.S. Territories That Do Not Change Their Clocks

Puerto Rico: This Caribbean territory remains on standard time throughout the year. Similar to Hawaii, Puerto Rico’s latitude results in minimal variation in daylight duration, so there is no practical need for clock changes. As a Puerto Rican official states, “Our consistent daylight hours make DST unnecessary.”

Guam: Located in the Pacific, Guam also does not observe daylight saving time. The minimal variation in daylight hours here means that, like other island territories, the benefits of adjusting clocks are negligible. An official from Guam emphasizes, “The small difference in daylight hours throughout the year means no need for clock adjustments.”

American Samoa: In the South Pacific, American Samoa follows a similar approach to Guam and Puerto Rico by staying on standard time year-round. The consistency in daylight hours here also makes DST irrelevant. As one local representative puts it, “Our daylight hours remain fairly constant, so DST does not provide any substantial advantage.”

U.S. Virgin Islands: This Caribbean territory similarly opts out of daylight saving time due to the minimal variation in daylight hours. A spokesperson for the U.S. Virgin Islands explains, “With little fluctuation in daylight throughout the year, maintaining standard time is most practical.”

Reasons Behind the Non-Adoption of Daylight Saving Time

The choice not to adopt daylight saving time in these states and territories primarily stems from practical and geographical considerations. Regions near the equator, such as Hawaii, Puerto Rico, and Guam, experience very little variation in sunlight over the course of the year. Consequently, adjusting clocks offers little to no advantage. As highlighted by a spokesperson from the U.S. Virgin Islands, “The minimal variation in daylight hours negates the need for any time changes.”

For Arizona, the decision is driven by climate considerations. During the summer, temperatures can soar to extreme levels. By remaining on standard time, Arizona avoids additional heat exposure and reduces the reliance on air conditioning, which in turn lowers energy consumption. A representative from the state explains, “Our hot climate makes standard time preferable as it helps reduce cooling needs and energy use.”

The Navajo Nation: An Exception in Arizona

An interesting exception to Arizona’s overall stance is the Navajo Nation. This region, which spans parts of Arizona, Utah, and New Mexico, does observe daylight saving time. The Navajo Nation follows DST to maintain consistency with other areas within its jurisdiction that do observe the time change. A Navajo Nation official clarifies, “We align with daylight saving time to keep uniformity across our territory, which includes regions outside Arizona.”

Future Perspectives on Daylight Saving Time

The debate over the efficacy of daylight saving time continues at a national level. While some states and territories have chosen to remain on standard time, discussions about making DST permanent in various regions have gained traction in recent years. Such changes, however, require federal approval. As noted by a policy expert, “There is ongoing discussion about the potential benefits of permanent daylight saving time, but implementing such changes involves navigating federal regulations.”

The varied adoption of daylight saving time across the United States reflects the diverse needs and geographic conditions of its states and territories. As the conversation around DST evolves, there may be further adjustments or even a nationwide shift in how time is managed. The ongoing debate and differing regional practices illustrate the complexity of balancing timekeeping with practical benefits and regional conditions.

Supreme Court’s Arizona Ruling on Voter Registration Sparks Controversy

The legal battles over the 2024 U.S. election are already intense, with recent actions by the Arizona election board drawing significant attention. Last week, the U.S. Supreme Court indicated it would revisit a previously settled issue, allowing a new Arizona law to take effect that requires proof of citizenship to register to vote. By reopening this matter so late in the process, the Court is creating a misleading narrative that noncitizens are a threat to U.S. elections. This decision signals that the justices, who appear aligned with former President Donald Trump, may intervene in the election unless the results are indisputable.

The case, Republican National Committee v. Mi Familia Vota, involves the Republican National Committee (RNC) seeking last-minute changes to Arizona’s voter registration laws, despite the fact that the state’s vote-by-mail registration period is already underway. The RNC’s legal actions threaten voting rights by potentially disenfranchising tens of thousands of eligible Arizona voters and perpetuating the false claim that noncitizens are voting in U.S. elections. As the libertarian Cato Institute pointed out, “there is no good evidence that noncitizens voted illegally in large enough numbers to actually shift the outcome of elections.” The stakes are high: Joe Biden won Arizona in 2020 by just 10,457 votes, and it is unclear how this new ruling might affect the upcoming election.

The Court’s unsigned order allows Arizona’s new law, which requires proof of citizenship for voter registration, to take effect. This suggests that the Court’s conservative justices, including three appointed by Trump, may ultimately strike down a part of the 1993 National Voter Registration Act (NVRA), a significant federal voting rights law. This would mark a shift from its previous position supporting the Act.

While the Court permitted the new law requiring proof of citizenship for new voter registrations, it stopped short of allowing the RNC’s request to remove the 42,301 already registered voters who lack documentation. However, Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, and Neil Gorsuch supported removing these voters as well.

The threat of further interference in Arizona’s voter rolls remains. For example, Stephen Miller, a former Trump advisor, and his America First group recently filed a lawsuit in Maricopa County to force the county recorder to submit the names of voters without documentation to the Department of Homeland Security and the state attorney general.

Although Miller’s lawsuit may not succeed, the Court’s intervention could still impact the election, even if it only affects future registrations. Voter registration has surged since President Joe Biden’s exit from the race, with nonpartisan group Vote.org reporting tens of thousands of new registrants, 83 percent of whom were under the age of 34, in just the first two days following Biden’s announcement. While data from Arizona is not yet available, the trend is consistent across other battleground states. With registration ongoing, the Court’s ruling changes the previously provided information to voters about registration requirements, complicating efforts to ensure all eligible voters can participate.

How did we reach this point? Three decades ago, during a period when voting rights had more bipartisan support, Congress passed the NVRA to standardize voter registration across the U.S. This Act created a national registration form requiring applicants to declare under penalty of perjury that they are U.S. citizens, but it did not require them to provide supporting documents. In 2004, Arizona passed Proposition 200, which required proof of citizenship, such as a passport or birth certificate, to register to vote.

The Supreme Court ruled in 2013 that Arizona could not enforce this requirement. In a 7–2 decision authored by Justice Antonin Scalia and joined by Chief Justice John Roberts, the Court held that the NVRA preempts Arizona’s conflicting requirements because “the power of Congress over the ‘Times, Places and Manner’ of congressional elections ‘is paramount, and may be exercised at any time, and to any extent which it deems expedient.’”

Currently, Arizona mandates proof of citizenship to vote in state elections, and most voters comply. However, there are several thousand “federal-only” voters who have not submittedadditional documentation, many of whom register on college campuses, suggesting they are likely college students without driver’s licenses rather than noncitizens.

In 2022, Arizona Republicans, encouraged by a political climate that often challenges constitutional norms, passed a law reimposing the citizenship documentation requirement for federal elections. This directly contradicted the Supreme Court’s 2013 ruling, which clarified that the NVRA “precludes Arizona from requiring a Federal Form applicant to submit information beyond that required by the form itself.” Despite this precedent, the Court’s recent decision allows Arizona’s new law to go into effect, requiring proof of citizenship for all new registrations. The Court may revisit this case next year, potentially impacting the status of over 40,000 already registered voters.

The Court’s conservative justices have reversed themselves on this issue, displaying what some view as hypocrisy. In the 2020 election, Justices Brett Kavanaugh and Neil Gorsuch cited the “Purcell principle,” which advises against federal court interference with state voting laws close to an election. However, the Court’s current actions could alter the outcome in November. Not all voters without an ID are Democrats, but many are, including college students who may lack the necessary documentation required by Arizona’s new law. Among registered voters aged 18 to 29 in battleground states, Harris leads Trump by 9 points.

Beyond voter suppression, the RNC’s push to bring this case so close to the election appears intended to cast doubt on the election results by reviving debunked theories about noncitizen voting. Twenty-four states filed an amicus brief supporting Arizona, alleging that “aliens are illegally voting in elections” in significant enough numbers to have influenced past election outcomes. These claims rely on a single, flawed, and widely debunked study.

Contrary to these conspiracy theories, there are many benign reasons why people might lack proof of citizenship, often related to income levels. Research shows that nearly 9 percent of voting-age citizens “do not have a non-expired driver’s license,” while “another 12 percent (28.6 million) have a non-expired license, but it does not have both their current address and current name.” The same study found that “people in lower income groups are more likely to think photo IDs are not required for voting in person or to be unsure.” Access to these documents may be hindered by them being stored in a bank safety deposit box or lost during periods of hardship. The NVRA’s oath requirement is effective because it allows individuals who lack easy access to documentation to vote while imposing criminal penalties if they lie.

Arizona’s restrictions are not only burdensome but unnecessary. States already have multiple safeguards to prevent noncitizens from voting, such as cross-referencing state DMV records, jury duty lists, and Social Security records.

The Supreme Court’s recent ruling raises serious concerns about its potential impact on voter registration and turnout, especially as the 2024 election approaches.

The Origins of All 50 U.S. State Names

Though many Americans are taught to learn all 50 U.S. states at a young age, we know far less about the etymological origins behind each name. While some are inspired by Native American languages and others by natural water sources and rock formations, the naming process behind every state offers a fascinating glimpse into our country’s history and culture.

While some namesakes may be more obvious like that of the state of Washington, the backstory behind state names like Kentucky is steeped in uncertainty. From Alabama to Wyoming, here are 50 eye-opening tales about how each U.S. state earned its name.

Alabama

A wooden walkway to the Gulf of Mexico on the Alabama Gulf Coast.
Credit: Darryl Vest/ Shutterstock

The state of Alabama owes its modern name to Spanish explorer Hernando De Soto, whose 16th-century expedition brought him to the region. There he encountered Native American inhabitants known to De Soto as the Alabamans, who would become the namesake for both the river and the state. The word itself roughly translates to “vegetation gatherers” in the Choctaw language, as Alabama is a combination of the words “alba” meaning vegetation, and “amo” meaning a picker or gatherer. Given Alabama’s lush vegetation —  thanks in no small part to its proximity to the Gulf of Mexico and other major rivers — it’s no surprise that the name makes reference to the state’s incredible natural beauty.

Alaska

View of a mountain range in Denali National Park, Alaska with a reflection in lake.
Credit: joeborg/ Shutterstock

Long before Russian explorers first landed in Alaska in 1741, the native Unangan people of the Aleutian Islands and the Sugpiaq people of the Alaska Peninsula called the region home. Those groups were collectively dubbed as the Aleut by the Russians, and it’s the Aleut language that we have to thank for Alaska’s name. Natives referred to the Alaska Peninsula and mainland as alaxsxag, a word that’s also sometimes spelled as alyeska. That word translates to “great land,” which is perhaps the most appropriate phrase to describe Alaska, as the state’s impressive breadth makes it larger than Texas, California, and Montana combined. This “great land” of the American northwest is also home to the largest national park in the United States, where you can witness Alaska’s ethereal and expansive beauty firsthand.

Arizona

Grand Canyon National Park seen from desert.
Credit: Jason Patrick Ross/ Shutterstock

There are competing theories as to how the Grand Canyon State got its name. Some scholars believe it originated with the native Pima people, who called the region Al Shon (meaning “place of little spring”), a term that was later adopted by Spanish explorers as Arizonac. Other historians believe the name originated with explorers from the Spanish Basque region, specifically the phrase artiz onak which translates to “the good oak tree.” The latter theory is especially apt, given Arizona is home to species of oak trees that are native to the Sonoran Desert region. These trees remain leafy for most of the year and add an element of unique natural beauty to the state’s desert environment.

Arkansas
View of tree covered mountains from hiking trail in Arkansas.
Credit: Kit Leong/ Shutterstock

The name Arkansas acknowledges both the original Native American inhabitants as well as the first Europeans to land in the area. The region was once home to the Quapaws, who were referred to as the Arkansas, or “south wind,” by the Alngonquian-speaking Natives of the Ohio Valley. 1673 saw the arrival of French explorers; this group was later honored in 1881, as it was declared the state’s official spelling should be Arkansas (not “Arkansaw”) in a nod to the dialect of those early French explorers. Though French influence later dissipated throughout the region, their legacy remains. The French term “Aux Arc” — which named a 1700s-era trading post — is believed to have inspired the naming of the extraordinary Ozark mountain range in northern Arkansas, which is one of America’s most striking natural wonders.

California
View down Laguna Beach with ocean on one side and rocky palm tree lines landscape on other.
Credit: Gabriele Maltinti/ Shutterstock

Given its marvelous oceanside location, it’s fitting that California would owe its name to a mythical island from a work of fiction, specifically a romance novel. Spanish author Garci Rodríguez de Montalvo’s 1510 book Las Sergas de Esplandián (“The Adventures of Esplandián”) described an island named California that was filled with gold and ruled by Queen Calafia and other powerful women. Upon arriving on what is now Baja California in 1539, Spanish explorers believed they had stumbled upon this opulent, albeit fictitious land. Though there’s some dispute over this theory, it remains widely accepted. It’s also quite an appropriate hypothesis considering that California’s gorgeous and varied scenery is storybook in nature.

Colorado

Garden of the Gods eroded red-sandstone formations in Colorado Springs, Colorado.
Credit: Oleg Kovtun Hydrobio/ Shutterstock

Few concert venues are as spectacular as Colorado’s Red Rocks Amphitheater, but the region’s stunning red rocks have given us more than just a beautiful place to see a show. In fact, the red rocks are responsible for the state’s name, at least according to one theory. The name Colorado undoubtedly comes from the Spanish language word colorado, which translates to the color red. Initially, the prevailing belief was that in the early 16th century, Spanish explorers discovered a red-colored river carrying silt down from the mountains and named it Rio Colorado. However, some state historians believe that the state was actually named after Colorado City, thanks to lobbyists who believed naming the whole territory Colorado would help promote their town. According to one of the founders of Colorado City, they took that name due to the town’s proximity to the region’s alluring red rocks.

Connecticut
Hartford, Connecticut downtown city skyline on the river.
Credit: Sean Pavone/ Shutterstock

Connecticut may be a small state, but it’s also home to part of the longest river in all of New England, that being the Connecticut River. That flowing water source lends its name to the state as a whole, as the river was one called Quinnehtukqut — an Algonquian word that aptly means “long river place” — by the state’s native Mohegan tribe. Connecticut owes both its name and verdant landscape to the serene waters that run through it and add to the calm atmosphere of this quiet northeastern state.

Delaware
A pathway to the shore at the Delaware seaside with a view of a lighthouse in distance.
Credit: Yvonne Navalaney/ Shutterstock

It’s appropriate that this small, yet naturally spectacular jewel of the Atlantic coast owes its name to a water source. In 1610, English explorer Samuel Argall was sailing from Virginia when a storm blew him off course and into modern day Cape Henlopen. After his arrival, Argall would go on to pay tribute to his governor, Thomas West, Lord De La Warr, the first governor of the colony of Virginia, by naming the waterway Delaware Bay. The state takes its name from both that bay and the Delaware River.

Florida
Everglades National Park.
Credit: Irina Wilhauk/ Shutterstock

The Sunshine State is justly named in part after the bright and colorful plant life that can be found throughout the Florida peninsula. In April 1513, famous Spanish explorer Juan Ponce de León made his first European expedition to Florida, landing near what is now St. Augustine (America’s oldest city). It’s believed that the region’s spectacular plant life and the fact that the date was very close to Easter (or Pascua in Spanish) inspired the name Pascua Florida after one of Spain’s celebrations of the religious holiday, the Feast of Flowers. Every year, on April 2, Florida celebrates de León’s discovery with its official state day, Pascua Florida Day. You don’t need to wait until then to experience Florida’s beauty, however, as its stunning flora and unique natural sites like the Everglades can be enjoyed year round.

Georgia
Landscape of Providence Canyon, Georgia.
Credit: Sean Pavone/ Shutterstock

Despite America’s quest for independence from the British, the influence of English royalty can still be felt stateside, as evidenced by Georgia’s name. British philanthropist James Oglethorpe sought to create a U.S. colony where the debt-ridden people of England could get back on their feet and take ownership over their lives. During these efforts, he named the state after King George II for the king’s role in granting the charter that made his vision possible. Though Oglethorpe’s social-reform brainchild didn’t pan out as he hoped, Georgia still blossomed into a state that perfectly encapsulates all that the American southeast has to offer, from its rich history to scenic beauty.

Hawaii
Diamond Head crater in Hawaii.
Credit: Norbert Turi/ Shutterstock

In the early 1810s, King Kamehameha I of Hawaii united the islands as the Kingdom of Hawaii, though the etymology behind the name is unclear. One theory is that British explorer Captain James Cook asked the Natives where he was when he landed in 1778, and wrote it down as “Owhyhee,” which translates to “homeland.” Others suggest that the name comes from a blend of  similar Proto-Polynesian words or that it is named after the Hawaiian legend Hawaiʻiloa, who is said to have settled the big island of Hawaii. All that being said, it’s hard to worry too much about which theory holds true when you can simply shut off your brain and relax on the sandy beaches of this Pacific paradise instead.

Idaho
Shoshone Falls, Snake River, Idaho.
Credit: Benny Marty/ Shutterstock

While Idaho is very real, its name was entirely made up to begin with. In 1860, the name Idaho was proposed for the territory by George Willing, a mining lobbyist who claimed it was a Native American word meaning “gem of the mountains.” It turned out that Willing had actually made the name up; Congress found out about the fraud and rejected the name, instead naming it Colorado. But a few years later, in 1863, after the naming hoax fiasco had been forgotten, the mining territory was officially named Idaho after all. The story really makes you wonder how many place names we can owe to a curious imagination.

Illinois
A summer sunset over Garden of the Gods in Southern Illinois
Credit: anthony heflin/ Shutterstock

Spanning nearly 400-miles North to South, Illinois is home to a wide array of climates and cultures that make the state fascinating to learn about, but when it comes to its name, there’s a simple explanation. Illinois is a French pronunciation of the Illiniwek Native American tribe that French explorers Louis Jolliet and Jacques Marquette encountered upon arriving in 1673. The explorers believed the word to mean “the men,” but more recent studies of the language indicate it could mean “he speaks in the ordinary way.” In 1818, when the territory was made a state, Congress confirmed the name. Nowadays the word Illinois is synonymous with the state’s great residents who have gone on to achieve profound success in the worlds of politics, art, music, and more.

Indiana
Indianapolis, Indiana downtown skyline over the river walk.
Credit: Sean Pavone/ Shutterstock

The story behind why Indianans are called “Hoosiers” is a lot more uncertain than the state’s name as a whole. The name Indiana simply means “land of the Indians,” though how it got that name is a tumultuous story. After the French and Indian War, the state was owned by a Philadelphia trading company who named it after the Native Americans that originally had claim to the land. But a large portion of the land actually belonged to Virginia, and after years of legal dispute, Indiana was reabsorbed by the territory, no longer bearing an official name. It wasn’t until 1800, when Congress reassigned territory boundaries that the old name Indiana was restored, and this key region from America’s Heartland became what we know it as today.

Iowa
Sunrise over corn field with silo.
Credit: Larry Lindell/ Shutterstock

With endless fields of glorious corn, the lands of Iowa are majestic. In fact, the state’s name has been translated to mean “the beautiful land” by Iowa officials in the past, but the more likely explanation is that it came from the Ioway Native American tribe who originally inhabited the region. The tribe’s actual name, Ayuhwa, was given to the tribe by the Dakota Sioux and means “sleepy people,” though it was later adapted into Ioway by Europeans. Either way you look at it, the name Iowa is appropriate for such a visually appealing state whose residents live a calm and serene lifestyle.

Kansas
Gravel road through high grass in the Flint Hills of Kansas.
Credit: TommyBrison/ Shutterstock

Kansas is derived from a Siouan language, and means “people of the south wind.” How appropriate, considering the winds that sweep through Kansas’ vast plains. The state got its name from the Native American Sioux tribe called the Kaws — also known as the Kansa — for whom French explorers also named the Kansas River. It’s believed that a French explorer once wrote the name on a map, and from that point on, the name Kansas was used for the region. Who knew that the simple stroke of a pen could have such a long-lasting impact?

Kentucky
Fenced in land on horse farm in Kentucky.
Credit: Alexey Stiop/ Shutterstock

Knowing your namesake can be a point of pride, as it carries on the legacy of those who came before. But for Kentuckians, they may never know exactly where their state’s name came from. There are several prevailing theories, all primarily derived from Iroquois names. One includes a word for “prairie”; another, kentahten, means “land of tomorrow.” Other experts say it originated from an Algonquian term, kinathiki, which refers to a river bottom, or a Shawnee word meaning “at the head of a river.” Some records indicate that the Wyandot people’s Iroquois word for “plain” is in fact the true origin, and that it was first recorded in 1753. One thing’s certain: The Bluegrass State’s official name origins remain a mystery.

Louisiana
Louisiana bayou.
Credit: Tom Wolf/ Shutterstock

Take a trip down to the Bayou and you’ll see French influence everywhere you look. If you can’t make it down South, then just take one look at a map of the United States. There you’ll see the name Louisiana, which was named by French explorer René-Robert Cavelier Sieur de La Salle in 1682. He named Louisiana Le Louisiane in honor of the French King Louis XIV, and after the territory was divided up as part of the 1803 Louisiana Purchase, the state of Louisiana retained its name.

Maine
Sunset behind Portland Breakwater Light in Portland, Maine.
Credit: Sean Pavone/ Shutterstock

Similar to Louisiana, we sort of have the French to thank for the name Maine, at least according to the modern day state legislature. The first recorded use of the name Maine was in a 1622 land patent from King Charles calling the area “the Province or County of Mayne.” While some historians believe the name was used to differentiate it as the mainland, the Maine legislature adopted a resolution in 2001 stating that Maine’s name was taken from a nearby French province by the same name. It only took 379 years, but we can finally put that debate to rest.

Maryland
Downtown Annapolis, Maryland over Main Street with the State House.
Credit: Sean Pavone Shutterstock

Women have played an undeniably important role in America’s history, yet only three states are named after female individuals. Maryland is one of them, named after English King Charles I’s wife, Queen Henrietta Maria. Some religious scholars, however, point out that Maryland’s founder George Calvert intended the colony to be a refuge for Catholics, and believe its name to be biblical in nature, named it after Mary, the mother of Jesus. No matter which way you cut it, Maryland’s name pays homage to a powerful and influential woman.

Massachusetts
Boston, Massachusetts skyline with Faneuil Hall and Quincy Market at dusk.
Credit: Sean Pavone/ Shutterstock

The Bay State takes its official name from the Massachusett tribe of Native Americans who lived south of present-day Boston; that Algonquian term roughly translates to “at the Great Hill.” How appropriate given the pivotal American Revolution battle that took place in Massachusetts at Bunker Hill. The name Massachusetts first appeared on record in explorer John Smith’s 1616 book, A Description of New England, and in that text he described the place as though its name had already been assigned by the Native inhabitants.

Michigan
Upper Peninsula, Michigan forest near the shore of Lake Superior.
Credit: Craig Sterken/ Shutterstock

Michigan not only looks like a glove, but its name fits like a glove. Explorer Jacques Marquette settled the region in 1668 and named it such as a French derivation of the Chippewa word michigama, meaning “great or large lake.” Whale Marquette may not have realized it at the time, Michigan is the only state that borders four of the five Great lakes, an impressive geographic achievement for this northern lacustrine paradise.

Minnesota
Lake with tree line reflected in water in Minnesota.
Credit: Dan Thornberg/ Shutterstock

Though it’s nicknamed the “Land of 10,000 Lakes” — and that’s selling it short, given there are a staggering 11,842 lakes found throughout the state! — Minnesota actually takes its name from a river. That river was named by the Native American Dakota tribe who inhabited present-day Minnesota. Mni is the Dakota word for “water”; sota is largely said to mean “cloudy or muddy,” while others say it means “sky-tinted.” For a definitive answer, state historians point to the Treaty of 1851 in which the Dakota included the direct translation as “land where the water is so clear it reflects the sky,” which is a beautiful description of this lush northern territory.

Mississippi
Credit: TLF Images/ Shutterstock

Though its glistening waters weave through 10 states, the Mississippi River lent its name to just one. The river was named by the area’s Native Ojibwe tribe, who called the river misi sipi, which translates to “big river.” It has also been said that the Native American communities, who long used the water for transportation and food, referred to it as the “Father of Waters.” How apt, given that this namesake of Mississippi continues to provide in those ways even today.

Missouri
Winding Missouri River through hills.
Credit: kavram/ Shutterstock

From one watery state to another, Missouri was also named after the river that bears its name. In 1673, a Native American Sioux tribe named the Missouris — a name given to them by the Fox tribe — called the area home. That name was initially thought to mean “muddy water,” but in later years it was determined to mean “people with big canoes.” You’d need big canoes to navigate the Missouri River, which believe it or not is actually the longest river in the United States! The river was named after these original inhabitants, which in turn gave its name to the future territory and eventual state.

Montana
Bridger mountain range near Bozeman, Montana.
Credit: Brian A Smith/ Shutterstock

Though its elevation falls shy of the nearby Rocky Mountain region, the towering crags of Montana are undeniably abundant. Its rocky terrain is what inspired the name Montana, which is Latin for “mountainous.” Montana was first proposed as a name in 1864, when the Dakota territory was split into smaller portions, though the mountains have loomed large over the state for tens of millions of years prior to that.

Nebraska
Aerial of shallow and braided Platte River near Brady, Nebraska
Credit: marekuliasz/ Shutterstock

Like many states throughout the Great Plains, the name Nebraska comes from a Native American term. In this case the word nebrathka comes from the Otoe people, and means “flat water,” a reference to the region’s Platte River. Nebraska likely owes its modern name to American explorer and politician John C. Frémont, who used the river’s Native name in a report to the Secretary of War. Fear not, though, there’s no warring with the state’s borders. Nebraska is a peaceful place nestled perfectly in the center of this great nation we call home.

Nevada
Road through Valley of Fire State Park in Nevada.
Credit: littlenySTOCK/ Shutterstock

Nevada’s name actually comes from a mountain range primarily located in nearby California. The Sierra Nevada mountains were named such by Spanish explorers who discovered the area in awe during the 1770s, and came upon the snow-covered peaks. Sierra is Spanish for “mountain range,” and nevada means “snowfall.” Nevada wouldn’t be comprehensively explored until the 1820s, at which point the groundwork was laid for the modern gambling and entertainment mecca we know it as today.

New Hampshire

Houses and trees along the Winnipesaukee River, in Laconia, New Hampshire.
Credit: Jon Bilous/ Shutterstock

There’s no place like home. This mantra is believed by many, including a settler named John Mason. In 1623, the land that would eventually become the New England state of New Hampshire was granted to Mason, and in 1629, he named it after his home, Hampshire county in England. Though Mason died in 1635 before ever voyaging over to live in the new province, his indelible impact on the Granite State remains.

New Jersey

Fenced path over sand dunes with ocean in background.
Credit: Jon Bilous/ Shutterstock

The name New Jersey is the result of a breakup, but not the romantic kind. In 1664, when the British seized the colony of New Netherland from the Dutch, the land was divided in half, with the east side granted to English statesman George Carteret. He had once served as governor of the Isle of Jersey, an island in the English Channel, and named the colony after it. Given its namesake, it only makes sense that New Jersey also borders the waters of the Atlantic, albeit many thousands of miles away.

New Mexico
Hot air balloons of the Rio Grande River in New Mexico.
Credit: gmeland/ Shutterstock

New Mexico was obviously named after the modern day country it borders, right? Wrong! You’d be surprised to learn that New Mexico was settled long before the country of Mexico was even named. In the 1500s, Spanish settlers referred to the upper area of the Rio Grande as Nuevo México, after the Aztec Valley of Mexico. The name comes from the Nahuatl word mexihco, and while the exact meaning is unclear, it seems most likely that the Aztecs named themselves after the tribal god of sun and war Huitzilopochtli, who was also referred to as Mēxihtli. So the next time someone ponders which came first, Mexico or New Mexico, keep this bit of trivia handy to wow them.

New York
Aerial view of the Central park and skyline in New York, New York.
Credit: Ingus Kruklitis/ Shutterstock

For a brief time in the 1600s, the city nicknamed the Big Apple was named after an entirely different fruit. In 1664, the British took power of the region of New Amsterdam and renamed it New York after King Charles I’s son, the Duke of York. However, for a short time, the city was actually called New Orange. In 1673, the Dutch regained control of the state and named it after the Dutch Prince of Orange. The following year, however, the British repossessed the region and renamed it New York for good, which later gave its name to the entire state. Yes, it’s hard to imagine Frank Sinatra singing “New Orange, New Orange,” but for a brief moment in history that was almost a reality.

North Carolina
Beach Front Houses at the coast of North Carolina with sand, sea grass and ocean in the foreground.
Credit: David Louis Econopouly/ Shutterstock

Naming a state after yourself is quite the power move, but that’s exactly what happened in 1629. King Charles I of England decided to name a new province Carolina (although it also appeared as “Carolana” in the charter), which is derived from Carolus, the Latin form of his name. Ah, to be king. In 1663, King Charles II granted a new charter for the same territory to the Lords Proprietors, who in 1710, appointed a separate governor to the northern part of the region. In 1729, the Carolina colony was officially divided in two, making Charles the namesake for double the amount of states he initially intended.

North Dakota
The Little Missouri River flowing through Theodore Roosevelt National Park .
Credit: Randy Runtsch/ Shutterstock

Much like the Carolinas, the Dakotas were once a singular, larger territory before being split into separate states in 1889.  The name Dakota was taken from that of the Native American Dakotas, a Sioux tribe who originally inhabited the region; the word means “friend,” though is also often translated as “allies.” Will the region be divided even further leading to an East and West Dakota someday? Probably not, but anything is possible.

Ohio
The rolling hills of south east Ohio.
Credit: Don Bilski/ Shutterstock

You can’t find any U.S. state names shorter than Ohio, but it was named after an even shorter Iroquoian wordO-Y-O, meaning “great river.” The Seneca Native Americans settled along what is now the Ohio River in the 1650s, and though the region was briefly named La Belle Riviere by French explorers in the late 1600s, the English restored its Native Ohio name when they took control in the mid-1700s.

Oklahoma
Wichita Mountain Wildlife Preserve, Lawton, Oklahoma.
Credit: Sarah Quintans/ Shutterstock

No, it’s not named after a frying pan, though Oklahoma’s shape certainly resembles ones. The first recorded use of the name Oklahoma actually came from Spanish explorer Francisco Vázquez de Coronado in 1541, and is based on the Choctaw words okla and humma, which mean “people” and “red,” and were used by the Choctaw to describe their people. In 1866, it was Allen Wright, then Chief of the Choctaw Nation, who suggested the name for the territory during treaty negotiations.

Oregon
Tumalo Falls in Bend, Oregon.
Credit: Clifford Wayne Estes/ Shutterstock

The story behind Oregon’s name is as murky as the state’s muddy banks along the Pacific Ocean. The first written record of the name appeared in 1765 by English army officer Major Robert Rogers, who stated that a local river was called Ouragon by Native Americans. Other theories were once popular enough to be printed in school textbooks, including that the name had Spanish roots and was adapted either from oregano, or orejon, a word meaning “big ears.” Though we may never be sure of Oregon’s true namesake, it’s certain that Oregon boasts an incredible natural beauty unique to the Pacific Northwest region.

Pennsylvania
Pine Creek Gorge, also called the Grand Canyon of Pennsylvania.
Credit: Reid Dalland/ Shutterstock

While Pennsylvania played a key role in helping to achieve American independence, its name has less to do with its political history and more with the state’s lush greenery. The Province of Pennsylvania — a name meaning “Penn’s Woods” — was inspired by the surname of its founder, William Penn, and also by the new province’s forestssylva (or “forest trees”). Penn envisioned a “a green country town” that encouraged religious freedom, which in turn led to Pennsylvania becoming one of the most culturally diverse among the 13 original colonies.

Rhode Island
Sunset at Castle Hill Lighthouse on Newport, Rhode Island.
Credit: Jim Schubert/ Shutterstock

You’ll have to forgive early explorers for assuming Rhode Island was an island. The New England state’s official stance on the origin of its name is that Dutch explorer Adriaen Block, on his 1614 expedition, called it “Roodt Eylandt” (“red island”) after seeing the red clay that lined the shore. One other popular theory however, is that explorer Giovanni da Verrazzano anchored near present-day Providence and compared the region to the Greek island of Rhodes. Though it’s not an island, Rhode Island still offers incredible oceanside views of the Atlantic that have earned it the very appropriate nickname, the Ocean State.

South Carolina
Historical downtown area of Charleston, South Carolina.
Credit: f11photo/ Shutterstock

It’s no surprise that South Carolina shares an origin story with North Carolina, as described above. Despite this, South Carolina possesses a unique identity and southern charm that differentiate it from its neighbor to the North.

South Dakota

Sylvan Lake in Custer State Park.
Credit: Jess Kraft/ Shutterstock

Once again, there’s no unique origin story for South Dakota, as it shares that history with North Dakota. But what makes South Dakota particularly stunning compared to its northern neighbor are South Dakota’s Black Hills and Badlands that make it a must-visit site for nature lovers.

Tennessee

Aerial of downtown Chattanooga, Tennessee and Tennessee River.
Credit: Kevin Ruck/ Shutterstock

It’s an unfortunate truth that sometimes details get lost in the annals of history. While that’s the case with regards to Tennessee’s naming origins, one agreed-upon fact is that Spanish explorer Juan Pardo was the first to record the name in 1567. He and his crew are believed to have traveled through a Cherokee village called Tanasqui, or, potentially Tanasi. The meanings of those words are not known, but have been theorized to be derivations of “winding river” and “river of the great bend.” With both the Tennessee and Mississippi Rivers winding through its borders, it’s very possible if not likely that they could have inspired the state’s name.

Texas
The Rio Grande as viewed from Big Bend National Park, Texas.
Credit: William Silver/ Shutterstock

Texans have that sweet southern charm, so it’s fitting that its name translates to “friends or allies.” Spanish explorers encountered the Native American Caddo tribe in present-day Texas in the 1540s, and are believed to have interpreted their word teyshas as the tribe name, recording it as Teyas or Tejas. While the errors were corrected and the usage stopped over time, the name eventually lived on. “Friendship” has even been the Texas state motto since 1930, so if you don’t have a pal from Texas already then be sure to find yourself one.

Utah
Sandstone arch in Arches National Park, Utah/
Credit: Harry Beugelink/ Shutterstock

From its crystal clear Great Salt Lake to the mountainous peaks that make the state distinct, Utah has a natural beauty as rich as its deep history. When Spanish settlers arrived in the area in the late 1500s, they encountered the Native American Ute tribe, from which the state takes its name. The meaning of this tribe’s name is “people of the mountains”; it’s also believed that this name could potentially have come from the Apache word for the tribe, yuttahih, which roughly translates to “those that are higher up.” Despite the association with the state’s elevation, in the Ute tribe’s language, their own name actually means “land of the sun.”

Vermont
View from overlook of Green Mountains in Vermont.
Credit: Stacy Funderburke/ Shutterstock

While many of the names on this list date back to pre-American independence, Vermont’s name was first documented just one year after the country’s creation. The words vert and mont translate to “green mountain,” as the state is home to the glorious Green Mountain range. On April 11, 1777, Philadelphia doctor and revolutionary Thomas Young became the first to use the name Vermont in print, writing, ““To the Inhabitants of Vermont, a Free and Independent State.” Young is believed to be the originator of the name, which was likely as much a tribute to his friend Ethan Allen and his Green Mountain Boys militia as it was a description of the stunning scenery.

Virginia
Aerial of Virginia Beach and boardwalk.
Credit: ABEMOS/ Shutterstock

Much like Maryland, yet another powerful and influential woman lends her name to the state of Virginia (and in turn, West Virginia, but we’ll get to that later). Virginia was named for Queen Elizabeth I of England, who was also known as the “Virgin Queen” for her reluctance to marry. In 1584, Elizabeth granted English explorer and soldier Walter Raleigh permission to start the colony, and he would go on to name the new land in her honor.

Washington
Autumn landscape and Columbia River Gorge from Cape Horn Viewpoint.
Credit: PL Designs/ Shutterstock

Few individuals have had a more prolific impact on our country’s history than the first U.S. President George Washington, so it’s only sensible to have named a state after him. The territory was initially going to be named Columbia, after the Columbia River, but Congress worried it might get confused with the national capital, the District of Columbia. Washington is the only U.S. state named after a president, though if there’s one man who deserves the honor, it’s George.

West Virginia
Bridge over New River Gorge in autumn.
Credit: Sean Pavone/ Shutterstock

West Virginia retained the name of the state from which it separated (Virgina), meaning it is also named after Queen Elizabeth I and is the third and final (alphabetically) U.S. state named for a female individual. During the Civil War, when the State of Virginia withdrew from the Union in 1861 to join the Confederacy, the state’s western region — which had long felt alienated from the eastern region’s politics — refused to do so. In 1863, President Abraham Lincoln proclaimed West Virginia as its own state. This beautiful Appalachian state received its first national park in 2021, the New River Gorge.

Wisconsin
Rocky overlook view of lake and hills in Devil's Lake State Park near Baraboo, Wisconsin.
Credit: Sarah Quintans/ Shutterstock

Doctors famously have bad handwriting, but in one historic case, so do explorers. In 1673, French explorer Jacques Marquette adapted the word Meskousing from the region’s Algonquin-speaking tribes to describe a river he had traveled. The word, written in cursive, was then misread as “Ouisconsin” by French explorers. It was written that way until 1830, when the U.S. House of Representatives first printed it as it sounds: Wisconsin.

Wyoming
Jackson, Hole Wyoming.
Credit: Andreiute/ Shutterstock

Last but not least we come to Wyoming. The name comes from the Native American Algonquian word mecheweamiing (meaning “at the big plains”), and was first used by the Lenape people as a name for their home region, Pennsylvania’s Wyoming Valley. In 1865, the name was suggested for the Wyoming territory. Though U.S. Representative James M. Ashley (who was born in the Wyoming Valley) later expressed regret upon learning of the new territory’s poor soil quality, the name stuck. Hopefully Ashley’s descendents don’t feel the same way, as Wyoming is home to some of the most awe-inspiring nature found anywhere in the U.S.A.

Source credit: thediscoverer.com

Harris Narrows Trump’s Lead in Latest Polls, Gains Among Key Demographics

In a series of recent polls, Vice President Kamala Harris has significantly reduced former President Donald Trump’s lead. This marks a shift in the competitive landscape of the upcoming presidential race. According to a Rasmussen Reports poll conducted between August 11 and 14, Trump’s lead over Harris has decreased to 4 points. The survey found Trump at 49 percent and Harris close behind at 45 percent. This is a notable drop from a July poll by the same organization, which showed Trump leading by 7 points, with 50 percent to Harris’ 43 percent.

Trump, who frequently highlights favorable polls from Rasmussen Reports on his Truth Social account, may find these results surprising. The pollster, which AllSides media bias rating describes as “lean right,” has typically shown Trump with a more substantial lead. Despite this, Trump’s overall lead in the latest poll has narrowed by one point over the past week. However, there is a silver lining for Trump in terms of his appeal to independent voters.

Interestingly, Trump’s support among independents has increased by 2 points since last week. In the latest poll, Trump has secured 51 percent of the independent vote, compared to Harris’ 40 percent. Just a week prior, Trump held a 9-point advantage among these unaffiliated voters, which has now grown even larger. This could suggest a solidifying of support among a key voter demographic, despite the tightening race overall. As Rasmussen mused in a post on X (formerly known as Twitter), “Is Trump getting a DNC Convention bounce?”

While Trump has made gains with independents, Harris has made progress in winning over women voters. The latest poll shows that Harris has flipped a 2-point deficit among women to a 2-point lead, with 48 percent compared to Trump’s 46 percent. Historically, women voters have leaned heavily Democratic, and Harris appears to be benefiting from this trend. Most polls continue to show Harris leading among women, which could be a critical factor in the final election outcome.

Since Harris announced her candidacy, national polls have generally shown her overtaking Trump. According to FiveThirtyEight’s poll tracker, Harris has been consistently ahead of Trump since July 26 in six of the seven key swing states. During this period, only four national polls have placed Trump in the lead, underscoring the challenges he faces in regaining ground. Overall, Harris now holds a 3.6-point lead over Trump nationally, which is her largest average lead to date.

However, the dynamics of the race could shift if independent candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr. decides to drop out. Reports suggest that Kennedy’s participation as a third-party candidate has been siphoning more votes away from Trump than from Harris. In various state and national polls, including a Fox News survey conducted among 1,034 Pennsylvania voters between July 22 and 24, 10 percent of Trump’s two-way supporters indicated they would prefer another candidate if third-party options were available. In contrast, only 7 percent of Harris supporters said the same.

The influence of third-party candidates is just one factor that could change the current standings. Some pollsters caution against viewing Harris’ recent gains as a guaranteed victory. A memo from July by Tony Fabrizio, a pollster for the Trump campaign, predicted a “short term” increase in Harris’ poll numbers, which he attributed to a temporary surge in enthusiasm following her entry into the race. He referred to this period as the “Harris Honeymoon,” suggesting that her bump in the polls might not be a lasting trend.

Mark Mellman, who was the lead pollster for then-Senator John Kerry, echoed a similar sentiment. He stated that Harris’ lead is not “unreal” or “unnatural” but also “not necessarily permanent.” Mellman explained to Politico, “I can certainly imagine a situation where both candidates’ favorabilities decline a little bit.” His comments reflect a broader uncertainty in the race, with many factors still at play that could influence voter sentiment before the election.

As the race continues to evolve, both candidates are likely to experience shifts in their polling numbers. The inclusion or exclusion of third-party candidates like Robert F. Kennedy Jr., demographic shifts among key voter groups, and the overall political climate will all play crucial roles in determining the final outcome. For now, Harris seems to have the momentum, but whether she can maintain and build on her lead remains to be seen. The coming weeks and months will be critical for both campaigns as they seek to solidify their bases and sway undecided voters in what is shaping up to be a highly competitive election.

Robert F. Kennedy Jr. Endorses Donald Trump, Withdraws from Presidential Race

Independent White House candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has withdrawn from the presidential race and endorsed Republican nominee Donald Trump. Kennedy, a longtime Democrat and a prominent member of the Kennedy political dynasty, made this announcement at a rally in Arizona, standing beside Trump on stage. He stated that the same principles that drove him away from the Democratic Party now compel him to support Trump.

At a press conference in Phoenix on Friday, Kennedy, 70, revealed plans to remove his name from the ballot in ten crucial battleground states. Before bringing Kennedy to the stage, Trump promised to release all remaining documents related to the 1963 assassination of President John F. Kennedy if he is elected. At the rally in Glendale later, Trump lauded Kennedy as “phenomenal” and “brilliant.”

Democratic rival Kamala Harris, meanwhile, responded to Kennedy’s move by stating her intention to “earn” the support of his voters. As the November election approaches, Kennedy’s polling numbers have declined sharply from their earlier double-digit highs, largely due to dwindling funds and reduced national media coverage.

Kennedy, the son of U.S. Senator Robert F. Kennedy and nephew of President John F. Kennedy, belongs to one of the most storied families in Democratic politics. His decision to back a Republican candidate for the White House has provoked outrage among his relatives. Earlier this year, they had criticized his use of the family name in a Super Bowl advertisement. His sister, Kerry Kennedy, described his endorsement of Trump as a “betrayal of the values that our father and our family hold most dear,” adding, “It is a sad ending to a sad story.”

Addressing the personal difficulties arising from his decision, Kennedy stated, “This decision is agonising for me because of the difficulties it causes my wife and my children and my friends.” However, he also expressed a sense of clarity and peace, saying, “I have the certainty that this is what I’m meant to do. And that certainty gives me internal peace, even in storms.” His wife, Cheryl Hines, an actress known for her role in HBO’s “Curb Your Enthusiasm,” voiced her support for his decision to suspend his campaign in a post on X (formerly Twitter), though she did not comment on his endorsement of Trump.

Kennedy emphasized that Trump’s commitment to ending the war in Ukraine through negotiations with Russia was a major factor in his decision to support Trump’s campaign, stating, “Trump’s insistence he could end the war in Ukraine by negotiating with Russia alone would justify my support for his campaign.” He acknowledged that they still have “very serious differences” on many issues but are aligned on key matters.

Kennedy has already begun removing his name from the ballots in key battleground states like Arizona and Pennsylvania. However, election officials indicated that it is too late for him to withdraw from swing states such as Michigan, Nevada, and Wisconsin. Kennedy initially launched his campaign in April 2023 as a Democrat, citing the legacy of his father and uncle as “champions of the Constitution.” However, he claimed he left the party because it had transformed into one of “war, censorship, corruption, big pharma, big tech, big money.”

Kennedy cited “media control” and efforts by the Democratic Party to thwart his campaign as reasons for suspending his run. “In my heart, I no longer believe I have a realistic path to victory in the face of relentless and systematic censorship,” he explained. At his peak, Kennedy polled between 14% and 16% but has since seen his support diminish to single digits, particularly after Kamala Harris secured the Democratic nomination.

Despite Kennedy’s offer to collaborate with Harris on her presidential bid, Democrats appeared largely unconcerned by his withdrawal and subsequent endorsement of Trump. Mary Beth Cahill, a senior adviser for the Democratic National Committee, commented, “Donald Trump isn’t earning an endorsement that’s going to help build support; he’s inheriting the baggage of a failed fringe candidate. Good riddance.”

Kennedy’s campaign has been closely associated with the anti-vaccine movement, stemming from his leadership role in the Children’s Health Defense organization, formerly the World Mercury Project. His controversial actions, such as recounting a 2014 incident where he dumped a dead bear cub in New York’s Central Park as a joke, have drawn significant public and media attention. Additionally, earlier in his campaign, it was revealed that Kennedy had suffered from a brain parasite over a decade ago, which led to severe memory loss and brain fog.

Rumors have swirled in recent days that Kennedy’s endorsement of Trump could be an attempt to secure a position in a potential future Trump administration. While Trump told CNN he would be “certainly open” to the idea, Trump’s son, Donald Trump Jr., suggested Kennedy might be suited to “blow up” a federal department. This speculation reflects broader concerns about the two-party system in the U.S. and the challenges new ideas and candidates face in breaking through the political process. As Merrill Matthews, a resident scholar with the conservative Institute for Policy Innovation, noted to the BBC, Kennedy’s decision underscores “how difficult it is to get new ideas and fresh people into the process.”

Kennedy’s withdrawal and endorsement of Trump mark a significant turn in the 2024 presidential race, reshaping the dynamics just months before Americans head to the polls.

Kamala Harris Faces Daunting Challenges in Presidential Race Against Donald Trump

At the Democratic National Convention this week, party members confidently predicted that Kamala Harris would emerge victorious against Donald Trump. They hailed her as a historic leader, a beacon of hope, and referred to her as “the president of joy.” Amid this overwhelming optimism, however, former First Lady Michelle Obama issued a sobering caution: “No matter how good we feel tonight or tomorrow or the next day, this is going to be an uphill battle.” Her warning was soon overshadowed by the excitement of the 17,000 attendees at the convention in Chicago, but it underscored a pressing reality for Harris: the real challenge is only beginning.

More than a month after President Joe Biden endorsed her, Harris has yet to present detailed plans on how she would tackle the nation’s most significant issues, such as immigration, crime, and climate change. She has not yet sat down for a comprehensive media interview to address tough questions about her past policy shifts, leadership style, and the scrutiny surrounding her race and gender as a historic candidate. As John Anzalone, a pollster for the last three Democratic presidential nominees, pointed out, “We can’t put our heads in the sand. She’s a Black woman. The bar is going to be higher for everything. And guess what? That means, even mistakes. Mistakes are going to be magnified.”

Harris’ supporters acknowledge that she remains largely undefined to many voters, having spent much of the past four years in Biden’s shadow. This relative anonymity presents both opportunities and risks. David Axelrod, a former chief strategist for President Barack Obama, noted, “The bad thing about vice presidents is that nobody knows who you are. The good thing about vice presidents is nobody knows who you are.”

With just over two weeks to prepare for her only scheduled presidential debate against Trump on September 10, which could significantly influence the race’s trajectory, Harris’ team feels no urgency to release a comprehensive policy platform or engage in media interviews that might disrupt the positive momentum her campaign has generated. So far, her advisers have positioned her policy agenda as an extension of Biden’s first-term accomplishments, especially in economic matters, though some specifics may differ.

For instance, Harris has abandoned her opposition to fracking and her previous support for Medicare for All, key positions in her 2019 presidential run. Her aides argue that while her values remain consistent, she has adopted more centrist policies out of practicality. “She’s going to work to support and lead pragmatic common sense policies that are going to directly relate to improving the lives of Americans,” said Brian Nelson, a senior campaign policy adviser.

Meanwhile, Harris’ allies anticipate that Trump will eventually settle on an effective line of attack against her. In recent days, he has employed a broad-based strategy, targeting her racial identity, demeanor, record as vice president, and perceived liberalism. “He’ll figure out how to get a message and land a political punch,” said Pennsylvania Governor Josh Shapiro. “What you’ve seen with her is an ability to absorb the criticism and just keep going. And that is a really, really important political trait.”

However, some acknowledge that as Election Day approaches, the scrutiny on Harris will intensify. Sarah Longwell, a leader of Republican Voters Against Trump, commented, “People ask this question: Will people vote for a Black woman? And I actually think that’s always the wrong question. I think the question is, Will they vote for Kamala Harris, with her particular set of both skills and baggage? The biggest problem for Kamala Harris is that people view her as too progressive, and that’s going to hurt her with these swing voters.”

Polls indicate that public perception of Harris has shifted since Biden withdrew and she became the presumptive nominee. In a June AP-NORC poll, only 39% of Americans viewed her favorably, with 12% unsure. By August, those figures had improved to 48% favorable, with only 6% expressing uncertainty. Additionally, 27% of respondents reported a “very” favorable opinion, up from 14% in June. This rapid change suggests that public opinion could shift again as voters learn more about Harris.

This shift also suggests that Harris’ current surge might be less about her candidacy and more about Democrats’ relief over Biden stepping aside. Before he withdrew, nearly two-thirds of Democrats expressed opposition to another Biden run, with about half stating they would be dissatisfied if he were the nominee. Quentin Wathum-Ocama, president of Young Democrats of America, expressed mixed feelings of relief and excitement over Harris. “Do people know her? People are aware of her,” he said. “I can be excited, but I still want more.”

However, he may have to wait, as Harris has yet to release comprehensive policy details. Randi Weingarten, president of the American Federation of Teachers, noted that past Democratic efforts to provide detailed policy plans did not resonate with voters. “We used to do 10-point plans; they weren’t even satisfied with five-point plans,” Weingarten said. “I think that that’s not where Americans are.”

So far, Harris has provided a glimpse of her policy intentions. She has proposed federal limits on price increases for food producers and grocers, pledged to make permanent a $3,600 per child tax credit for eligible families, and introduced a new $6,000 tax credit for families with newborns. Additionally, she plans to build three million new housing units over four years and expand down payment assistance for renters. She also wants to accelerate a Biden initiative to allow Medicare to negotiate drug prices, aiming to reduce costs by 40% to 80% by 2026.

Trump’s campaign has focused on the lack of specifics in Harris’ platform and her avoidance of media interviews. At a recent rally in Asheboro, North Carolina, Jerry Zimmerman, a Trump supporter, acknowledged the challenge of defeating Harris, saying, “If they can prove that everything went fair, I’ll be cool with it. I think a lot of people will be cool with the outcome.”

With the election timeline compressed, both candidates have little time to pivot dramatically. Early voting in key states like Pennsylvania begins on September 16, with more states following shortly after. Both campaigns have already committed substantial resources to television ads, with Democrats planning to spend over $270 million compared to the Republicans’ $120 million.

Michelle Obama warned that mistakes are inevitable and urged Democrats to stay focused on defeating Trump. “The minute something goes wrong, the minute a lie takes hold, folks, we cannot start wringing our hands,” she said. “We cannot get a Goldilocks complex about whether everything is just right. And we cannot indulge our anxieties about whether this country will elect someone like Kamala, instead of doing everything we can to get someone like Kamala elected.”

Epic Systems Explores AI Integration to Revolutionize Healthcare

At an underground auditorium bustling with thousands of healthcare executives this week, Judy Faulkner, CEO of Epic Systems, took to the stage dressed as a swan, complete with feathers. While her costume choice might have surprised some newcomers, those familiar with the health-tech industry, especially Epic’s community, knew that this was just the start of their annual Users Group Meeting (UGM). This year’s event, held on Tuesday, focused heavily on how new artificial intelligence (AI) features could benefit both doctors and patients.

Epic Systems is a major player in healthcare software, with its technology implemented in thousands of hospitals and clinics across the United States. The company manages medical records for over 280 million Americans, although patient data is often spread across various vendors.

An Enchanting Atmosphere

Every year, Epic’s headquarters in Verona, Wisconsin, becomes a hive of activity as thousands converge to learn about the company’s newest products and strategies. UGM is one of Epic’s biggest annual events, and this year was no exception. The 1,670-acre campus, adorned with farm animals, wizard statues, and buildings themed around “Alice in Wonderland” and “The Wizard of Oz,” provided a fitting backdrop for the “storytime” theme of the conference.

Faulkner and her team embraced the whimsical theme by dressing up as characters from children’s literature. The presentations were lively, featuring skits and songs, as the executives highlighted updates across Epic’s suite of products. Key offerings discussed included MyChart, an app allowing patients to access their medical records, and Cosmos, a de-identified patient dataset used for clinical research.

AI Takes Center Stage

A significant portion of Epic’s announcements at the conference revolved around artificial intelligence. According to Faulkner, the company is developing over 100 AI features, although many are still in the early stages. One of the key advancements coming by the end of this year is a generative AI tool that will assist doctors in rewriting messages, letters, and instructions in plain language, making them more comprehensible to patients.

Epic also aims to simplify routine tasks for doctors by using AI to queue up orders for prescriptions and laboratory tests automatically. Many physicians face the burden of time-consuming duties, such as drafting letters for insurance denial appeals and reviewing prior authorization requirements. To alleviate this, Epic plans to introduce AI tools this year to streamline these processes.

Looking ahead to 2025, Epic’s generative AI is expected to advance further, with capabilities to integrate results, medications, and other critical details into a doctor’s responses through the MyChart platform. Specific features, such as AI-driven wound measurement calculations from images, are also slated for release next year.

In addition, Epic unveiled a new scheduling application for healthcare staff, “Teamwork,” designed for both physicians and nurses. Faulkner mentioned that Epic is “investigating” the possibility of enabling direct claims submission through its software, potentially eliminating the need for intermediaries like clearinghouses. Should Epic succeed, this could represent a significant shift in how insurance claims are processed within the healthcare industry.

 

The viability and adoption of these AI features by health systems remain uncertain, but Epic’s presentation concluded on a high note with a visionary demonstration of the future potential of its technology.

A Glimpse Into the Future

Seth Hain, Epic’s senior vice president of research and development, led the futuristic demo. He interacted with an AI agent through the MyChart app, discussing his recovery from a fictional wrist surgery and answering questions about his pain levels. The AI agent instructed Hain to use his camera to capture his wrist movement, which it then analyzed to assess his healing progress. Based on data from similar patients in Epic’s Cosmos database, the agent determined that Hain’s wrist extension, measured between 60 to 75 degrees, indicated he was ahead of schedule in his recovery.

Curious about his ability to resume playing pickleball, Hain asked the AI agent for advice. The response was cautious, advising him to “still wait a little longer” before returning to the game.

After the presentation, Hain met with reporters and clarified that the demo was performed in real-time without any human intervention. However, he emphasized that this capability is still in its infancy. “It is very, very, very early in regards to how and where the community, the broader medical community, will adopt that type of thing, but it’s viable,” Hain explained. He added that it would likely take several years before such technology is widely available and accepted within the healthcare sector.

As Epic Systems continues to innovate with AI, the company’s efforts signal a potential transformation in the way healthcare is delivered. By enhancing the efficiency of medical professionals and improving patient outcomes, these advancements could usher in a new era for the industry. For now, however, the road to fully realizing these technological capabilities remains long and filled with challenges.

Democrats Push ‘Joy’ Strategy in 2024 Race, Positioning Kamala Harris as a Unifying Force

Democrats are placing their bets on the belief that American voters are eager to move beyond the divisive era shaped by former President Donald Trump. At the Democratic National Convention (DNC) in Chicago, the party showcased a strategy centered on “joy,” with Vice President Kamala Harris being positioned as the candidate to lead the nation into a more hopeful future.

Former President Bill Clinton emphasized this theme by declaring that Harris brings “sheer joy” to the 2024 presidential race. Meanwhile, Oprah Winfrey encouraged the nation to “choose joy.” Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg further contrasted Trump’s “darkness” with the more uplifting political approach offered by Harris and her running mate, Minnesota Governor Tim Walz, stating, “it just feels better to be part of.”

This messaging shift highlights how quickly the dynamics of the 2024 presidential race have changed since President Joe Biden exited the race last month. While Biden’s campaign was heavily focused on the dangers Trump posed to democracy, Harris has taken those concerns and wrapped them in a more forward-looking narrative centered on themes of freedom and joy. The convention was designed to reflect this new tone, complete with a party-like atmosphere.

The evening’s entertainment featured performances by John Legend, drummer Sheila E., and Stevie Wonder, who delivered a rousing rendition of “Higher Ground.” The celebratory mood extended to the appearance of alumni from Mankato West High School’s football team, which had previously won a state championship under Walz’s guidance as an assistant coach. They appeared on stage in their old jerseys as a pep band played the school’s fight song. “Thank you for bringing the joy to this fight,” Walz told the audience.

Six Key Moments from the DNC’s Third Night

  1. Tim Walz, the ‘Happy Warrior,’ Makes His Case

Governor Tim Walz, relatively new to the national stage, used his moment to introduce himself as more than just a politician. Before becoming Harris’s running mate, Walz had never delivered a speech to a national audience, let alone used a teleprompter. Yet, instead of leaning on his political credentials as a two-term governor and former congressman, he presented himself as a high school teacher, football coach, hunter, and neighbor.

Walz used his speech to argue that Democrats are the true champions of freedom. “In Minnesota, we respect our neighbors and the choices they make. Even if we wouldn’t make the same choices ourselves, we’ve got a golden rule: Mind your own damn business,” Walz said. He linked this philosophy to Harris’s policy positions on health care, abortion rights, and homeownership, speaking in tones reminiscent of the late Minnesota Senator Paul Wellstone.

“When we Democrats talk about freedom, we mean the freedom to make a better life for yourself and the people you love,” he said. “Freedom to make your own health care decisions. And yeah, your kids’ freedom to go to school without worrying about being shot dead in the hall.”

The governor’s heartfelt address also touched on personal struggles, particularly the fertility challenges he and his wife, Gwen, faced. He emotionally addressed his family, saying, “Hope, Gus, and Gwen, you are my entire world, and I love you.” His son Gus stood up with tears in his eyes, applauding his father.

Walz concluded his speech with a call to action, urging Democrats to give their all in the remaining 76 days of the campaign, saying, “We’re gonna leave it on the field.” He exited the stage to Neil Young’s “Rockin’ in the Free World,” a song that Harris’s campaign received special permission to use, marking a sharp contrast to Young’s previous legal battle to prevent Trump from using it.

  1. Oprah Winfrey Ties Harris to a Legacy of Progress

Oprah Winfrey took the stage to draw a historical connection between Harris and previous generations of African American trailblazers, portraying the vice president as representing “the best of America.” Winfrey recounted the story of Tessie Prevost, who passed away last month, and three other Black girls who, at the age of six, bravely began desegregating New Orleans elementary schools in 1960.

Winfrey noted that the “New Orleans Four” paved the way for Harris, who nine years later became part of the second class to integrate public schools in Berkeley, California. Now, Winfrey declared, Harris is on the cusp of making history.

“Soon and very soon, we’re going to be teaching our daughters and sons about how this child of an Indian mother and a Jamaican father, two idealistic and energetic immigrants… grew up to become the 47th president of the United States,” Winfrey said, to a roaring crowd chanting “U-S-A.” She also addressed Ohio Senator JD Vance’s derogatory remarks about childless women, making a powerful statement about the shared humanity of all Americans.

  1. Bill Clinton’s Stark Choice: ‘For the People’ or ‘Me, Myself, and I’

Former President Bill Clinton framed the election as a choice between Harris, who is “for the people,” and Trump, who he described as being solely about “me, myself, and I.” Clinton, whose influence within the party has diminished over the years, still holds a unique appeal to White working-class voters, making his appearances at conventions particularly noteworthy.

Clinton discussed Harris’s policies on housing, health care, and job growth, while also painting Trump as a self-centered figure. He quipped, “So the next time you hear him, don’t count the lies. Count the I’s.” This line drew attention to Trump’s focus on his grievances, vendettas, and conspiracy theories.

  1. A Generational Shift in the Democratic Party

The convention in Chicago also symbolized a generational shift within the Democratic Party. While the primary goal was to build momentum for Harris, the event also highlighted the passing of the torch from seasoned figures like Biden, Clinton, and former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi to newer leaders.

Bill Clinton, aware of his own mortality, reminded the crowd of his long history with the Democratic National Convention and urged voters to support Harris, saying, “If you vote for this team… you’ll be proud of it for the rest of your life. Your children will be proud of it. Your grandchildren will be proud of it.”

  1. The Struggles of Hostage Families

In a poignant moment, Rachel Goldberg-Polin, mother of a hostage taken by Hamas, expressed the agony that she and her husband, Jon Polin, have endured. She thanked the Biden-Harris administration for their support, while also acknowledging the suffering on all sides of the Israel-Hamas conflict.

  1. Defending Democracy: Trump Betrayed Us

Even as Harris reframed the Democratic message, the convention retained a strong focus on defending democracy. Aquilino Gonell, a former U.S. Capitol Police sergeant, accused Trump of betraying the officers who defended the Capitol on January 6, 2021. His emotional testimony was a reminder of the stakes in the upcoming election, underscoring the enduring relevance of the fight to preserve democratic values.

Kamala Harris Raises $500 Million for 2024 Campaign, Setting Fundraising Records

U.S. Vice President Kamala Harris’ 2024 election campaign has garnered significant financial support, amassing an unprecedented $500 million since she officially became the Democratic presidential candidate, according to sources familiar with the matter. This substantial fundraising achievement reflects the strong enthusiasm among donors as the November 5 election approaches.

Four individuals closely involved with the fundraising efforts disclosed to Reuters that Harris’s campaign had successfully accumulated this considerable sum in the four weeks following her entry into the race on July 21. The rapid inflow of campaign funds highlights the critical role that financial resources play in modern elections, particularly in financing advertising and voter mobilization initiatives aimed at swaying undecided voters.

Harris’s decision to enter the presidential race came after President Joe Biden stepped down from the top of the Democratic ticket, a move that reignited a wave of funding that had largely dried up following Biden’s challenging debate performance against Republican contender Donald Trump. In the initial week of her campaign, Harris raised an impressive $200 million, quickly securing the support needed to become the party’s nominee.

In total, Harris’s team raised $310 million in July alone, bringing the combined fundraising total for her and Biden, before he exited the race, to over $1 billion. This rapid accumulation of funds marks the quickest achievement of such a significant fundraising milestone in U.S. political history, according to the Harris campaign.

On the Republican side, Donald Trump’s campaign reported raising $138.7 million in July, with cash reserves amounting to $327 million. Trump’s campaign had previously outpaced Biden’s in fundraising during the second quarter of the year.

Despite the competition, enthusiasm for Harris has remained strong. Her campaign reported having $377 million in cash on hand as of July, with the momentum continuing into August. This ongoing support is evident not only from large donors but also from small-dollar contributors, as thousands of people have been attending her rallies in key swing states across the nation.

To put this fundraising success in perspective, Biden’s campaign committee raised a total of $1.04 billion during the 2020 election cycle, a figure that swelled to $1.62 billion when combined with contributions from outside groups, as reported by OpenSecrets, a watchdog organization that tracks money in politics.

At the Democratic National Convention in Chicago, Harris expressed her appreciation for Biden’s leadership, while the president himself took the opportunity to highlight his record and urge voters to support Harris and her running mate, Minnesota Governor Tim Walz, in the upcoming election.

Former President Barack Obama, a significant figure in Democratic fundraising, also played a role in bolstering Harris’s campaign. Obama delivered a speech at the convention on August 20, while Harris continued her efforts to energize voters in nearby Wisconsin. Obama has already participated in two major fundraisers with Biden and has offered his assistance to Harris in organizing additional fundraising events.

Throughout her campaign, Harris has consistently referred to herself as the underdog in the race against Trump, a tactic intended to prevent complacency among her supporters and maintain a high level of engagement from both her voter base and her donors.

With less than three months remaining until Election Day, Harris’s fundraising prowess and strong donor enthusiasm place her campaign in a formidable position as she continues to rally support across the country in her bid to become the next President of the United States.

Obamas Steal the Show at Democratic National Convention with Powerful Speeches

The Democratic National Convention on Tuesday night was dominated by the Obamas, highlighting an extraordinary reality: the party’s two most compelling orators are married to each other. The only debate among Democrats seemed to be which of the two delivered the more impactful speech.

Former President Barack Obama aimed to elevate the conversation, drawing on former President Lincoln’s call for Americans to summon the “better angels” of their nature, hoping for a future where the nation could transcend its current turmoil. Meanwhile, former First Lady Michelle Obama delivered a more impassioned and confrontational address, directing several pointed critiques at former President Trump, albeit without frequently mentioning his name. She urged Democrats to take decisive action to prevent his reelection.

The Obamas overshadowed other speakers, including second gentleman Douglas Emhoff, who didn’t attempt to compete. Here are the five major takeaways from the evening:

Barack Obama Calls for Unity Amid Division

Twenty years ago, at the Democratic National Convention in Boston, a state senator gained national attention with a speech arguing that the differences between “blue” and “red” America were overstated, particularly by those who benefit from such division. That state senator was Barack Obama, who would be elected to the U.S. Senate later that year and to the White House—becoming the nation’s first Black president—just four years later.

On Tuesday night, Obama’s address echoed similar themes but was tempered by experience, marked by more battles, and acutely aware of the deepening divisions in the country. “We live in a time of such confusion and rancor,” Obama said, “with a culture that puts a premium on things that don’t last—money, fame, status, likes.” However, he maintained that “away from all the noise, the ties that bind us together” still endure.

Obama’s political message was that Democrats must articulate their belief in those ties to win in November. He also emphasized the importance of freedom, aligning with Vice President Kamala Harris’s campaign theme. Obama defined freedom broadly, including same-sex marriage, religious freedom, and environmental rights. He also criticized Trump, mocking his “weird obsession with crowd size” and his “whining about his problems.”

Obama praised President Joe Biden as a leader who “defended democracy at a time of great danger.” Ultimately, the speech was a display of the soaring rhetoric that propelled Obama to the presidency, still thrilling his party as much as it ever did.

Michelle Obama’s Fiery Address

Michelle Obama’s speech was even more impassioned than her husband’s, targeting Trump repeatedly while refraining from naming him until later in her address. She criticized the advantages of the wealthy and privileged, making it clear that Trump was her target. “Most of us will never be afforded the grace of failing forward,” she stated, adding that not everyone has “an escalator waiting to take us to the top”—a clear reference to Trump’s famous descent down the escalator in Trump Tower in 2015 to announce his first presidential run.

The crowd at the United Center in Chicago, Michelle Obama’s hometown, erupted with applause at her pointed reference to “the affirmative action of generational wealth.” This was a jab at both Trump’s background as the son of a wealthy developer and Republican criticisms of programs designed to support marginalized communities, especially Black communities.

Obama drew parallels between herself and Harris, portraying them as two women of color from modest backgrounds who had to fight for their achievements, which in turn gave them a greater capacity for empathy. “Kamala knows, like we do, that regardless of where you come from, what you look like, who you love, how you worship, or what’s in your bank account, we all deserve the opportunity to build a decent life. All of our contributions deserve to be accepted and valued,” she said.

She also cautioned Democrats to prepare for the kind of attacks on Harris that she and her husband had previously faced. At the same time, Obama warned that the stakes in the election were too high for voters to approach it with a “Goldilocks complex about whether everything is just right.”

Harris as the People’s Champion, Trump as Self-Serving

The overarching theme of the convention was clear: Harris is a champion of the middle class, while Trump is only interested in serving himself. The convention’s purpose was not just to energize the base but also to craft a compelling campaign message. Democrats aimed to portray Harris as a forward-thinking leader dedicated to the middle class, in contrast to Trump’s self-serving nature.

Republicans, of course, reject this narrative, arguing that Democrats are too liberal for the average American. However, nearly every speech on Tuesday reinforced the central theme of Harris as a leader for the people.

Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) highlighted this when he spoke of working with Harris in the Senate, saying, “I saw a leader who was fearless, who stood up for middle-class families like the one she was raised in.” Whether the electorate will accept this portrayal remains to be seen, but Democrats are united in their message.

Emhoff’s Personal Touch

Second gentleman Douglas Emhoff, aware that he couldn’t match the grand rhetoric of the Obamas, opted for a more personal approach. He shared anecdotes about his early relationship with Harris, including leaving a “rambling” message on her voicemail. Emhoff’s self-deprecating humor was evident when he quipped that “my mother is the only person in the whole world who thinks Kamala is the lucky one for marrying me.”

Emhoff presented himself as an everyman, still connected to his high school friends and somewhat awed by his current position. While his speech may not have swayed many opinions, it effectively served its purpose.

Biden’s Quick Fade from the Spotlight

One of the most striking aspects of the second day of the convention was how rapidly President Biden seemed to recede from prominence. While Barack Obama praised Biden, Michelle Obama didn’t mention him at all. The party’s relief in rallying around Harris was palpable.

Biden had already left Chicago for California, a move that, while perhaps strategic, also highlighted his swift marginalization. The convention underscored the party’s shift of focus toward Harris, signaling a new chapter in Democratic leadership.

Joe Biden Defends His Legacy at Democratic National Convention

It was not the speech Joe Biden had envisioned for this year, especially under the current circumstances. However, given his experiences with tragedy and adversity, the president understands how swiftly fortunes can shift.

At the Democratic National Convention’s opening night in Chicago, Biden delivered a passionate defense of his presidency, revisiting many themes from his 2020 campaign and his more recent bid before his mid-July withdrawal following a poor debate performance.

“Like many of you, I gave my heart and soul to this nation,” Biden said towards the end of his nearly hour-long speech, which was met with enthusiastic shouts of “Thank you, Joe.”

Introduced by his daughter Ashley and his wife, Jill, Biden took the stage with visible emotion. Jill described witnessing Biden’s deep reflection as he decided to withdraw from the presidential race, and Biden dabbed at his eyes with a tissue, touched his heart, and straightened up at the lectern, smiling broadly as the crowd cheered.

His address reflected on his historical significance and also praised his vice president, whom he hopes will succeed him. “Selecting Kamala was the very first decision I made when I became our nominee and it’s the best decision I made my whole career,” Biden remarked. “She’s tough, she’s experienced, and she has enormous integrity.”

While Biden did not explicitly mention passing the torch to a new generation, the sentiment was evident. Following his remarks, Vice President Kamala Harris and her husband, Doug Emhoff, joined Biden and Jill on stage. Harris mouthed “I love you” to Biden after their embrace.

Although Biden’s focus was on Harris, acknowledging that her performance against Donald Trump in the upcoming election could shape how history and his party view him, earlier speakers paid tribute to the current president.

The evening began with a surprise appearance by Harris, who received a standing ovation as she took the stage. “Joe, thank you for your historic leadership and for your lifetime of service to our nation and for all you continue to do,” she said. “We are forever grateful to you.”

Delaware Senator Chris Coons, a close ally of Biden, also praised the president. “I’ve never known a more compassionate man than Joe Biden,” Coons said. “I’ve never known a man who has taken from his own loss and his own faith and delivered so much for the future of so many others.”

Hillary Clinton, who appeared earlier in the evening, lauded Biden for restoring “dignity, decency and competence” to the White House. She received a long ovation and highlighted that while she did not break the “highest, hardest glass ceiling” by becoming the first woman president, “on the other side of that glass ceiling is Kamala Harris taking the oath of office.”

The reception Biden received from the packed Democratic convention hall was vibrant. The Chicago Democrats had been jubilant all day, but the applause for Biden also seemed to acknowledge his reluctant decision to step aside, alongside honoring his lengthy political career that began in 1972 when he was first elected to Congress at 29.

Former Presidents Barack Obama and Bill Clinton are set to address the convention later this week. Unlike them, Biden will not have the opportunity to run for re-election. Instead, he used his speech to define and defend his legacy as a one-term president, a speech that may stand as his final address to a large American audience unless a significant national event occurs in the next five months.

At the speech’s conclusion, Biden quoted a line from the song “American Anthem.” “Let me know in my heart when my days are through, that America, America, I gave my best to you,” he said, eliciting another round of applause from the audience.

Eight years ago, Biden chose not to run for president in favor of Hillary Clinton, partly due to pressure from Obama. Four years ago, although he won the nomination, the Covid pandemic prevented him from enjoying the full Democratic convention experience with a celebratory balloon drop.

This convention marked one of Biden’s closest experiences to a traditional Democratic convention moment in the spotlight. After his speech, he departed for Air Force One and a flight to California for a holiday. His time in Chicago was brief, and despite his hopes from a few months prior, his remaining term as president will be limited to months rather than years.

Chicago Hosts 2024 Democratic National Convention Amid High Stakes and Celebrity Appearances

With just three months remaining until the 2024 election, thousands of individuals have convened in Chicago for the Democratic National Convention (DNC). This event, rooted in tradition since the 1830s, marks a significant moment for the Democratic Party, as delegates gather to solidify their platform and energize their base.

The convention’s origins can be traced back to the 1830s when Democratic delegates supporting President Andrew Jackson assembled in Baltimore to nominate him for a second term. Over time, this gathering has evolved into a major event, filled with speeches, celebrity appearances, and political strategy.

This year’s convention, taking place at the United Center Arena in Chicago, began on Monday, August 19, and will continue through Thursday, August 22. While the event will uphold many longstanding traditions, it comes with some notable changes. The most significant is that the party has already officially nominated Vice-President Kamala Harris through a virtual roll call, following President Joe Biden’s decision to withdraw from the race.

As a result, the convention’s focus has shifted to speeches from key Democratic figures and the finalization of the party’s platform. The platform, which has already been drafted, addresses a wide array of issues, such as reducing inflation, combating climate change, and curbing gun violence. The draft also contrasts the Democratic Party’s positions with those outlined in Project 2025, a conservative blueprint developed by the Heritage Foundation for a potential second Trump administration. Although Trump has distanced himself from the project, several of his allies were involved in its creation.

Throughout the week, the convention will feature speeches from a range of prominent Democrats. On Tuesday, former President Barack Obama and former First Lady Michelle Obama are expected to deliver remarks. Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders, and Illinois Senator Tammy Duckworth are also slated to speak. Other notable speakers include Illinois Governor JB Pritzker, New Mexico Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham, Mesa, Arizona Mayor John Giles, and Second Gentleman Doug Emhoff, the husband of Kamala Harris.

Wednesday’s lineup is expected to feature former President Bill Clinton and former Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, among others. Minnesota Governor Tim Walz, Harris’s running mate, will deliver the prime-time speech on Wednesday night after his official nomination. However, the most significant moment of the convention will occur on Thursday when Vice-President Harris takes the stage to formally accept the presidential nomination and deliver her speech, which will be the culmination of the event. House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries will also make an appearance during the week.

Already, several notable figures have addressed the convention. President Joe Biden, who was the headline speaker on Monday, delivered an emotional speech defending his presidency. Introduced by his wife Jill and daughter Ashley, Biden stated, “America, I gave my best to you.” The same evening, 2016 presidential candidate Hillary Clinton praised Biden and expressed hope that Kamala Harris could finally shatter the “highest, hardest glass ceiling” by becoming the first female president. Other speakers on Monday included progressive lawmaker Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, individuals affected by abortion bans in Republican-led states, and representatives from the labor movement, including United Auto Workers head Shawn Fain.

The convention is expected to draw around 50,000 attendees, including thousands of delegates chosen by state Democratic parties and super delegates, who are significant elected officials and members of the Democratic Party. The media presence will also be substantial, with thousands of members of the press covering the event.

In addition to the political figures, the convention will feature appearances from various celebrities. In previous years, actors such as Julia Louis-Dreyfus, Eva Longoria, Elizabeth Banks, and America Ferrera have attended the DNC. This year, rumors have circulated about potential appearances by mega-stars Beyoncé and Taylor Swift, although neither has confirmed their attendance.

While the convention itself is a highly orchestrated event, it is not without controversy. Demonstrations have been organized outside the DNC venue, primarily opposing U.S. support for Israel’s war in Gaza. On Monday, thousands of protesters marched, calling for a ceasefire in Gaza and an end to U.S. support for Israel. Although the protest was mostly peaceful, several arrests were made when some demonstrators breached a security fence. The turnout was reportedly lower than expected, falling short of the 15,000 participants claimed by organizers.

During his speech on Monday, President Biden acknowledged the protesters, stating, “The activists have a point,” and added, “A lot of innocent people are being killed, on both sides.”

For those unable to attend the convention in person, there are multiple ways to follow the coverage. Members of the public can only attend by volunteering, but national media outlets are providing extensive coverage. The convention itself is offering live streams on social media platforms, ensuring that the public can stay informed. BBC News is among the media organizations providing in-depth coverage, with special reporting and analysis available on their website and app, as well as on their live-stream. The BBC News Channel is also airing special coverage each night from 20:00 ET (01:00 BST). Additionally, special episodes of The Global Story and Americast podcasts can be found on BBC Sounds and other podcast platforms.

As the 2024 election draws nearer, the Democratic National Convention serves as a critical moment for the party to rally its supporters and present a unified front. With speeches from key figures, the adoption of a comprehensive platform, and the nomination of Kamala Harris as the presidential candidate, the convention will set the stage for the final stretch of the campaign.

Kamala Harris’ Entry Shakes Up 2024 Electoral Landscape

The 2024 electoral race has seen a significant shift since Vice President Kamala Harris took the helm of the Democratic ticket, altering the political map that once appeared to be a rematch between an unpopular, aging incumbent president and the former president, now a convicted felon, whom he defeated four years ago.

This latest analysis of the “Road to 270” electoral map shows several moves favoring Harris, indicating she has more pathways to securing the 270 electoral votes needed to win the presidency than President Joe Biden had when he led the Democratic Party. The current outlook resembles the situation in the final days of the 2020 campaign, focusing on seven battleground states and one congressional district in Nebraska. These areas are expected to receive the most attention and resources from both campaigns as they vie for the White House. In the month since Biden announced he would not run for re-election, these seven states have witnessed $240 million in advertising spending, split almost evenly between the two parties, according to AdImpact.

Previously, former President Donald Trump held a clear advantage in the race to 270 electoral votes. However, Harris’ entry into the race and her swift success in unifying the Democratic Party and regaining support from key groups, including voters of color, young voters, and women, has erased that advantage. Although the momentum has shifted in Harris’ favor, the race remains extremely close, with no clear frontrunner. Both Trump and Harris have multiple routes to achieving the necessary 270 electoral votes.

In this new analysis, four states have shifted from leaning Republican to being classified as toss-up battlegrounds: Michigan, Georgia, Nevada, and North Carolina. Together, these states account for 53 electoral votes, which were previously considered to lean toward Trump.

Trump now has 24 states and one congressional district in Maine either solidly in his favor or leaning in his direction, giving him a total of 219 electoral votes, 51 short of the 270 needed to win. Meanwhile, Harris has 19 states plus the District of Columbia either solidly in her favor or leaning her way, totaling 225 electoral votes, 45 votes shy of the required 270.

Currently, seven states and one Nebraska congressional district, amounting to 94 electoral votes, are classified as true toss-ups as the Democratic National Convention approaches and the summer draws to a close.

It is crucial to understand that this electoral outlook is a snapshot of the current state of the electoral college, not a prediction of the final outcome in November. The analysis is based on public and private polling, discussions with campaign advisers, political operatives from both parties, members of Congress, and professionals involved with outside groups active in the race.

As some Sun Belt states, such as Arizona, Nevada, Georgia, and North Carolina, have become more competitive with Harris in the race, her most straightforward path to 270 electoral votes likely involves maintaining the “Blue Wall” states—Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin—and retaining the Omaha-area congressional district in Nebraska in the Democratic column.

For Trump, the most direct route to 270 electoral votes would involve holding onto all the states he won in 2020 and flipping Georgia and Pennsylvania—two states he won in 2016—back to his column. Keeping North Carolina from slipping away is also critical for Trump, which may explain his recent focus on the state, including two visits in as many weeks and increased spending on television ads there.

The current electoral map breaks down as follows:

Solid Republican (188 Electoral Votes):Alabama (9), Alaska (3), Arkansas (6), Idaho (4), Indiana (11), Iowa (6), Kansas (6), Kentucky (8), Louisiana (8), Mississippi (6), Missouri (10), Montana (4), Nebraska (4), North Dakota (3), Ohio (17), Oklahoma (7), South Carolina (9), South Dakota (3), Tennessee (11), Texas (40), Utah (6), West Virginia (4), Wyoming (3).

Leans Republican (31 Electoral Votes):Florida (30), Maine 2nd Congressional District (1).

Toss-ups (94 Electoral Votes):Arizona (11), Georgia (16), Michigan (15), Nebraska 2nd Congressional District (1), Nevada (6), North Carolina (16), Pennsylvania (19), Wisconsin (10).

Leans Democratic (50 Electoral Votes): Colorado (10), Minnesota (10), New Hampshire (4), New Mexico (5), Oregon (8), Virginia (13).

Solid Democratic (175 Electoral Votes):California (54), Connecticut (7), Delaware (3), District of Columbia (3), Hawaii (4), Illinois (19), Maine (3), Maryland (10), Massachusetts (11), New Jersey (14), New York (28), Rhode Island (4), Vermont (3), Washington (12).

Vice President Kamala Harris Unveils Ambitious Plan to Tackle America’s Housing Affordability Crisis

Americans, regardless of their political beliefs, are united in acknowledging that rent costs are high and purchasing a home feels almost out of reach. The housing affordability crisis in the United States is rooted in fundamental economic principles of supply and demand. The housing market is suffering from a severe shortage of available homes, as many sellers are reluctant to put their properties on the market. This hesitancy is largely due to the fear that moving to a new home will result in higher mortgage payments, given the current historic mortgage rates. Meanwhile, demand for homes surged during the pandemic and has remained strong, despite rising prices and interest rates.

Although there are indications that the worst of the housing affordability crisis may have passed, the market remains constrained. This issue is so pressing that it has become a key topic for voters in the 2024 presidential election. On Friday, Vice President Kamala Harris introduced a comprehensive plan aimed at making housing more affordable. While some analysts welcomed certain aspects of her proposals, others expressed concern that some elements might exacerbate existing issues in the housing market.

Harris’ plan, which builds on previously announced proposals by President Joe Biden, includes several key initiatives:

– Up to $25,000 in down-payment assistance for first-time homebuyers.

– A $10,000 tax credit for first-time homebuyers.

– Tax incentives for developers who build starter homes intended for first-time buyers.

– Expansion of tax incentives for the construction of affordable rental housing.

– The creation of a $40 billion innovation fund to encourage innovative housing construction methods.

– The repurposing of federal land for affordable housing projects.

– A ban on the use of algorithm-driven tools that landlords use to set rental prices.

– The removal of tax benefits for investors who purchase large numbers of single-family rental homes.

Several economists concurred that adding more homes to the market through these incentives would help alleviate the affordability issue by increasing inventory and potentially driving down prices. However, there was skepticism about the effectiveness of capping rent.

Joe Brusuelas, principal and chief economist at RSM US, commented on the plan, saying, “What I’ve seen is three parts substance and one part symbolism.” He praised the focus on increasing housing supply through financial channels, describing it as a solid and forward-thinking proposal. However, he viewed the rent caps as more symbolic than practical.

President Biden’s July proposal to limit rent increases to 5% is likely to resonate with the public, according to Brusuelas. However, he noted that the current economic conditions are already easing rent pressures, making such caps potentially redundant. The Consumer Price Index data for July, released on Wednesday, showed that the “rent of shelter” index had risen by 5.1% annually, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Despite this, recent trends indicate that rents are decreasing, with landlords offering incentives like free parking and rent-free months to attract tenants. Brusuelas believes that this makes the proposed price caps ineffective.

Lanhee Chen, director of domestic policy studies at the Hoover Institute at Stanford University and a former campaign adviser for Republicans like Senator Mitt Romney, criticized the rent control measures in Harris’ plan. “What is effectively a federal rent-control measure… was a bad idea when President Biden proposed it a few weeks ago,” Chen said. He also expressed concerns about the $40 billion innovation fund, suggesting that it might be another financial giveaway to local governments without clear accountability for results.

Chen also voiced apprehension about the down-payment assistance initiative. While it may seem appealing to potential homebuyers, it could inadvertently increase demand and drive up housing costs even further. Brusuelas shared a similar viewpoint, noting that while the down-payment assistance might appeal to Gen Z voters, its overall impact on the market is uncertain.

Despite these concerns, Brusuelas emphasized that the most substantial part of Harris’ plan is the proposal to add 3 million housing units to the market. Long before the pandemic and the subsequent supply chain disruptions and rise in remote work, the U.S. housing market was already struggling with chronically low inventory levels. This scarcity of homes has been a significant factor in driving up prices and worsening the affordability crisis.

“The proposal released Thursday from the Harris campaign is the only one I’ve seen that directly addresses the concerns around the supply of housing,” Brusuelas said. He highlighted the need for a coordinated effort by federal, state, and local governments to increase housing supply, as the nation currently faces a shortage of approximately 3 million homes.

Chen agreed that increasing housing supply is the most commendable aspect of Harris’ plan. “There’s bipartisan support for repurposing federal lands for the construction of affordable housing, and the concept of creating the right tax and economic incentives for builders to construct more new housing,” he said. However, Chen expressed some concerns about the targeting of these incentives but acknowledged that these “supply-side” reforms are long overdue.

Former President Donald Trump has also proposed using federal land to address the housing shortage. During a news conference on Thursday, Trump stated, “We’re going to open up tracts of federal land for housing construction. We desperately need housing for people who can’t afford what’s going on now.”

The Republican National Committee’s platform also emphasizes the importance of promoting homeownership through tax incentives and support for first-time buyers. The platform includes a commitment to reducing unnecessary regulations that increase housing costs and lowering mortgage rates by curbing inflation.

Jeffrey Zabel, an economics professor at Tufts University, expressed cautious optimism about Harris’ plan. However, he noted that turning these promises into reality will be challenging. “While this is a step in the right direction, let’s wait and see what they can actually implement,” Zabel said. He emphasized that proposing such measures is one thing, but successfully implementing them is another. Even if these proposals are enacted, Zabel believes that much more needs to be done to restore balance to the housing supply.

While Vice President Kamala Harris’ housing plan has sparked debate, it addresses the critical issue of increasing housing supply, which many experts agree is essential to solving the housing affordability crisis. The effectiveness of rent caps and down-payment assistance remains uncertain, but the proposal to build 3 million new homes may be the key to alleviating the strain on the housing market.

Top Countries Receiving U.S. Green Cards in 2022: Mexico and India Lead the Way

Who’s Receiving U.S. Green Cards: A Look at the Leading Countries of Origin

The United States remains a beacon for many around the world who aspire to live in a country known for its opportunities, safety, and freedom. Whether driven by the hope for better prospects or the need to escape adverse conditions, people from across the globe see the U.S. as a land of promise. In fact, the U.S. hosts more immigrants than any other country, with its numbers surpassing those of Germany, Saudi Arabia, Russia, and the United Kingdom combined.

In 2022, over a million people realized their dream of permanent residency in the U.S., with the exact figure standing at 1,018,340. This data, provided by the Office of Homeland Security Statistics, reveals the diversity of immigrants and highlights the nations most represented among new green card holders. Among the top 15 countries of origin, Mexico and India lead the pack, reflecting longstanding migration trends and the search for opportunities in the U.S.

Mexico and India Lead in U.S. Green Card Distribution

Mexico continues to be the primary source of immigrants to the U.S., with a staggering 10.7 million Mexican-born individuals currently residing in the country. This longstanding migration pattern is also evident in the number of green cards issued, with Mexicans receiving 139,000 green cards in 2022 alone. The reasons for this substantial movement are varied but often include the pursuit of economic opportunities, improved living conditions, and the chance to reunite with family members already in the U.S.

India, on the other hand, holds the second position in terms of green cards granted, with 127,000 Indian nationals becoming permanent residents in 2022. The surge in Indian immigration is closely tied to the country’s growing population of skilled professionals. Many Indian immigrants are drawn to the U.S. by the promise of better job prospects, especially in the technology and healthcare sectors, as well as the chance to pursue higher education in some of the world’s leading universities.

The Growth of Indian Immigration

The flow of immigrants from India to the U.S. has seen significant fluctuations in recent years. Notably, in 2020, the number of new permanent residents from India dropped to a decade-low figure of 46,363. This decline was largely attributed to the COVID-19 pandemic, which led to stricter travel restrictions and disruptions in global mobility. However, this downward trend did not last long, as the numbers began to rise again in the following years. By 2021, the figure had climbed to 93,450, and by 2022, it reached 127,012.

The combined total of green cards issued to immigrants from Mexico and India in 2022 was 265,784, representing 26% of the total green cards distributed that year. This significant share underscores the importance of these two countries in the broader landscape of U.S. immigration.

This analysis sheds light on the patterns and trends that shape U.S. immigration today, illustrating how people from different parts of the world continue to view the U.S. as a land of opportunity and a place to build a new life.

Kamala Harris’ Nomination Sparks New Enthusiasm Among Female Voters, Shaping 2024 Election Dynamics

The nomination of Vice President Kamala Harris as the Democratic presidential candidate has introduced a significant shift in the race, with implications that are still unfolding. Her potential to become the first female U.S. president brings the role of the women’s vote into sharp focus for the upcoming November election.

Looking back at the 2022 midterm elections, the women’s vote played a crucial role in countering the expected “red wave,” leading Democrats to perform better than anticipated. This election took place shortly after the Supreme Court’s Dobbs decision, which overturned Roe v. Wade, allowing states to impose strict limitations on abortion access. The ruling galvanized a higher-than-expected turnout among women, particularly young women, who supported Democratic candidates in the House of Representatives and state elections.

Now, with Vice President Harris stepping into the role of the Democratic candidate, there is a renewed wave of enthusiasm among Democrats, especially women. Polls conducted weeks before Harris’ nomination showed President Joe Biden trailing behind his Republican opponent, Donald Trump. However, Harris’ emergence has energized many, with women’s health, abortion rights, and reproductive freedom—issues Harris has long championed—taking center stage in the campaign. According to Brookings Institution’s Elaine Kamarck, these issues will be pivotal in the election. Harris has also advocated for policies important to women, including paid parental leave, child care, and economic policies that resonate with younger and minority women. The support for Harris from women’s groups is already visible through increased funding and outreach efforts.

With Harris leading the ticket, the question arises: Will this newfound enthusiasm and potential surge in female voter turnout be sufficient to secure her victory in November? To explore this, it’s essential to review the role of women’s votes in recent presidential elections, identify the demographics most favorable to Democratic candidates, and examine how gender differences in voter turnout could provide women with an electoral advantage. Additionally, analyzing the demographic shifts among female voters from 2012 to the present reveals a rise in Democratic-leaning groups within this electorate. Finally, a simulation of the 2024 election, based on recent polling data, offers insights into Harris’ chances if this enthusiasm translates into increased voter turnout and support among women.

Historically, women have shown a consistent preference for Democratic candidates in presidential elections. Since 1984, women have consistently voted for Democrats over Republicans. This trend is evident in recent elections, as illustrated by the Democratic-Republican (D-R) vote margins by gender from 2000 to 2020. In each election, the D-R margins have been positive for women, who have leaned more Democratic than men, regardless of the party that ultimately won the presidency.

The 2020 election, in particular, highlighted significant gender disparities in voting patterns across battleground states. In seven key states, only one of which (North Carolina) was won by Trump, women exhibited positive D-R margins, while men showed negative margins. The most pronounced gender disparities were observed in Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Georgia, where women’s votes were crucial in securing Democratic victories.

These gender differences extended across various demographic groups in the 2020 election. Women’s D-R margins were higher than men’s in groups that traditionally lean Democratic, such as Black voters, Hispanic voters, and young voters aged 18 to 29. Even among non-college-educated white women, who generally favor Republicans, the negative D-R margins were smaller compared to their male counterparts. The only exception was among Asian American voters, where men’s D-R margins were higher than women’s.

Beyond partisan preferences, voter turnout rates will play a crucial role in determining women’s influence in the upcoming election. Since 1980, women have consistently exhibited higher turnout rates than men in presidential elections. In the 2020 election, these turnout rates reached their highest levels in decades. Due to their higher turnout and longer life expectancy, there were 9.7 million more female voters than male voters in 2020.

Women’s higher turnout rates also contributed to their majority share of the electorate, comprising 53% of all voters in 2020. However, this share varies across different demographic groups. For instance, women accounted for 58% of Black voters, 55% of Asian voters, and 54% of Hispanic voters. Among voters aged 65 and older, 54% were women. Even within the white non-college graduate group, which tends to favor Republicans, women still made up a majority of 52%.

As the size of the female electorate continues to grow, its demographic composition is also evolving. Between 2012 and 2024, there have been notable shifts in the profile of eligible female voters by race and education. Specifically, there have been gains in women’s groups that are more likely to vote Democratic—such as white college graduates and women of color—and a decline in the women’s group that tends to favor Republicans—white non-college graduates. For the first time in a presidential election, the latter group will comprise less than 40% of the female electorate.

Similar demographic shifts are evident in the battleground states, where the female electorate has become more diverse and Democratic-leaning. In states like Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Michigan, Arizona, Nevada, Georgia, and North Carolina, there has been a decline in the share of white non-college-educated women and an increase in the share of women of color. For example, in Nevada, the proportion of white non-college-educated women decreased from 48% in 2012 to 35% in 2024, while the proportion of women of color increased from 36% to 47% over the same period. These demographic changes have contributed to a more Democratic-leaning voter profile among women in these states.

As polls conducted before and after Harris’ nomination reveal, there are early indications of how the 2024 election might unfold. Three polls of likely voters conducted by the New York Times/Siena College on June 26, July 3, and July 25—after Biden’s endorsement of Harris—show shifts in D-R voting margins among men and women. Notably, the D-R margin for women stood at 14% in favor of Harris versus Trump on July 25, while the negative D-R margin for men remained high at 17%.

Vice President Kamala Harris’ nomination as the Democratic presidential candidate has the potential to reshape the dynamics of the 2024 election, particularly with regard to the women’s vote. The enthusiasm and support for Harris among women, coupled with the changing demographic composition of the female electorate, suggest that women will play a decisive role in the outcome of the election. If this newfound enthusiasm translates into higher voter turnout and increased support for Harris among women, it could significantly boost her chances of winning the presidency in November.

Kamala Harris Targets High Food and Housing Costs in Economic Policy Push

Vice President Kamala Harris is intensifying her focus on high food and housing costs, a central concern for voters, as she prepares to deliver an economic policy speech in North Carolina. In her speech, Harris is expected to advocate for a federal ban on price gouging in groceries and outline strategies to reduce other living costs, positioning these initiatives as extensions of the current administration’s efforts.

Although inflation has recently hit its lowest point in over three years, food prices remain significantly elevated, with a 21% increase compared to three years ago. Former President Donald Trump, now the Republican presidential nominee, has been critical of the Biden administration’s handling of inflation, making it a key issue in his campaign.

Housing costs, another major contributor to inflation, are also a focal point of Harris’s policy proposals. She plans to leverage federal resources to facilitate the construction of three million new housing units, legislate to curb rent hikes, and offer $25,000 in down-payment assistance to first-time homebuyers if elected. Harris is aligning herself closely with President Joe Biden’s legislative and economic record, framing her plans as continuations of their joint work over the past three and a half years.

The proposed Harris housing plan includes the introduction of a tax credit for builders who develop starter homes aimed at first-time buyers and the expansion of a $20 billion “innovation fund” from the Biden administration to support housing construction. The down-payment assistance plan would also significantly build on Biden’s existing proposal to offer federal aid to first-time homebuyers.

Earlier this week, both Biden and Harris celebrated their administration’s achievements in lowering prescription drug prices at an event in Maryland. This marked Harris’s first joint speaking engagement with Biden since she assumed the lead on the Democratic ticket nearly four weeks ago. During the event, they announced that negotiated drug prices would reduce the costs of ten of Medicare’s most expensive drugs, cutting prices by hundreds or even thousands of dollars. This program, a result of the 2022 Inflation Reduction Act focused on health care and climate, was made possible through Harris’s tiebreaking vote in the Senate, which allowed Democrats to overcome unified Republican opposition. As Biden noted, “The tiebreaking vote of Kamala made that possible,” adding his confidence that Harris would be a formidable president.

Biden has also undertaken initiatives to combat rising food prices, including the establishment of a “competition council” aimed at reducing costs by fostering competition within the meat industry. This is part of a broader strategy to demonstrate that his administration is actively working to tackle inflation. When questioned on Thursday about whether he was concerned Harris might distance herself from his economic policies, Biden assured reporters, “She’s not going to.”

Public opinion, however, reveals a mixed response to Harris’s economic capabilities. According to the latest poll from the Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research, 45% of Americans believe Trump is better suited to handle the economy, while 38% favor Harris. Notably, about one in ten respondents expressed trust in neither candidate regarding economic management.

Speaking at his golf club in Bedminster, New Jersey, Trump criticized Harris’s proposals, labeling them as “communist price controls” that would exacerbate shortages, hunger, and inflation. As he made these remarks, Trump was flanked by popular grocery items to underscore his point about rising food costs.

Harris’s housing plan also includes measures to address data-sharing and price-setting tools used by landlords to determine rents and the elimination of a tax incentive that has led investment firms to acquire substantial portions of the nation’s housing stock. Harris plans to contrast her approach with Trump’s, referencing a lawsuit brought against him by the Justice Department five decades ago for housing discrimination.

Consumer confidence surveys indicate that high prices continue to frustrate shoppers, especially those in lower-income brackets, despite the overall cooling of inflation. Prices across the board are about 21% higher than they were before the pandemic, although average incomes have risen slightly more, sustaining consumer spending even as many Americans report a pessimistic outlook on the economy.

Certain meat prices have risen even more steeply than overall inflation: beef prices have surged nearly 33% since the pandemic began, chicken by 31%, and pork by 21%, according to government data. Pandemic-related supply chain disruptions played a role in these increases, as many meat processing plants temporarily shut down due to COVID-19 outbreaks among workers.

The Biden administration, however, has argued that corporate consolidation in the meat processing industry has been a more significant factor, enabling a few large companies to hike prices beyond their costs. In late 2021, the White House noted that four major companies control between 55% and 85% of the beef, chicken, and poultry markets, naming Tyson Foods and JBS among the dominant players. These companies have paid out hundreds of millions of dollars to settle price-fixing lawsuits for chicken, beef, and pork, though they have not admitted to any wrongdoing.

Some economists have suggested that large food and consumer goods companies took advantage of pandemic-era disruptions, a phenomenon economist Isabella Weber at the University of Massachusetts, Amherst, termed “seller’s inflation.” Others have referred to it as “greedflation.”

Harris’s proposals to curb price gouging come at a time when there is some evidence that this “seller’s inflation” is easing. Consumers are becoming more selective and are opting for lower-cost alternatives over more expensive options. The government reported Wednesday that grocery prices, on average nationwide, have risen just 1.1% in the past year, aligning with pre-pandemic price increases.

The meat industry has long been defending against allegations of price gouging and price-fixing. Major players in the industry dispute claims that their consolidation is responsible for high prices. Glynn Tonsor, an agricultural economist at Kansas State University, explained that the increased costs of raising animals, processing meat, and delivering it to consumers have contributed to higher prices. “Yes, consumers are seeing higher prices, but it doesn’t necessarily mean somebody is gouging them,” Tonsor said.

Julie Anna Potts, President, and CEO of the Meat Institute trade group, echoed this sentiment, arguing that Harris’s proposal would not address the underlying causes of inflation. “Consumers have been impacted by high prices due to inflation on everything from services to rent to automobiles, not just at the grocery store,” Potts said. “A federal ban on price gouging does not address the real causes of inflation.”

Global Debt Soars to $91 Trillion, U.S. Alone Holds $35 Trillion, Sparking Concerns Over Economic Stability

Global debt has reached a staggering $91 trillion, with the United States alone responsible for over a third of this amount. The U.S. debt has soared to $35 trillion, a figure that has raised alarms at the International Monetary Fund (IMF) due to its potential risks to the global economy.

To put this colossal number into perspective, if $35 trillion worth of dollar bills were laid end to end, they would reach far beyond our planet. Even the moon, which is about 2.5 billion dollar bills away, pales in comparison to this astronomical sum. The sheer magnitude of U.S. debt is difficult to fathom, emphasizing the gravity of the situation.

“Yeah, these are big numbers,” remarked Peter Blair Henry, an economist at Stanford University’s Hoover Institution. Henry joined in visualizing just how far $35 trillion in dollar bills could stretch. This massive trail of debt would easily pass Mars, which is approximately 140 million miles away, requiring roughly 1.5 trillion dollar bills. Even Jupiter, the largest planet in our solar system, would not be far enough. It would take around 4.5 trillion bills to reach Jupiter, but the U.S. debt continues beyond this point. Next in line is Saturn, but with an average distance requiring only 9 trillion dollar bills, even Saturn can’t encapsulate the U.S. debt.

The journey continues past Uranus and finally reaches Neptune, nearly 30 trillion dollar bills away. By the time we reach the last official planet in our solar system, we still have about $6 trillion of U.S. debt left. A dollar bill measures just over 6 inches, and 35 trillion of them would nearly reach Pluto. The realization of this vast amount of debt is truly shocking, making the IMF’s concerns all the more understandable.

“Honestly, the best way to deal with huge numbers like that is to think about ratios,” said Blair Henry. “What really matters is: How big is the debt relative to the size of the economy?” In simpler terms, America’s near-Pluto debt might not be problematic if the U.S. economy was producing an equivalent amount of wealth. However, this isn’t the case. The U.S. economy is generating roughly $30 trillion in gross domestic product (GDP) this year, while the debt has climbed to $35 trillion. The current debt-to-GDP ratio stands at about 120%, meaning the nation owes more than it produces—a situation that worries Henry.

“As your debt ratio rises, your finances are just getting tighter and tighter,” he explained. “And the danger is, at some point, your creditors look at your debt situation and say, ‘Oh my gosh, you are not going to be able to pay me.’” This shift in perception among creditors could lead to higher interest rates on borrowed money, driving up borrowing costs significantly.

“Your borrowing costs go up dramatically, and that can lead to a financial crisis,” Henry added.

This concern isn’t just theoretical—it’s already happening. For a long time, the U.S. enjoyed low borrowing costs, with creditors confident in the country’s ability to repay its debts. The size of the debt seemed irrelevant. However, as the debt has ballooned, lenders have begun demanding higher interest rates from the U.S. “We’ve hit a turning point,” said Harvard economist Kenneth Rogoff. “At least I believe that.”

Rogoff, who served as chief economist at the IMF for years, sees the rising interest on U.S. debt as a significant economic problem. “This is the biggest thing that’s happened in the global economy in the last five or 10 years,” he said. The U.S. debt has reached a level where even a small increase in interest rates can have massive consequences.

“The interest payments that we have to make on U.S. debt have soared,” Rogoff noted. “I think the interest payments alone are the equivalent of our military budget.” This year, interest payments on the debt are expected to approach $1 trillion—a substantial amount that could otherwise be spent on infrastructure, healthcare, or economic growth. The size of the debt is not only immense but is also siphoning resources from other critical areas.

“People got this idea that it was just free—‘Don’t worry about what your debt is!’” Rogoff commented. “That’s the big change that’s happened in the world, is a bucket of cold water on this idea that debt doesn’t matter.” He cautioned that if another global crisis, akin to COVID-19, were to occur, the U.S. might need to spend large amounts of money quickly, making borrowing even more expensive. This scenario could become risky, potentially destabilizing the economy, especially since other major economies are also heavily indebted.

Rogoff emphasized that while debt can be a valuable tool, it should not be used without restraint. “You want to use debt for a rainy day, but you don’t want to just declare every day a rainy day,” he said.

Interestingly, Neptune is known for its diamond rain, but until such a resource becomes accessible, the solution to managing the debt seems straightforward to Rogoff. It would require Congress to make difficult choices, including cutting spending and raising taxes. The country would need to adopt more stringent fiscal policies, and compromise would be essential in Congress.

However, given the political climate, this might be more challenging than reaching for Neptune’s diamonds.

Kamala Harris Surges Ahead in Presidential Race: Can She Sustain the Momentum?

Kamala Harris, the current Vice President, has quickly risen to the forefront of the presidential race just three weeks into her campaign. This surge has put her ahead in horserace polling, a challenge that former President Joe Biden struggled to overcome during his time as a candidate. However, the sustainability of this momentum remains uncertain.

The political landscape in the United States has been particularly tumultuous in recent weeks. Significant events, such as the July 13 assassination attempt on Donald Trump, the Republican convention, Trump’s selection of a running mate, Biden’s decision to exit the presidential race, and Harris’s choice of a vice-presidential candidate, have all contributed to the current dynamics. Each of these events alone would typically cause a temporary shift in polling numbers. However, the cumulative impact of these occurrences makes it difficult to determine the true state of the race. With the Democratic convention approaching, yet another potential shift in voter sentiment looms.

As the race evolves, questions arise about its structural changes and the possibility of Trump regaining the lead. A surge of polling in the coming days will begin to shed light on these uncertainties, followed by a critical two-month period of intense polling. Several key metrics have emerged as indicators of Harris’s early success, including her rising personal favorability and the narrowing gap in Trump’s advantage on economic issues, a core aspect of his campaign.

Neil Newhouse, lead pollster for Mitt Romney’s 2012 presidential campaign, commented on the nature of the race, saying, “Presidential campaigns are a marathon, and this one has turned into a sprint. And that tends to favor the candidate who is new on the horizon.”

To gain a deeper understanding of the current state of the race, five key numbers should be closely monitored beyond the basic horserace polling.

Kamala Harris’ Favorability Rating

On June 27, Harris’s favorability rating stood at 39 percent, according to a RealClearPolitics average. As of now, that number has climbed to 45 percent. Voters are beginning to see Harris in a new light since she became the Democratic presidential candidate.

For the past three years, there has been a significant disparity between the number of voters who viewed Harris favorably and those who held an unfavorable opinion of her. However, that gap has narrowed. In a recent New York Times/Siena College poll, likely voters in key battleground states such as Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin were nearly evenly split in their views of Harris, with 50 percent holding a favorable opinion and 48 percent an unfavorable one.

Despite this improvement, there is no guarantee that it will last. Trump’s campaign has already launched an advertising blitz in battleground states, attempting to portray Harris as “dangerously liberal.” This negative campaigning could potentially erode her favorability ratings, particularly as her record faces increased scrutiny following the initial excitement of her campaign rollout.

“Image is a precursor to ballot change,” said Newhouse. “You’ll see her image change before the ballot changes. You’ll see her unfavs go up, her very unfavs in particular.”

Trump, too, is experiencing a high point in his favorability, at least since the 2020 election. This surge follows the assassination attempt and the Republican convention, but it’s possible that his numbers might also recede to more typical levels, which have generally been unfavorable.

“With Kamala Harris, it’s like ‘A Star is Born,’” observed Mark Mellman, lead pollster for then-Sen. John Kerry in the 2004 presidential race. “It’s not unreal. It’s not unnatural. It’s not fake. But it’s not necessarily permanent. I can certainly imagine a situation where both candidates’ favorabilities decline a little bit.”

Third-Party Vote Share

On July 21, the percentage of voters indicating support for one of the three independent or third-party candidates—Robert F. Kennedy Jr., Cornel West, or Jill Stein—stood at 12.2 percent, according to a RealClearPolitics average. Today, that number has dropped to 7.1 percent.

While this metric is technically part of the horserace question, it also provides insight into an election where a larger portion of voters now appears to favor their primary options. This shift is attributed to Harris’s surge in popularity and the post-assassination and post-conviction rise in Trump’s favorability. Before Harris replaced Biden on the Democratic ticket, a significant portion of voters expressed dislike for both Biden and Trump, with as many as a quarter of voters falling into this category.

These voters, often referred to as “double-haters,” were seen as potentially decisive in the election. However, their numbers have dwindled. A recent Monmouth University poll revealed that only 8 percent of registered voters now hold unfavorable views of both major-party candidates. Consequently, there are fewer voters inclined to support Kennedy, West, or Stein.

Voter Enthusiasm

Among Democrats, 62 percent are “very enthusiastic” about the election, according to a New York Times/Siena College poll of likely voters in Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin. Among Republicans, the figure is slightly higher, at 63 percent.

While higher enthusiasm doesn’t always translate into victory, as seen in the 2012 election where Romney supporters were more enthusiastic than Obama’s, Harris has managed to energize the Democratic base in a way that Biden and the fear of a second Trump term had not. In the New York Times/Siena College polls, Democrats and Harris supporters expressed enthusiasm for voting at levels comparable to Republicans and Trump supporters.

The enthusiasm gap is even more pronounced in the Monmouth poll, where 85 percent of Democrats described themselves as enthusiastic about the Harris-Trump race, compared to 71 percent of Republicans. The level of enthusiasm among Republicans remained unchanged from June, when Monmouth pollsters inquired about a potential Trump-Biden rematch. However, for Democrats, this represents a significant shift, as only 46 percent expressed enthusiasm about the rematch before the debate.

While enthusiasm alone doesn’t guarantee more votes, it could play a crucial role in a close race by closing the energy gap between supporters of different candidates.

Perceptions on Economic Leadership

In June, Trump held a substantial lead over Biden on the economy, with 54 percent of voters favoring him compared to Biden’s 45 percent, according to an NPR/PBS News/Marist College poll. Now, the gap has narrowed significantly, with Trump at 51 percent and Harris at 48 percent.

Trump’s strong advantage on economic issues has been a central feature of his campaign. However, Harris’s entry into the race has disrupted this dynamic. Polls now show a much closer contest on economic leadership between Trump and Harris, with Trump holding a slight edge of 3 points in a national NPR/PBS News/Marist College poll and 6 points in the Rust Belt battlegrounds surveyed by the New York Times/Siena College.

Harris is eager to establish her own record on the economy. She has planned an event in North Carolina to present her plan to lower costs, signaling her intent to differentiate herself from Biden’s record on inflation, which could be a significant challenge for her campaign.

National Direction Perception

On June 27, 25 percent of voters believed the country was heading in the right direction, while 65 percent thought it was on the wrong track. Today, these figures remain unchanged.

Although this metric hasn’t shifted, voters’ perceptions of it may be evolving. Previously, Trump was seen as the candidate representing change, a favorable position given that two-thirds of voters viewed the country as heading in the wrong direction. However, Harris’s entry into the race has complicated Trump’s status as the candidate of change. She is now positioning herself as the fresh, new face of the campaign, with an emphasis on her youth and vision for the future. This contrasts with Trump, who at 78 years old, is the first person in 80 years to be his party’s presidential nominee in three consecutive elections.

Trump and his supporters will likely focus on convincing voters that Harris, as vice president, bears responsibility for the current state of the country and should be held accountable for the perceived wrong direction.

Ellis Island: A Gateway to America’s Complex Past

Ellis Island, located under the shadow of the Statue of Liberty, served as the entry point for millions of immigrants arriving in the United States at the turn of the 20th century. From 1892 to 1954, the U.S. Immigration Station on Ellis Island processed over 12 million immigrants, shaping the diverse cultural landscape of America. Today, this 27.5-acre island holds a significant yet complex place in American history. Here are five key facts that highlight its pivotal role.

An Island of Many Names

Before European settlers arrived in North America, the island was known as Kioshk or Gull Island by the Mohegan Indigenous peoples. In 1630, the Dutch purchased the island and named it Little Oyster Island due to its abundance of oysters. By the 1700s, the island had become a site for public executions, earning the grim nickname “Gibbet Island,” which refers to gallows. Over the years, it was also called Bucking Island, Dyre Island, and Anderson’s Island. The island’s name changed to Ellis Island in 1774 when Samuel Ellis, who owned a tavern on the island, purchased it. Following Ellis’ death in 1794, his family retained ownership until 1806, when the island was sold to John A. Berry. In 1808, Berry sold it to the U.S. government, marking the beginning of its role in American history.

The Immigration Process: A Half-Day of Hope and Fear

For many European immigrants, arriving at Ellis Island marked the start of a new life. Those who disembarked from their ships in good health and with proper documentation underwent a half-day inspection process. This included medical examinations, reading tests, and a series of questions about their background, such as whether they had family in America, had ever been imprisoned, or held anarchist beliefs. These inquiries were partly influenced by the rising fears of communism and anarchy in the United States at that time. While most immigrants passed through without issue, about 20% were detained for political, legal, or health reasons, and approximately 2% were sent back to their home countries.

A Record-Breaking Year in 1907

Ellis Island saw its busiest day on April 17, 1907, when 11,747 immigrants were processed. That year was the peak of activity for the immigration station, with over 1 million newcomers arriving in the United States. However, the flow of immigrants significantly declined after 1924, following the passage of the National Origins Act, which was part of the Immigration Act of 1924. This legislation imposed strict quotas on the number of immigrants allowed into the country, marking the end of Ellis Island’s golden era as an immigration hub.

Tracing the Roots of Nearly Half of America

A significant number of immigrants who passed through Ellis Island were from Southern and Eastern Europe, fleeing hardships such as poverty, religious persecution, and ethnic discrimination. Today, it is estimated that around 40% of Americans can trace their ancestry back to Ellis Island. The Ellis Island National Museum of Immigration offers visitors the opportunity to delve into their family histories at the Family History Center, providing a tangible connection to the island’s rich heritage.

A Unique Geographical Position

Ellis Island is uniquely situated in New York Harbor, lying between the states of New York and New Jersey. Despite being federally owned as a historic site, the island is officially part of both states. In a 1998 ruling, the U.S. Supreme Court determined that both New York and New Jersey have jurisdiction over the island. The main building, which is a popular tourist attraction, is located in New York, while a 21-acre portion of the island, created through land reclamation, falls within New Jersey’s borders.

Ellis Island’s history is not only a testament to the millions who passed through its gates but also a reflection of the broader immigrant experience in America. Its legacy continues to resonate with the many descendants of those who sought a new life on its shores

Kamala Harris Surpasses Trump in Key Swing States, Boosting Democratic Hopes Ahead of Election

A significant new poll indicates Kamala Harris has overtaken Donald Trump in three pivotal swing states, marking a substantial momentum shift for the Democratic party just three months before the election.

The poll shows the vice-president leading the former president by four percentage points—50% to 46%—across Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, and Michigan. This survey, conducted by the New York Times and Siena College, sampled nearly 2,000 likely voters between August 5 and 9.

This polling period coincided with Harris’s announcement of Tim Walz, the governor of Minnesota and a former high school teacher from the Midwest, as her running mate for the November Democratic ticket.

The poll results offer the most definitive snapshot yet of voter sentiment in critical battleground states since Joe Biden exited the race, throwing his support behind Harris amid increasing concerns about his cognitive health and capacity to serve a second term. This development follows months of polling that showed Biden either neck-and-neck with or slightly trailing Trump.

Registered voters in these states perceive Harris as more intelligent, honest, and temperamentally suited to govern the country compared to Trump.

These findings, released on Saturday by the New York Times, are likely to energize the Democratic base as Harris and Walz continue their campaign across the country. This week marks their first together on the campaign trail, with multiple events planned in swing states that could determine the election outcome.

On Saturday, Harris and Walz held a rally in Las Vegas, Nevada—a state that Biden and Harris won by over two points in the 2020 election.

Although the poll offers only a brief glimpse into the current state of the race, Democrats may find optimism in the fact that 60% of surveyed independent voters—a crucial demographic in determining election outcomes—expressed satisfaction with the presidential candidates. This is a marked increase from the 45% reported in May.

The shift appears to be largely influenced by changing voter perceptions of Harris, who has garnered praise for her positive and forward-looking speeches on the campaign trail. In Pennsylvania, where Biden narrowly defeated Trump by just over 80,000 votes in the previous election, Harris’s favorability rating among registered voters has increased by 10 points since last month, according to the Times/Siena polling data.

To secure a Democratic victory, Harris must win in Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, and Michigan—key battleground states that Biden won in 2020.

The latest polls may further frustrate Trump, whose recent campaign events have been dominated by anger and apparent disbelief at the swift change in momentum. Just weeks ago, Trump announced JD Vance, Ohio senator and former venture capitalist, as his running mate during the Republican national convention, which had a celebratory atmosphere.

Vance has faced criticism from Democrats, who have labeled him as “weird” due to his controversial comments in 2021 about the United States being run by “childless cat ladies.” The new poll shows that the majority of independents, Democrats, and even some Republicans view Vance unfavorably or with little enthusiasm.

Despite this, Democrats still face challenges in effectively communicating Harris’s vision for the country. The poll reveals that 60% of registered voters believe Trump has a clear vision for the nation, compared to 53% for Harris.

Moreover, Trump continues to lead in voter confidence on handling the economy and immigration—two of the three most critical issues for voters, according to the polls.

Nevertheless, Harris holds a significant 24-point lead over Trump on the issue of abortion, which Democrats hope will mobilize voters in crucial swing states like Arizona and Wisconsin. Harris is also perceived far more favorably than Trump regarding democracy. Trump remains embroiled in legal challenges, including charges related to his alleged efforts to overturn the 2020 election results and his involvement in the January 6 Capitol insurrection.

In response to the poll, Tony Fabrizio, the Trump campaign’s chief pollster, asserted that the new surveys “dramatically understated President Trump’s support,” pointing to polling errors in the 2020 election that overestimated Biden’s margin of victory.

Kamala Harris Eyes Wealth Tax and Income Inequality in Potential Presidency

In the current economic landscape, having substantial wealth has always been advantageous, but now more than ever, it seems to be a particularly opportune time to be affluent. The Institute for Policy Studies highlights that during the COVID-19 pandemic, American billionaires saw their wealth increase by 62%. Meanwhile, Oxfam reports that the wealthiest 1% of the world amassed two-thirds of the $42 trillion in new wealth generated in the years following the pandemic.

Vice President Kamala Harris, who is positioning herself as a strong candidate for the presidency, shares concerns with her current superior, President Joe Biden, regarding these statistics. Both see these figures as indicative of an unhealthy level of wealth inequality and economic disparity in the country. Should Harris secure a victory in the November election and work with a cooperative Congress, the wealthy in America might find themselves facing significant changes, particularly those with large fortunes.

Harris’s Wealth Tax Proposal

One of Harris’s primary focuses as a potential president would be to implement tax policies that target the wealthiest Americans. Dennis Shirshikov, a professor of finance, accounting, and economics at the City University of New York, and a seasoned real estate investor, anticipates that a Harris administration would advocate for significant tax reforms aimed at increasing the tax burden on high-income earners. “A Kamala Harris presidency could bring significant changes to the tax landscape for the wealthy,” Shirshikov notes.

A critical component of these potential changes is the introduction of a wealth tax. This idea is embedded in the Biden-Harris 2025 budget proposal, which argues that the current tax code is skewed in favor of the wealthy, allowing them to pay disproportionately low taxes compared to middle-class Americans. The proposal aims to impose a minimum tax of 25% on individuals with wealth exceeding $100 million, addressing what it describes as a glaring inequity in the tax system.

Taxing Capital Gains and Unrealized Gains

Another area of focus for Harris would be closing tax loopholes that disproportionately benefit the wealthy. The Biden-Harris budget proposal plans to treat capital gains as regular income for individuals earning $1 million or more, a significant shift from current tax policies. This change would also eliminate the carried interest loophole, which allows investment fund managers to pay lower tax rates than average workers, and the like-kind exchange loophole, which lets real estate investors defer taxes indefinitely.

Perhaps the most groundbreaking proposal is the taxation of unrealized gains for the ultra-wealthy, a concept described by IFC Media as a “radical departure from normal taxation.” Traditionally, unrealized gains — the increase in value of an asset that has not yet been sold — are not taxed. However, Harris’s proposed 25% tax on these gains for individuals with fortunes exceeding $100 million would mark a significant shift in U.S. tax policy.

Implications for High Earners

Harris’s tax proposals are not limited to the ultra-rich. She also supports raising the top marginal tax rate, a move that would affect a broader range of high-income earners. According to Shirshikov, “This approach aligns with her broader goal of addressing income inequality and ensuring that the wealthiest Americans contribute a fairer share to public revenues.”

The Biden-Harris 2025 budget proposal specifically seeks to repeal the tax cuts implemented under former President Donald Trump’s 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, which reduced the top tax rate for high earners to 37%. Under the new proposal, the top tax rate would be restored to 39.6% for single filers earning more than $400,000 annually and married couples earning more than $450,000. Although these income levels might seem modest compared to billionaire wealth, they place individuals in the top 2% of earners, according to the Tax Foundation. The Biden-Harris administration believes that targeting this group is a reasonable step in addressing income inequality.

The anticipated tax changes under a Harris presidency are intended to generate revenue for social programs and address the widening wealth gap in America. However, these measures are also expected to have significant implications for investment strategies and financial planning among the affluent. As Shirshikov advises, individuals in this income bracket would be wise to start preparing now by consulting with their financial advisors.

Final Thoughts

A Kamala Harris presidency could bring about profound changes in the way the wealthy are taxed in the United States. Her proposals, embedded in the Biden-Harris 2025 budget, aim to create a more equitable tax system that ensures the wealthiest Americans pay a fairer share. Whether through the introduction of a wealth tax, the taxation of unrealized gains, or the increase in the top marginal tax rate, Harris’s potential policies are likely to have a significant impact on the financial landscape for high-income earners in America.

Astrology and the 2024 U.S. Election: Are the Stars Aligning for Kamala Harris?

Is the outcome of Election Day predestined by the cosmos? According to some astrologers, it might be. When political events and planetary movements intersect, the forecasts can be compelling.

In July, the political landscape was shaken when President Joe Biden unexpectedly announced he would not seek re-election, instead endorsing Vice President Kamala Harris as his successor. With less than four months until Election Day, this news was a bombshell in American politics — but not for many astrologers.

Some astrologers claim they foresaw this exact scenario in Harris’ and Biden’s natal charts, which are astrological tools based on the planetary positions at the time of a person’s birth. These astrologers have long been informing their audiences about Harris’ ascendant fortune and Biden’s waning influence. In fact, some even predicted the exact weekend of a major political shift, tied to a full moon. For these astrologers, the notion of Biden’s exit from the race was a long time coming.

“Astrologers have observed signs of illness in Biden’s chart for many years,” said astrologer Catherine Urban, who predicted in June that Biden’s health might deteriorate this year, potentially leading him to endorse Harris.

Predictive astrology involves various techniques to arrive at conclusions, many of which include analyzing a person’s birth date, time, and place to construct their natal chart. Astrologers then track planetary and star movements to predict how a person’s life might unfold, including critical moments in their career.

Mo, an astrologer who co-hosts the “Fixed Astrology” podcast and asked to keep her full name private due to her job, predicted Harris would be a “wartime president” back in May. She explained that Harris’ natal chart shows she would rise to power under challenging circumstances, due to an “enemies of the moon configuration” in her fall solar return. This configuration suggests that Harris will face slander and criticism, which is indicated by planets like Mars or Saturn forming a “difficult aspect” with the moon. A “difficult aspect” in astrology refers to the geometric angles between planets that suggest turmoil or conflict.

Even if you are skeptical of astrology, many others are captivated by the narratives it spins. A quick search on TikTok will reveal astrologers’ predictions about Election Day, including potential outcomes like candidate deaths and election results, drawing tens of thousands of views. One TikTok user, commenting on a video that accurately predicted Biden’s exit from the race, said, “This is my whole FYP [for you page] AND I CAN’T GET ENOUGH.”

The influence of astrology in politics is not a new phenomenon.

Urban attributes the growing interest in political astrology to the high stakes of this U.S. election, noting that “people often look to modalities like astrology to give us hope.”

However, the intersection of astrology and politics is far from new; it’s an ancient tradition. Alexander Boxer, a data scientist and author of *A Scheme of Heaven: The History of Astrology and the Search for Our Destiny in Data*, contends that astrologers were the first data scientists.

“Mapping the emotions of the stars onto politics is the original use of astrology. And it hasn’t ever really gone away,” Boxer told HuffPost.

During the reigns of Roman emperors like Augustus and Tiberius, astrologers wielded considerable power, as their predictions influenced who would become the next emperor and how long they were likely to live.

Astrologers have often been part of rulers’ inner circles. For example, Queen Elizabeth I had a court astrologer who advised her during her reign. In the U.S., Nancy Reagan famously consulted an astrologer after the 1981 assassination attempt on her husband, using astrology to determine auspicious dates for President Ronald Reagan’s trips and public appearances.

“Astrology, I’d say, both invented and in many ways perfected the art of taking a bunch of data, which maybe by itself is meaningless, and putting it together in a very compelling story,” Boxer explained.

Boxer compares ancient astrologers to modern-day election forecasters like Nate Silver. Using complex mathematical models that are difficult for the average person to understand, both astrologers and forecasters can craft a convincing narrative, even when their predictions are wrong. “There’s a particular seduction we have to a story told with data and numbers,” Boxer said.

As for who astrologers believe will win in November, the consensus points to a period of nationwide upheaval.

Pluto is returning to the same celestial configuration it held on July 4, 1776, the day the U.S. was founded. This means Pluto is moving toward the same position in the universe as it was during the nation’s birth. Urban explains that this final phase of the nation’s Pluto return marks a time of “massive death and rebirth,” signaling a restructuring of the current system.

Urban predicts Harris will win the election over former President Donald Trump by a “narrow margin,” based on how the planets and signs in her natal chart align with Election Day and the inauguration.

Both Harris and Trump have Jupiter — the planet associated with luck, opportunity, and abundance — near significant points in their natal charts. However, since Harris is a Gemini rising and 2024 is a “Gemini-ruled year,” she is expected to benefit more from Jupiter’s influence. “Jupiter helped her be in the right place at the right time,” Urban said.

Conversely, Urban forecasts that Trump will feel “crushed” around Election Day, but his influence won’t disappear. “There are signs in his chart that the things he becomes known for haven’t even happened yet,” Urban noted, adding that Trump’s chart appears “very authoritarian,” and he’s already leading a movement. The question remains, “What would happen to that movement?”

Mo adds that astrologers like herself consider the charts of both running mates when making predictions. Trump’s choice of Sen. JD Vance (R-Ohio) has not boosted his chances, according to her. “If Trump picked someone with better activations… maybe we would be having a different conversation,” she said, referencing the idea that Vance’s chart doesn’texhibit “taking the helm” energy. In astrology, “activation” refers to times when a zodiac sign or planet gains significance due to the timing of certain events.

Astrologer Lisa Stardust, who has long predicted Biden would be a one-term president, suggests the outcome of November’s election will hinge on the chart of Harris’ running mate.

Stardust predicts that by September 17, the winner of the November election should be clear, as Harris will experience a lunar eclipse in Pisces, affecting her 10th house of public image. This, she says, will be the “tipping point” for Harris.

Astrology can have as much meaning as you choose to give it. It can be entertaining, but it’s important not to let it dominate your life.

Mo notes that while astrology can provide themes, it cannot predict every detail of your life. “I can’t tell if you had a matcha latte for breakfast,” she said. “But I could say that maybe you had a very energetic start to your day Tuesday morning based on whatever [planetary] transits you were having.”

Boxer, who does not believe in astrology, warns against placing too much trust in predictions, especially regarding the November election. “Astrology is the template of data science and, in particular, the template for how we tell stories with numbers and data and how we can easily deceive others and ourselves.”

Jess Holt, an astrologer and licensed clinical social worker in New York, advises that astrology can be a helpful tool for coping with uncertainty. However, if reading election horoscopes “makes you feel anxious, if it compels you to constantly check for updates, or if it leads to despair, then it’s probably not the right tool for you.”

In essence, use astrology to align with your values, but don’t let it trap you in a cycle of endless information. As Holt said, “That’s not a helpful use of the tool.”

Moreover, don’t rely on astrological predictions to excuse yourself from political action. Urban emphasizes the importance of active participation in shaping the nation’s future.

“There are certain things that are written,” Urban acknowledged. “However, there’s also free will, and when it comes to deciding the fate of a nation, everyone needs to participate. Everyone’s will isparticipating.”

Vice President Harris Selects Minnesota Governor Tim Walz as Running Mate for 2024 Election

Vice President Kamala Harris has officially chosen Minnesota Governor Tim Walz as her running mate for the upcoming November election, where they will face off against former President Donald Trump. Harris made the announcement on Tuesday, both through an Instagram post and a text message to her supporters, highlighting Walz’s commitment to middle-class families and his diverse background, which includes service in the National Guard and experience as a teacher.

Harris praised Walz in her Instagram post, emphasizing his strong background and how it has shaped his political career. She wrote, “I share this background both because it’s impressive in its own right, and because you see in no uncertain terms how it informs his record.” Harris was particularly struck by Walz’s dedication to his family, naming his wife Gwen and their children, Gus and Hope. “But what impressed me most about Tim is his deep commitment to his family: Gwen, Gus, and Hope,” she noted. Harris also mentioned her husband, Doug Emhoff, expressing their eagerness to collaborate with Walz and his family in building an administration that reflects shared values. “Doug and I look forward to working with him and Gwen to build an administration that reflects our shared values.”

The vice president also shared her excitement about the upcoming campaign, stating, “We are going to build a great partnership. We are going to build a great team. We are going to win this election.”

Walz, who is 60 years old, was not initially seen as a frontrunner for the vice-presidential spot. The early stages of the selection process were dominated by speculation around more prominent figures like Pennsylvania Governor Josh Shapiro and Arizona Senator Mark Kelly. However, Walz’s standing improved significantly over the past week, especially after a viral cable news interview where he criticized some Republicans as “weird.” This comment resonated with national Democrats, who soon adopted this line of criticism.

The selection of Walz comes after a rapid and intense two-week period that began with President Joe Biden announcing the end of his reelection bid. Harris quickly consolidated support within the Democratic Party, becoming the presumptive nominee, and her team moved swiftly to vet potential running mates.

The choice of Walz has been met with approval from both progressive and moderate Democrats. Progressive leader Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York expressed her approval on social media, stating, “Vice President Harris made an excellent decision in Gov. Walz as her running mate. Together, they will govern effectively, inclusively, and boldly for the American people. They won’t back down under tight odds, either – from healthcare to school lunch.” This sentiment was echoed by Rep. Lloyd Doggett of Texas, who was the first House Democrat to suggest that Biden should not seek reelection. Doggett described Walz as a “solid, decent former colleague with good humor, a former teacher and veteran, who represented a Minnesota district usually represented by the GOP.” He further added, “You can’t not get along with no-nonsense Tim. As Governor, he offers a straight-talking, compassionate leader delivering the progress we need.”

Harris took her time finalizing her decision on a running mate, with reports indicating that she had not made up her mind until late Monday night, only hours before the announcement. Walz was ultimately seen as a safe choice, especially when compared to other potential candidates who had faced criticism from various factions within the Democratic Party. Shapiro, for example, had been under scrutiny for his handling of pro-Palestinian protests following the Israel-Hamas war, and both he and Kelly had drawn criticism from union leaders.

Another factor that made Walz an appealing choice is his Midwestern roots. Trump has increasingly focused on flipping Midwestern states like Minnesota, a state that Biden won by seven points in 2020. Although no Republican has won Minnesota in a presidential election for more than 50 years, Trump and his running mate, Ohio Senator JD Vance, have intensified their efforts to campaign in the state.

However, Walz is not without potential weaknesses. Republicans are expected to use his stances on issues like abortion and LGBTQ rights to portray him as a radical liberal, a tactic they have previously used against Harris. Walz’s tenure as governor during the riots that erupted after George Floyd’s murder in Minneapolis will likely be a focal point of Republican attacks. The Trump campaign has already linked Harris to the unrest, criticizing her for supporting a bail fund for protesters arrested during the unrest in Minnesota.

Trump campaign press secretary Karoline Leavitt issued a statement attacking the Harris-Walz ticket, saying, “It’s no surprise that San Francisco Liberal Kamala Harris wants West Coast wannabe Tim Walz as her running-mate – Walz has spent his governorship trying to reshape Minnesota in the image of the Golden State.” Leavitt went on to criticize Walz’s policies, including his support for a carbon-free agenda, stricter emission standards for gas-powered cars, and voting rights for convicted felons. “From proposing his own carbon-free agenda, to suggesting stricter emission standards for gas-powered cars, and embracing policies to allow convicted felons to vote, Walz is obsessed with spreading California’s dangerously liberal agenda far and wide,” she said. Leavitt also warned voters about the Harris-Walz ticket, saying, “If Walz won’t tell voters the truth, we will: just like Kamala Harris, Tim Walz is a dangerously liberal extremist, and the Harris-Walz California dream is every American’s nightmare.”

Despite the criticism, Harris and Walz are moving forward with their campaign, with plans to visit several battleground states this week. Their first stop is in Philadelphia on Tuesday evening, followed by visits to Wisconsin, Michigan, Arizona, and Nevada. Scheduled trips to North Carolina and Georgia have been postponed due to the impact of Hurricane Debby in the Southeast.

The Harris-Walz campaign is expected to be a closely watched race as they prepare to challenge Trump and Vance in what promises to be a highly contested election.

Market Watcher Ed Yardeni Draws Parallels Between Current Selloff and 1987 Crash, But Remains Optimistic on Economy

Veteran market analyst Ed Yardeni recently noted that the current global equities selloff bears similarities to the infamous 1987 market crash. Despite investor anxieties back then, the economy managed to avoid a downturn, a scenario that Yardeni believes could potentially repeat itself today.

“This situation is very reminiscent of 1987,” Yardeni remarked during an interview on Bloomberg Television’s *Bloomberg Surveillance*. “We witnessed a crash in the stock market — which essentially occurred in just one day — and the assumption was that we were either in a recession or about to enter one. However, that didn’t happen. The crash had more to do with the internal dynamics of the market rather than the broader economy.”

One of the factors attributed to the current steep decline in equities is the unwinding of bets that leveraged near-zero funding costs in the Japanese yen to invest in various other assets. This strategy, known as the carry trade, was destabilized by the Bank of Japan’s recent interest rate hike and its indication of potential further actions. Traders have also pointed to the unwinding of investments in major U.S. technology companies as contributing to the market selloff.

“I believe there’s a similar situation happening now as in 1987, concerning internal market dynamics,” Yardeni, who leads Yardeni Research, explained. “Much of this selloff is related to the unwinding of the carry trade.”

Back in 1987, then-Federal Reserve Chair Alan Greenspan responded by lowering interest rates and injecting liquidity into the financial system. Yardeni anticipates that today’s monetary policymakers will likely respond to the current market conditions, although he did not forecast an emergency rate cut.

“This is turning into a global financial panic,” Yardeni said, expressing his belief that central banks would act in response. His comments came before U.S. stocks recouped some of their losses by midday Monday on Wall Street.

By noon in New York, the S&P 500 index had dropped approximately 2.3%, having earlier declined by as much as 4.3%. Meanwhile, Japan’s Topix Index experienced a steep decline of more than 12%. U.S. Treasury yields surged before retracing some of the move.

Yardeni suggested that policymakers’ initial response might be to “ease concerns about the U.S. economy” and to counter the possibility of the Federal Reserve initiating its easing cycle with a substantial 50 basis-point rate cut. He added, “But another couple of days like Friday and this morning’s futures selloff, and I think the central bank will switch to providing liquidity — and that could very well mean a 50 basis-point cut.”

The risk, according to Yardeni, is that the market’s steep decline could become self-perpetuating and evolve into a credit crisis. “It’s conceivable that this carry trade unwind could trigger a financial crisis that, in turn, leads to a recession,” Yardeni warned, although he emphasized that this is not his primary expectation.

Despite recent volatility, Yardeni pointed out that the labor market remains robust. Even after a weaker-than-expected U.S. jobs report last Friday, which showed a significant slowdown in payroll growth and an unexpected rise in the unemployment rate, Yardeni remains cautiously optimistic. The report fueled concerns that the Federal Reserve might be lagging in its efforts to reduce interest rates from their highest levels in over two decades.

“The U.S. economy is still growing,” Yardeni observed. “I think the service sector is performing well. Overall, I believe this will be more of a technical market aberration rather than a development that leads to a recession.”

Yardeni, who is well-known for coining the term “bond vigilantes” in the 1980s — referring to investors who influence policymakers by driving up interest rates due to concerns about fiscal policies — continues to monitor the situation closely.

In summarizing his outlook, Yardeni maintained a relatively positive stance. He argued that while the current market selloff may be alarming, it is not necessarily indicative of an impending economic downturn. Instead, he suggests that the recent market turmoil could be attributed more to technical factors than to underlying economic weaknesses.

“The market has a tendency to react strongly to specific catalysts, but that doesn’t always mean there’s a fundamental problem with the economy,” Yardeni elaborated. “We’ve seen similar scenarios before where markets corrected sharply only to stabilize once the initial panic subsided.”

Yardeni’s analysis reflects a broader debate among economists and investors about the potential impact of recent market trends on the global economy. While some fear that the current selloff could foreshadow a more significant economic downturn, others, like Yardeni, believe that the market’s internal mechanics are primarily to blame and that the broader economy remains on solid footing.

As central banks around the world monitor the situation, the next steps in monetary policy will likely be critical in determining whether the market’s recent volatility is a temporary blip or the beginning of a more sustained downturn. Yardeni’s insights, drawing on historical parallels and his understanding of market dynamics, suggest that while caution is warranted, there is also reason to believe that the worst-case scenarios may not materialize.

Yardeni’s perspective offers a nuanced view of the current market selloff. While acknowledging the potential risks, he remains hopeful that the economy will weather this storm, much like it did in 1987. His emphasis on the importance of central bank intervention and his belief in the resilience of the U.S. economy provide a counterbalance to the more pessimistic outlooks that have emerged in response to recent market developments. As always, the future remains uncertain, but Yardeni’s analysis provides valuable context for understanding the forces at play in today’s financial markets.

Kamala Harris Officially Secures Democratic Nomination with Overwhelming Delegate Support

Vice President Kamala Harris has officially secured the Democratic presidential nomination after receiving the overwhelming majority of delegate votes in a virtual roll call, as confirmed by the Democratic National Committee (DNC) in a statement released late Monday.

The roll call, which concluded on Monday evening, still requires certification by Convention Secretary Jason Rae, but the announcement has made Harris’s historic nomination virtually certain. The DNC highlighted the significance of this achievement, emphasizing the broad support Harris has garnered within the party.

“With the support of 99% of all participating delegates in the virtual roll call, Vice President Harris has historic momentum at her back as we embark on the final steps in officially certifying her as our Party’s nominee,” said Jaime Harrison, the DNC Chair, and Minyon Moore, the Chair of the Democratic National Convention Committee, in a joint statement. “We thank the thousands of delegates from all across the country who took seriously their responsibility throughout this process to make their voices – and the voices of their communities – heard.”

According to the DNC, Harris received 4,567 delegate votes, solidifying her position as the party’s nominee. This milestone marks Harris as the first Black and South Asian woman to lead a major party ticket, underscoring the historic nature of her candidacy.

Harris’s status as the party’s nominee was effectively secured last Friday when DNC Chair Jaime Harrison announced during a livestream call that Harris had garnered enough delegate votes through the virtual roll call to clinch the nomination. This confirmation was anticipated as Harris had been the only candidate who actively campaigned to succeed President Joe Biden following his withdrawal from the race. Moreover, she was the sole candidate who obtained the necessary delegate signatures to advance to the virtual roll call.

The convention delegates began voting virtually via email or phone from 9 a.m. ET on Thursday, with the process culminating at 6 p.m. ET on Monday. This extended virtual roll call was organized by the DNC to adapt to the evolving circumstances surrounding the nomination process.

Initially, the DNC had decided in May to conduct a virtual roll call due to uncertainties related to the deadlines for getting on the ballot in Ohio. Although the state legislature eventually addressed the issue, the DNC maintained that Republican lawmakers in Ohio were acting in bad faith, asserting that it was crucial to nominate the Democratic candidate earlier than the convention to avoid potential legal complications. Ohio leaders, however, have denied these allegations.

The roll call results reflect the strong backing Harris has within the Democratic Party, reinforcing her position as a unifying figure for the upcoming general election. With this near-unanimous support, Harris is poised to lead the party into the final phase of the campaign, with a focus on mobilizing voters and building on the momentum from her historic nomination.

As the first woman of Black and South Asian descent to be nominated by a major party for the presidency, Harris’s candidacy carries profound significance for the Democratic Party and the country at large. Her nomination represents a momentous step in American political history, highlighting the increasing diversity within the nation’s leadership ranks.

The DNC’s decision to proceed with a virtual roll call, despite the earlier uncertainties, allowed for a smooth and inclusive nomination process. This approach ensured that delegates from across the nation could participate fully, even amidst the logistical challenges posed by the current political landscape.

Looking ahead, the Democratic Party will now focus on officially certifying Harris’s nomination and rallying support for the general election. The party’s leadership, including Chair Jaime Harrison and Convention Chair Minyon Moore, expressed confidence in Harris’s ability to unite the party and lead it to victory in the upcoming election.

The final certification of Harris’s nomination is expected to be a formality, given the overwhelming delegate support she has already received. This formalization will mark the culmination of a nomination process that began with uncertainty but ended with a historic achievement.

As Harris prepares to embark on the next stage of her campaign, she will carry the weight of history on her shoulders, along with the hopes and aspirations of millions of Americans who see her nomination as a beacon of progress and change. The Democratic Party, unified behind its nominee, is poised to move forward with renewed energy and determination.

In the coming weeks, Harris will likely focus on outlining her vision for the country, building on her record as Vice President and her previous role as a U.S. Senator. The campaign will also work to galvanize voters, particularly those who are inspired by the historic nature of Harris’s candidacy.

With the official certification of her nomination on the horizon, Kamala Harris stands ready to lead the Democratic Party into the general election, carrying with her the support of a diverse and energized base. As the party’s nominee, she will seek to build on the momentum generated by her historic nomination, aiming to secure victory in November and chart a new course for the nation.

Kamala Harris Narrows Trump’s Lead, Ties in Key Swing States as Campaign Momentum Grows

Vice President Kamala Harris has significantly reduced former President Donald Trump’s lead since she assumed the role of Democratic presidential candidate from Joe Biden. According to recent polls, Harris is now tied with Trump in crucial swing states and leads him by a slim margin nationwide.

Key Facts

A CBS News poll released on Sunday reveals that Harris holds a one-point lead over Trump nationally, a shift driven in part by increased support from younger and Black voters, along with women who believe Harris will advocate for their interests (margin of error 2.1 points). The CBS News survey, conducted from July 30 to August 2, also shows a deadlock between Harris and Trump across seven key battleground states, namely Michigan, Pennsylvania, Arizona, Wisconsin, Georgia, North Carolina, and Nevada.

Further support for Harris emerges in an Economist/YouGov poll released on Wednesday, which places her two points ahead of Trump, 46% to 44%, in a five-way race that includes third-party candidates Robert F. Kennedy Jr., Jill Stein, and Cornel West. This trend is consistent with several other polls taken since Biden withdrew from the race. Harris is currently ahead in at least four more surveys, although Trump maintains a lead in at least eight others. Many of these polls, however, indicate that Harris has eroded Trump’s advantage over Biden and that her approval rating has improved since she launched her campaign.

Morning Consult’s weekly poll, conducted from July 26 to 28, shows Harris with a one-point lead over Trump, 47% to 46%, marking the second consecutive week she has outperformed Trump in their poll. Additionally, a Reuters/Ipsos poll released on Tuesday indicates Harris is leading by one point, 43% to 42%, although this is a slight decrease from her two-point lead in their previous survey conducted July 22-23.

In contrast, Trump led Harris by three points in a Harvard CAPS-Harris poll conducted from July 26 to 28 when respondents were given the option to choose “don’t know/unsure.” This marks a four-point drop from Trump’s seven-point lead over Biden in a June Harvard CAPS-Harris poll. In a two-way matchup, Trump maintains a four-point lead over Harris, consistent with his previous lead over Biden in June.

Other polls reflect a narrow advantage for Trump. A New York Times/Siena poll conducted from July 22 to 24 shows Trump with a one-point lead, 48% to 47%. Similarly, a Wall Street Journal poll from July 23 to 25 and a HarrisX/Forbes online survey released on June 26 both show Trump leading by two points, 49% to 47% and 47% to 45%, respectively.

Additional polls present a consistent, albeit slight, lead for Trump. He is ahead by three points, 49% to 46%, in an online CNN/SSRS survey conducted July 22-23, by two points, 47% to 45%, in another Morning Consult poll, by one point, 46% to 45%, in a NPR/PBS/Marist poll, and by three points, 44% to 41%, in an Economist/YouGov poll conducted from July 21 to 23. The latter poll also finds Kennedy with 5% support.

Despite these mixed results, polls consistently show that Harris outperforms Biden. Before Biden exited the race, he trailed Trump by six points in polls conducted by Morning Consult, CNN/SSRS, The Wall Street Journal, and Times/Siena.

Big Number

Trump leads Harris by an average of 0.8 points, according to the latest RealClearPolitics polling average. Conversely, FiveThirtyEight’s weighted average gives Harris a 1.5-point lead.

Surprising Fact

The New York Times/Siena poll highlights an increased voter engagement following the June 27 Biden-Trump debate, which was largely viewed as a poor showing for Biden. Since the debate, 64% of respondents reported paying close attention to the election, up from 48% before the debate.

Harris vs. Trump in Swing States

Harris leads Trump by one point overall in the seven battleground states that are likely to determine the election outcome: Michigan, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Nevada, Arizona, North Carolina, and Georgia, as indicated by a Bloomberg/Morning Consult poll conducted from July 24 to 28. Harris is ahead in Michigan, Wisconsin, Arizona, and Nevada, while Trump leads in Pennsylvania and North Carolina. The two are tied in Georgia.

Tangent

Democrats appear more enthusiastic about Harris than they were about Biden, as shown by the Times/Siena survey. Nearly 80% of Democratic-leaning voters express a preference for Harris as the nominee, compared to just 48% who said the same about Biden three weeks earlier. The contrast is also evident in perceptions of mental fitness, with 56% of voters in a Reuters/Ipsos poll stating that Harris is “mentally sharp and able to deal with challenges,” compared to 49% who said the same about Trump and only 22% for Biden. Moreover, a 19th News/SurveyMonkey poll found that 87% of Americans support Biden’s decision to end his campaign. More respondents believe this decision will benefit the Democratic Party (45%) rather than the Republican Party (29%).

The 19th News survey also indicates a divide in public opinion regarding Harris’ gender and race. Thirty-one percent of respondents think her being a woman will help her, while 33% believe it will hurt her, and 34% see no impact. There is more optimism regarding Harris’ identity as Black and Indian American, with 32% viewing it as a benefit, 24% seeing it as a disadvantage, and 41% expecting it to have no impact.

Contra

Tony Fabrizio, a pollster for the Trump campaign, predicted a temporary boost in Harris’ polling numbers, coining the term “Harris Honeymoon” in a memo released after the Reuters/Ipsos poll became public. Fabrizio suggested this surge would be short-lived as her entry into the race is expected to energize Democratic voters.

Signs of Economic Slowdown Emerge Amid Post-Pandemic Expansion

Two years ago, nearly every reputable economist was predicting an imminent recession, a forecast that turned out to be incorrect. However, this doesn’t imply that economic risks have disappeared.

Overview:

Recent economic data has revealed a series of subtle yet concerning indicators suggesting cracks in the robust expansion seen after the pandemic. The July employment figures, released last Friday, are particularly alarming. The unemployment rate has now climbed almost a full percentage point from its recent low, reaching 4.3% in July compared to 3.4% in April 2023, and job growth has noticeably slowed down.

Analysis:

There is now a phenomenon akin to the “boy who cried wolf” in economic forecasting, where the incorrect recession predictions from two years ago have led to a sense of complacency about the potential for a significant downturn to occur soon.

The central question is whether the Federal Reserve’s likely interest rate cuts, expected at their mid-September policy meeting, will be sufficient to halt the emerging economic weakness before it deepens.

Current Situation:

It is important to note that the economy is not currently in a recession. In July, employers added 114,000 jobs, the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) grew at a 2.8% annual rate in the last quarter, and the unemployment rate, at 4.3%, remains lower than any month between June 2001 and May 2017.

However:

Historical patterns suggest that when the unemployment rate rises as it has this year (from 3.7% in January to 4.3% in July), it seldom stabilizes and more often indicates an impending recession.

In addition to the unemployment rate, other economic data and anecdotal evidence from major companies have signaled potential economic difficulties ahead in recent weeks.

Insights:

This situation is echoed in quotes from respondents to the Institute for Supply Management’s monthly survey of manufacturers, released on Thursday. The survey indicated a significant contraction in business activity.

“It seems that the economy is slowing down significantly,” noted a manufacturer in the machinery sector. A manufacturer in the mineral products sector observed, “Some markets that are usually unwavering are showing weakness.” Furthermore, a firm in the food, beverage, and tobacco products industry stated, “Sales are lighter, and customer orders are coming in under forecasts. It seems consumers are starting to pull back on spending.”

Conclusion:

At present, the U.S. economy remains on solid ground, but there are growing concerns for the future. Warning signals are increasingly evident, suggesting that while the immediate economic outlook may appear stable, challenges may lie ahead.

Harris Surges Ahead of Trump in Multiple Polls Amidst Tight Electoral Race

Kamala Harris, the presumptive Democratic nominee for the 2024 presidential election, is now leading former President Donald Trump in eight recent national polls. These polls, conducted by various research firms, reveal a competitive race with Harris holding a slight edge over her Republican opponent.

The latest poll by RMG Research, released on Friday, shows Harris with a 5-point lead over Trump, with 47% of the vote compared to Trump’s 42%. This survey, conducted among 3,000 registered voters between July 29 and July 31, suggests a growing support base for Harris as the campaign intensifies.

Similarly, a Civiqs poll conducted between July 27 and July 30 indicates Harris leading Trump by 5 points. Out of 1,123 registered voters surveyed, Harris garnered 49% of the vote, while Trump received 45%. This poll’s margin of error is plus or minus 3 percentage points, meaning Harris’s lead is statistically significant.

In a poll conducted by Leger between July 26 and July 28, Harris leads Trump by 3 points. The poll surveyed 1,002 U.S. residents and showed Harris with 49% of the vote to Trump’s 46%. Notably, this represents a 4-point increase for Harris since Leger’s June poll. When third-party candidates were factored into this poll, Harris’s lead extended to 7 points, with 48% compared to Trump’s 41%.

Four other national polls show Harris with a narrower lead of 2 points over Trump. These include a poll by The Economist and YouGov, where Harris polled at 46% among 1,434 registered voters, within the poll’s margin of error of 3%. Other polls conducted by Redfield and Wilton Strategies, Angus Reid, and Florida Atlantic University, all conducted between July 23 and July 30, similarly showed Harris leading by 2 points, also within their respective margins of error.

The smallest lead for Harris was observed in a Morning Consult poll conducted between July 26 and July 28, where she led Trump by just 1 point. In this poll, Harris had 47% of the vote to Trump’s 46% among 2,223 registered U.S. voters. The margin of error for this poll is plus or minus 2 percentage points, indicating a very tight race.

The recent polling data reflects a positive trend for Harris since she officially launched her campaign two weeks ago. These polls suggest that Harris has managed to close the gap on Trump, a shift from when President Joe Biden was at the top of the Democratic ticket. Additionally, Harris is leading in multiple swing states, which could prove decisive in the upcoming November election.

However, despite these favorable polls for Harris, some experts still believe Trump remains the frontrunner to win the presidency. Election analyst and statistician Nate Silver has suggested that while Harris might win the popular vote, Trump could have the upper hand in the Electoral College.

Silver’s model gives Trump a 54.9% chance of winning the Electoral College, compared to Harris’s 44.6% chance. In the popular vote, Harris has a 53.5% chance of winning, while Trump’s chances stand at 46.5%. This model also shows a close contest in critical battleground states. For example, Harris is slightly favored to win Michigan with about a 54% chance, while Trump has a similar chance to win Wisconsin, another key state. In Pennsylvania, Trump has a narrow edge with a 53% chance of winning, compared to Harris’s 47%. Trump holds stronger leads in other swing states, including Arizona, Nevada, Georgia, and North Carolina.

Nate Silver is renowned for his accurate predictions, having correctly forecasted 49 of 50 states in the 2008 presidential election, which adds weight to his current projections.

While these national polls show Harris leading, aggregate polls from The New York Times, The Hill, and RealClearPolitics present a slightly different picture. These aggregates show Trump leading Harris by 1 to 2 points. However, it is noteworthy that Trump’s lead over Harris is smaller compared to his margin over Biden before the latter exited the race.

As the race heats up, Harris is expected to announce her vice-presidential running mate soon. Once the decision is made, Harris and her running mate will embark on a campaign tour across key swing states in an effort to maintain the momentum her campaign has built since she took over the Democratic ticket. The Democratic National Convention, where Harris will formally accept the nomination, is scheduled to take place next week in Chicago.

Meanwhile, Trump continues his campaign with planned events aimed at rallying his base. He is scheduled to hold campaign rallies in Atlanta, Georgia, on August 3, and in Bozeman, Montana, on August 9, according to his campaign website.

As both candidates intensify their campaigns, the polling data suggests a fiercely contested election ahead. With Harris leading in several national polls but Trump still maintaining a strong position in key swing states, the 2024 presidential election is shaping up to be one of the most competitive in recent history.

Kamala Harris Secures Democratic Presidential Nomination Ahead of 2024 Convention

Vice President Kamala Harris has successfully passed the required threshold to become the Democratic presidential nominee, achieving this milestone during a virtual roll call vote conducted on Friday. Upon reaching this significant point, Harris expressed her gratitude and sense of honor, acknowledging the critical role played by the tireless efforts of delegates, state leaders, and campaign staff. “I am honored to be the presumptive Democratic nominee for President of the United States, and I will tell you, the tireless work of our delegates, our state leaders, and our staff has been pivotal to making this moment possible,” Harris remarked, further noting that she plans to officially accept the nomination after the virtual voting period concludes next week.

Harris secured the necessary number of votes for the nomination in less than two weeks after declaring her candidacy for the top position on the 2024 ticket. Her declaration followed President Joe Biden’s decision to withdraw from the race and endorse her. Harris’s swift consolidation of support within the party was evidenced by her rapid accumulation of delegate endorsements, leading to her clinching the nomination without opposition. The Democratic National Committee (DNC) commenced the virtual roll call vote at 9 a.m. on Thursday, with Harris running unchallenged for the nomination.

DNC Chair Jamie Harrison made the official announcement on Friday, confirming that Harris had met the requirement of 2,350 votes to secure the nomination. “As chair of this great party, as chair of this party that is built on hope, I am so proud to confirm that Vice President Harris has earned more than a majority of votes from all convention delegates and will be the nominee of the Democratic Party following the close of voting on Monday,” Harrison declared. He highlighted the speed of Harris’s success, emphasizing the significance of her achievement just one day after the voting began. “Just one day after we opened voting that the vice president has crossed the majority threshold and will officially be our nominee next week, folks that is outstanding,” Harrison added.

By Tuesday, the DNC reported that Harris had secured 3,923 delegates, making her the sole candidate to qualify for the virtual roll call. This development positions Harris as the official nominee well ahead of the Democratic National Convention, which is set to take place in Chicago beginning on August 19. In anticipation of the formal nomination, Harris is expected to announce her choice for a running mate within the coming days. Following this announcement, she will embark on a campaign tour with her chosen vice-presidential candidate, targeting key swing states. The tour is scheduled to start in Philadelphia on Tuesday, with stops in six additional states thereafter.

The decision to conduct a virtual roll call vote before the convention was initially driven by logistical considerations to ensure Biden’s presence on the ballot in Ohio. The state had set a deadline for certifying the party’s presidential nominee ahead of the convention. However, Ohio Governor Mike DeWine, a Republican, has since extended this critical deadline, allowing the DNC to proceed with its adjusted voting schedule.

Kamala Harris to Announce Running Mate Ahead of Swing State Campaign Blitz

Vice President Kamala Harris is gearing up to announce her running mate by Tuesday, coinciding with her first rally alongside her chosen candidate in Philadelphia. This rally will kick off a whirlwind campaign tour across seven key swing states over four days. The cities on the itinerary include Philadelphia, western Wisconsin, Detroit, Raleigh, Savannah, Phoenix, and Las Vegas.

This campaign tour marks the first significant campaign event since Harris became the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee, following President Joe Biden’s unexpected exit from the race. The decision to embark on this tour reflects the campaign’s belief that the electoral landscape has broadened since Biden handed over the reins to Harris.

The Harris campaign shared the details of this tour exclusively with POLITICO. The choice to start the tour in Pennsylvania’s largest city has sparked speculation about her potential vice presidential pick. One of the leading candidates under consideration is Pennsylvania Governor Josh Shapiro. His inclusion would make Philadelphia an ideal location to unveil the decision, given his roots in the city’s suburbs. However, Philadelphia is also a diverse and voter-rich city crucial for any presidential candidate, due to Pennsylvania’s 19 electoral votes. Therefore, the choice of location might not necessarily indicate anything beyond strategic electoral considerations.

An aide from the Harris campaign advised against drawing too many conclusions from the choice of Philadelphia as the tour’s starting point. Harris herself stated that no final decision on her running mate has been made yet. When asked by reporters on Tuesday if she had selected her running mate, she responded, “not yet.”

In the coming days, Harris plans to interview several potential vice presidential candidates, according to sources familiar with the vetting process, who spoke on the condition of anonymity. Among the other names being considered are Arizona Senator Mark Kelly, Minnesota Governor Tim Walz, Kentucky Governor Andy Beshear, and Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg.

Governor Shapiro confirmed on Tuesday that he had not spoken to Harris since July 21, the day President Biden withdrew from the race. In recent days, Shapiro has been actively campaigning for Harris across Pennsylvania, a move that many Democrats interpret as an audition for the vice-presidential role. Shapiro headlined a rally with Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer in the Philadelphia suburbs on Monday, promoted the IRS’s free tax filing program with Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen on Tuesday, and participated in a Harris endorsement event with building trades unions on Friday.

During a visit to a youth basketball program in Philadelphia on Tuesday, Shapiro praised Harris as “a tough-as-nails prosecutor” while criticizing Trump’s running mate, Senator JD Vance of Ohio, stating he is “not exactly off to a good start.”

When asked about his interest in the vice-presidential role or whether he had submitted vetting materials to Harris’s team, Shapiro avoided a direct answer, instead emphasizing the importance of Harris’s choice. “The vice president has a very deeply personal decision to make right now: who she wants to run with, who she wants to govern with, and who can be by her side when she has to make the toughest decisions for the American people. I trust she will make that decision on her own terms when she is ready,” Shapiro stated.

Meanwhile, other vice-presidential contenders have been publicly showing their support for Harris, both in media appearances and fundraising efforts. Governor Tim Walz garnered attention for his viral remark that Trump’s GOP is made up of “weird people,” while Governor Andy Beshear took a jab at Senator Vance, stating on MSNBC that “JD Vance ain’t from here.”

Next week’s campaign tour will be Harris’s first extended tour through key battleground states, although she has already made some early campaign appearances. Last week, she held a rally in Wisconsin, and on Tuesday, she was in Georgia for another rally.

This tour is set to be a pivotal moment for the Harris campaign, as she looks to solidify her position and rally support across critical states. The outcome of her choice for a running mate and the success of this tour could have a significant impact on the overall trajectory of the campaign, as well as on the Democratic Party’s chances in the upcoming election.

President Biden Calls for Supreme Court Reforms in Landmark Speech at LBJ Library, Emphasizes Legacy and Civil Rights

President Joe Biden marked the 60th anniversary of the Civil Rights Act on Monday with a visit to the LBJ Presidential Library, where he delivered remarks on his new proposals to reform the U.S. Supreme Court. This speech was his first significant address since announcing his decision to exit the 2024 presidential race.

Speaking in Austin, Texas, Biden highlighted his administration’s efforts to protect civil rights and called for reforms to the Supreme Court. His proposals include implementing term limits for justices, establishing an enforceable code of conduct, and proposing a constitutional amendment to prevent presidential immunity. However, these reforms face significant challenges in a politically divided Congress, where a Republican-controlled House and a closely divided Senate reduce the likelihood of approval.

“In recent years, extreme opinions that the Supreme Court has handed down have undermined long established civil rights principles and protections,” Biden stated. He expressed his respect for institutions and the separation of powers as outlined in the Constitution but criticized the current state of affairs, noting, “What’s happening now is not consistent with that doctrine of separation of powers. Extremism is undermining the public confidence in the court’s decisions.”

Biden cited recent Supreme Court decisions as the impetus for his reform proposals, accusing the court of undermining long-established civil rights protections. He expressed particular concern over the Supreme Court’s ruling in Trump vs. the United States, which established that a sitting president could have immunity for potential crimes committed while in office. “This nation is founded on the principle that there are no kings in America. Each of us is equal before the law. No one is above the law!” Biden asserted.

The significance of Biden’s remarks was heightened by the setting—he is the first sitting president since Lyndon B. Johnson to not seek reelection. With his focus now shifted from the campaign trail, Biden is intent on “finishing the job” in the final months of his presidency, aiming to solidify the legacy of his long political career.

Stephen Benjamin, director of the White House Office of Public Engagement, emphasized Biden’s determination to make the remaining months of his presidency impactful. “The president is focused like a laser beam on making sure that the next six months matter to the American people,” Benjamin told reporters. He added that Biden is actively seeking input from both within his administration and across the country, asking, “What is left undone, what else do we need to work to secure?”

Benjamin also indicated that Biden’s priorities would include holding the Supreme Court accountable, strengthening the economy, and reducing prices for American families. Biden’s proposal for an 18-year term limit for Supreme Court justices is aimed at ensuring the court undergoes regular changes and reducing the potential for any one presidency to have disproportionate influence on future generations. “That would make timing for the court’s nomination more predictable and less arbitrary,” Biden explained, arguing that such a measure would diminish the impact of an “extreme court attacking the confirmation process.”

Despite Biden’s push for these reforms, congressional Republicans have already signaled strong opposition. House Speaker Mike Johnson dismissed the proposed Supreme Court reforms as “dangerous” and declared them “dead on arrival in the House.” Similarly, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell criticized the administration’s push for reform, arguing that it stems from political disagreements with the court’s recent decisions. “Why is the Biden Harris administration so willing to put the crown jewel of our system of government, the independent judiciary, to the torch? Because it stands in their way,” McConnell argued.

Biden concluded his speech by speaking about Vice President Kamala Harris, who has been supportive of his court reform proposals and is now the leading contender for the Democratic presidential nomination. “I’ve made clear how I feel about Kamala,” Biden said. “She has been a champion of rights throughout her career. She will continue to be an inspiring leader and project the very ideal of America.”

This speech underscores Biden’s commitment to ensuring that his remaining time in office is used to advocate for significant reforms and to leave a lasting impact on the country. His focus on the Supreme Court, civil rights, and the economy highlights his priorities as he seeks to cement his legacy in his final months as president.

7 Ways the Year 1968 Changed America

It’s been referred to as the year that changed America: In 1968, the United States experienced an unprecedented upheaval of long-held values and practices that left an indelible — and still reverberating — mark on the country. Facing the assassinations of beloved leaders, protests against the Vietnam War and racial inequality, and a major shift in media and pop culture, the nation was forced to confront some of its most deeply rooted issues, and evolve in the process. While the year was marked by tragedy and division, it also led to significant progress in civil rights and political activism, inspiring a generation of Americans to fight for equality and justice, and in turn, reshape the country’s social landscape. Here are seven events from 1968 that changed America.

Richard Nixon Became President After a Divisive Election

The 1968 presidential election is still considered one of the most contentious and divisive elections in U.S. history. In March, President Lyndon B. Johnson announced that he would not be seeking reelection. In the ensuing months, America’s opposition to the Vietnam War escalated, and the stunning assassinations of Martin Luther King Jr. and Robert F. Kennedy sent the country into angry unrest. An already tense political climate was thrown into chaos when anti-war protesters clashed with police outside the Democratic National Convention in Chicago. In the end, a fraught and uninspiring race between Republican candidate Richard Nixon, Democrat Hubert Humphrey, and segregationist George Wallace ended in a victory for Nixon. The contentious nature of the election contributed to a deepening sense of political polarization in the United States.

Two Major Leaders Were Assassinated Within Two Months

The assassinations of civil rights leader Martin Luther King Jr. on April 4 and presidential hopeful Robert F. Kennedy on June 6 were two of the most tragic events in American history. The violence shocked not only the U.S. but the world, particularly as it came on the heels of the assassinations of President John F. Kennedy and civil rights leader Malcolm X in 1963 and 1965, respectively. Despite the devastation that followed — and the fear that their progressive voices and visions for the country would be forgotten — the legacies of King and Kennedy continued to inspire and motivate people for decades to come.

King, who led the civil rights movement and helped bring about the landmark Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965, is honored every year on Martin Luther King Jr. Day, and continues to inspire the fight for racial equality and civil rights. Kennedy, in his final years, worked to bridge racial divides, address overlooked class issues, and end the Vietnam War. The senator galvanized a new generation of voters and activists, and his influence is still felt in American politics and social justice causes today.

The Tet Offensive Turned More of the Country Against the Vietnam War

The year 1968 began with the U.S. still embroiled in the long-running war in Vietnam, and the American public’s growing fatigue came to a head following North Vietnam’s deadly January 30-31 Tet Offensive attack on South Vietnamese and American forces. The widespread attack during the Lunar New Year holiday Tet made it clear to the American public that victory in Vietnam was not near, and confidence in the United States’ progress overseas began to falter. It faded faster still when respected broadcaster Walter Cronkite vocally opposed the war in a national television broadcast on February 27. Mass protests against the continued involvement unfurled across the country in the ensuing months. The occasionally violent unrest influenced the country’s eventual withdrawal from Vietnam in 1973, and the youth-led anti-war protests changed the face of civic engagement, fueling other historical grassroots activism such as the growing feminist movement and the rise of environmentalism.

Two American Athletes Protested Racial Inequality at the Olympics

Despite the tragedy of Martin Luther King Jr.’s untimely death, those influenced by his nonviolent activism continued to fight for racial and class equality. One of the most memorable protests took place at the 1968 Olympics in Mexico City. As American track and field athletes Tommie Smith and John Carlos took the podium to receive their respective gold and bronze medals, they each raised a gloved fist during the U.S. anthem in a symbolic gesture of solidarity with the Black Power movement. Smith and Carlos faced intense backlash and criticism from the media and the public, but their protest remains an enduring symbol of resistance and solidarity in the struggle for civil rights and social justice.

A Miss America Protest Birthed the Image of the “Bra-Burning” Feminist

The iconic image of the “bra-burning” feminist was born in this monumental year, irreversibly putting women’s rights in the mainstream conversation. On September 7, 1968, protesters marched against the objectification of women outside a Miss America beauty contest in Atlantic City, New Jersey. They threw oppressive items such as bras, makeup, and high heels into a “freedom trash can,” and while the bras were never actually burned, the demonstration ensured that the phrase “women’s liberation” gained national attention for the first time. The seminal moment was also a prescient introduction to intersectional feminism issues: Nearby, a Miss Black America pageant was also held in protest, as the official pageant had, to date, not included an African American contestant (the first Black woman would compete two years later).

“Star Trek” Aired an Interracial Kiss on Television

Much like the social and political upheaval that dominated 1968, popular culture had its own memorable and impactful moments that year. Given the racial tensions in the country, it was seen as revolutionary when the popular sci-fi series “Star Trek” aired the first romantic kiss between a white person and a Black person on American television, between Captain Kirk (William Shatner) and Lieutenant Uhura (Nichelle Nichols). (The response was largely positive.)

The year 1968 also marked the release of Stanley Kubrick’s film 2001: A Space Odyssey, revolutionizing science fiction and special effects in film. The sci-fi epic inspired influential filmmakers such as George Lucas and Steven Spielberg, who both went on to define entertainment in the ensuing decades. (Presciently, the film also introduced audiences to friendly AI virtual assistants.) Onstage, The Boys in the Band opened off-Broadway, offering a realistic and humanizing look at the then-underrepresented LGBTQ+ community. The play is often cited as a groundbreaking work that helped pave the way for greater visibility and acceptance of LGBTQ+ people in American culture.

Apollo 8 Became the First Manned Spacecraft to Orbit the Moon

On December 24, 1968, as one of the most tumultuous years in American history drew to a close, NASA’s Apollo 8 mission became the first manned spacecraft to orbit the moon, marking a major milestone in space exploration and providing an uplifting moment for the country. The three-man crew — Frank Borman, Jim Lovell, and Bill Anders — broadcast parts of their six-day lunar voyage on live television. Their lunar orbit, which aired in prime time on Christmas Eve, is said to have been watched by a billion people — one out of every four people on the planet at the time. The orbit also resulted in the enduring “Earthrise” photo, showing a sliver of planet Earth peering out from beyond the moon. The mission was not only a success, but a marvel that united and inspired a weary country. Apollo 8, it was said, had saved 1968.

Barack Obama Endorses Kamala Harris for Democratic Presidential Nomination Amid Biden’s Exit

Barack Obama has officially endorsed Vice-President Kamala Harris for the Democratic presidential nomination, concluding days of speculation about his support. In a joint statement with former First Lady Michelle Obama, the couple expressed their strong belief in Harris’s capabilities, stating she possesses the “vision, the character, and the strength that this critical moment demands.”

Following President Joe Biden’s recent announcement of his withdrawal from the race, Harris engaged in discussions with over 100 prominent Democrats, including Obama. Although Obama had praised Biden’s decision to exit the race, he had initially refrained from endorsing Harris.

Harris has already garnered the backing of a majority of Democratic delegates, positioning her as the likely nominee at the party’s convention in August. The Obamas declared in their statement that they were “thrilled to endorse” Harris and committed to doing “everything we can” to ensure her election. They praised Biden’s choice of Harris, stating, “Choosing Kamala was one of the best decisions he’s made. She has the resume to prove it,” referencing her tenure as California’s attorney general, a US senator, and vice-president.

“But Kamala has more than a resume,” the statement added. “She has the vision, the character, and the strength that this critical moment demands. There is no doubt in our mind that Kamala Harris has exactly what it takes to win this election and deliver for the American people. At a time when the stakes have never been higher, she gives us all reason to hope.” The endorsement was shared alongside a video of Harris receiving a phone call from the Obamas, during which they pledged their support. “Oh my goodness,” Harris exclaimed in the video. “Michelle, Barack, this means so much to me.”

In the days following Biden’s withdrawal, Harris has been active on the campaign trail. On Thursday, she addressed the American Federation of Teachers union in Houston. Although the event was officially part of her vice-presidential duties, it had the feel of a campaign rally, with enthusiastic applause and cheers from the audience. Harris criticized “extremist” Republicans and their “failed” policies, stating, “We want to ban assault weapons, and they want to ban books.”

Meanwhile, Donald Trump, the Republican presidential nominee, has ramped up his attacks on Harris. On his social media platform Truth Social, Trump labeled her “Lyin’ Kamala Harris” and a “radical left Marxist, and worse!” He also indicated he would not agree to a televised debate with Harris until her nomination is official, suggesting Democrats might still be seeking a different candidate.

In addition to her campaign activities, Harris has been involved in international diplomacy. She had “frank and constructive” discussions with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, urging an end to the Israel-Gaza war. The conflict began after an attack on southern Israel in October, which resulted in approximately 1,200 deaths and 251 hostages being taken. Since then, the Gaza health ministry, controlled by Hamas, reports that over 39,000 people have been killed.

Harris expressed her “serious concerns” about the casualties in Gaza, emphasizing to Netanyahu the importance of how Israel conducts its defense. She also reiterated the necessity for a two-state solution. Netanyahu has met with President Biden and is scheduled to meet with Trump as well.

Harris’s multi-faceted campaign approach, including both domestic engagements and international diplomacy, highlights her readiness to address the varied and significant challenges facing the nation. As the Democratic convention approaches, her endorsement by influential figures like the Obamas strengthens her position and amplifies her message of hope and resilience during critical times.

Trump Narrowly Leads Harris in Key Battleground States, Polls Show Tied Race in Wisconsin

Former President Trump holds a narrow lead over Vice President Harris, the anticipated Democratic presidential nominee, in several crucial battleground states, with the two candidates tied in Wisconsin, as revealed by recent polls.

The survey, conducted by Emerson College Polling and The Hill, and released on Thursday, shows Trump ahead of Harris by 5 points in Arizona, with 49 percent to Harris’s 44 percent. In Georgia, Trump leads by 2 points, at 48 percent to 46 percent; in Michigan, he leads by 1 point, at 46 percent to 45 percent; in Pennsylvania, by 2 points, at 48 percent to 46 percent. In Wisconsin, both candidates are tied at 47 percent.

In every state except Arizona, the polling results fall within the survey’s margin of error, indicating that the races in most battleground states could be even closer than they appear.

Notably, Harris is outperforming President Biden in each of these battleground states, according to a similar survey from earlier this month. She surpasses Biden by 5 points in Georgia, 4 points in Arizona and Wisconsin, and 3 points in Michigan and Pennsylvania.

A national poll aggregate compiled by The Hill and Decision Desk HQ shows Trump leading Harris by roughly 48 percent to 46 percent as of Wednesday afternoon. This is a narrower margin compared to Trump’s lead over Biden, which stands at 47 percent to 43 percent.

Vice President Harris has been actively campaigning since receiving President Biden’s endorsement on Sunday. She held her first rally in Milwaukee on Tuesday, following Biden’s withdrawal from the race.

“Harris has recovered a portion of the vote for the Democrats on the presidential ticket since the fallout after the June 27 debate,” explained Spencer Kimball, executive director of Emerson College Polling, in a press release. “Harris’s numbers now reflect similar support levels to those of Biden back in March.”

“Young voters have shifted toward Harris: Her support increased by 16 points in Arizona, eight in Georgia, five in Michigan, 11 in Pennsylvania, and one in Wisconsin since earlier polling this month,” added Kimball.

Among potential vice presidential picks from key swing states, Pennsylvania Governor Josh Shapiro (D) saw the highest support from Democratic voters in his state, with 57 percent backing him as Harris’s running mate. Senator Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.) received 42 percent support from Arizona Democratic voters, while Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer (D) garnered 36 percent support from Democratic voters in her state.

The survey also brings positive news for Senate Democrats. Senators Bob Casey (D-Pa.) and Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.), along with Representatives Elissa Slotkin (D-Mich.) and Ruben Gallego (D-Ariz.), lead their respective Republican Senate competitors by margins of 4 or 5 points.

Democrats have rallied around Harris following Biden’s announcement that he would withdraw from the presidential race and support his vice president instead. Numerous high-profile Democrats have quickly endorsed Harris with just weeks remaining before the Democratic National Convention.

The polling results also highlight that Senate Democratic candidates continue to outperform the Democratic presidential nominee.

The Emerson College Polling/The Hill survey was conducted from July 22-23. It included 800 respondents each in Arizona, Georgia, and Michigan, with a margin of error of 3.4 percentage points in each state. In Pennsylvania, 850 respondents were surveyed with a margin of error of 3.3 percentage points, and in Wisconsin, 845 respondents were surveyed with a margin of error of 3.3 percentage points.

Poll Reveals Kamala Harris Outpaces Biden in Public Perception as Trump Campaign Dismisses Support Surge

A recent poll reveals that a majority of respondents, 56 percent, view Vice President Kamala Harris, 59, as “mentally sharp and able to deal with challenges,” whereas 37 percent disagree with this assessment. In comparison, only 22 percent of voters consider President Joe Biden, who is 81, to have similar attributes. The poll, which carries a 3 percent margin of error, underscores a notable disparity in public perception between the two prominent figures.

On Sunday, Biden announced the end of his reelection campaign, citing concerns over his age and health as significant factors influencing his decision. He has endorsed Kamala Harris as his successor. Biden had faced mounting pressure from both Republicans and members of his own party, particularly following a poorly received performance in the first presidential debate last month. During this debate, Biden struggled with stammering and failed to effectively counter former President Donald Trump’s attacks, which included numerous false claims.

Trump and his MAGA allies had previously been vocal in criticizing Biden’s age, frequently deriding him as “Sleepy Joe” and questioning his cognitive abilities. They insinuated that he “can’t put two sentences together and he’s in charge of nuclear warfare.”

In response to Biden’s announcement, House Speaker Mike Johnson immediately criticized the Democrats’ move. Johnson suggested that the GOP would challenge the legality of the party’s switch to Kamala Harris as the nominee. “I think they’ve got legal hurdles in some of these states,” Johnson told CNN on Sunday. “And it’ll be litigated, I would expect, on the ground there.”

Despite these challenges, Harris has quickly mobilized her campaign, raising over $100 million from Sunday afternoon to Monday evening. According to a survey by The Associated Press, she has also secured enough delegate support to secure the Democratic nomination for the 2024 presidential election.

In a recent Reuters/Ipsos poll, Harris holds a slim 2-percentage-point lead over Trump, with 44 percent of respondents supporting her against the Republican candidate, who garnered 42 percent. When voters were presented with a hypothetical ballot that included independent candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr., Harris led Trump by 42 percent to 38 percent, an advantage that falls outside the margin of error.

Kennedy, who is favored by 8 percent of voters in the poll, has yet to qualify for the ballot in several states ahead of the November 5 election.

Polls conducted on July 15 to 16 showed Harris and Trump tied at 44 percent, while a July 1 to 2 poll had Trump leading by a single percentage point. Both surveys had a margin of error of 3 percent.

Trump’s campaign has dismissed any rise in Harris’ support as temporary, attributing it to the media coverage surrounding her new candidacy. “That bump is likely to start showing itself over the next few days and will last for a while,” said Tony Fabrizio, a pollster with Trump’s campaign, in a memo circulated to reporters, according to Reuters.

A Morning Consult poll conducted after Biden’s exit from the race shows Trump with a two-point lead over Harris, receiving 47 percent support compared to Harris’s 45 percent. However, this poll also indicates a narrowing gap between Trump and the Democrats. Previously, a survey by Morning Consult conducted between July 15 and 17 showed Trump leading Biden by four points, with Trump at 46 percent and Biden at 42 percent. The more recent poll, which surveyed 4,001 registered voters, has an unweighted margin of error of +/- 2 points.

NAINA HOLDS 9TH BIENNIAL CONFERENCE IN ALBANY, NY ON OCTOBER 4TH AND 5TH

The preparations for the Ninth Biennial Conference of the National Association of Indian Nurses of America (NAINA) are in full swing.  The two-day conference will be held on October 4 and 5th at Crown Plaza Hotel in Albany (New York).  The conference objectives and topics are based on the theme: “Synergy in Action:  Innovate, Inspire, Integrate”.

Suja ThomasNAINA stands as the representing voice of the tens of thousands among the 4.7 million nurses in the healthcare arena.  The primary goal of NAINA is to provide service to and bring all the nurses and nursing students of Indian origin under one umbrella.  With twenty chapters across the nation, NAINA stands as the sole national organization of Indian nurses with thousands of nurses enjoying the benefits of its membership.  In the mainstream, NAINA is closely associated with American Nurses Association, CGFNS International, National Coalition of Ethnic Minority Nurses Organization, and National Council of State Board of Nursing.  As we witness Indian Americans all across the life spectrum in the country, the Indian American nurses have already established their presence in healthcare. You will Indian nurses at bedside, in outpatient clinics, nursing leadership, nursing education, hospital administration, university faculty, and research.  They are ambitious; they uphold a vision of high-quality healthcare.  They believe that higher education can equip them with advanced knowledge, critical thinking skills, upward career opportunities, professional respect, and healthcare progress.” Suja Thomas, the president of NAINA emphasized.  Suja, a nursing administrator and an adjunct professor, is also in the governing team of CGFNS International.  The leadership team of NAINA also represents nursing professionals with expertise from diverse fields.

The conference, after the inaugural ceremony and keynote addresses, will be split in four concurrent sessions at theTara Shajan same time and will bring out new research outcomes and evidence- based practice initiatives that could empower and embolden nurses with knowledge and skills to bring back to their home practices. Attendees of each session will get continuing education credits that could be used for maintaining their specialty certifications and help nurses to achieve promotional initiatives like Clinical Ladder.  Tara Shajan, a nursing director at Health and Hospitals Corporation of New York who is the National Convenor and the treasure of NAINA pointed at the networking opportunities that NAINA conference provides to the attendees.  “Besides the valuable continuing education credits, you get opportunities to network with bedside nurses from all specialties, scholars, nurse practitioners and educators from California to Main and Florida to Minnesota. You can inspire and get inspired!”

Dr. Colleen Irwin-Walsh will be the keynote speaker on the first day.  She is the Associate Director of Evidence Based Practice at the Department of Veterans Affairs Health System, Washington DC whose Cardiac guidelines have been implemented by all VA System hospitals nationwide and will be presenting on the topic:  Driving Nurse Excellence: Ambili Nair Integrating Research, and Technological Innovation for Enhancing Practice.”   Mukul Bhakshi, Chief of Strategy and Governmental Affairs, will be another guest speaker.  Dr. Debbie Hatmaker, Chief Nursing Officer of American Nurses Association, and Dr Kelly Foltz-Ramos, director of simulation & innovation and assistant professor at University at Buffalo School of Nursing will be the guest speakers on Saturday, the second day.  Dr. Glenda B. Kelman, chair and professor of nursing at Russell Sage College Troy will do the keynote presentation on “Overcoming Imposter Syndrome in the Age of Technological Innovation in Nursing Practice.”  The concurrent sessions will follow.

Early registration to the conference is underway.  Ambili Nair, president of Indian American Nurses Association of Albany, the host of the conference, and the chapter convenor emphasized the benefits of early bird registration: “by being a participant at the conference, you are also participating in the discussion in transforming the future of nursing.”   Registration can be done at https://nainausa.org/biennial-conference-24-registration

A Conference Souvenir will also be published at the conference.  Dr. Shyla Roshin, the chief nursing officer at South Beach Psychiatric Center in Staten Island is the chair of the souvenir committee.  She said more information on submission of contributions to the conference is available at https://nainausa.org/conference-24-souvenir.

Kamala Harris Poised to Lead Democrats, Faces Crucial Battle Against Trump

Vice President Kamala Harris is poised to become the Democratic presidential nominee, barring any unforeseen events. Harris gained support on Monday, following President Joe Biden’s announcement that he would not seek reelection.

Numerous potential Democratic contenders have endorsed Harris, including Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer, California Governor Gavin Newsom, Pennsylvania Governor Josh Shapiro, and Illinois Governor JB Pritzker. Former Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) also expressed her support for Harris on Monday, having withheld endorsement during her initial reaction to Biden’s decision to step aside.

The key question now is whether Harris can defeat former President Donald Trump. Here are the primary arguments for and against her candidacy:

Democrats Are Finally United and Excited

The Democratic Party is eager to move past recent divisions and low spirits. The party was thrown into turmoil after Biden’s poor debate performance in Atlanta on June 27, leading to intense internal strife between his critics and supporters. The rapid consolidation around Harris indicates a strong desire to move forward. With the Democratic National Convention in Chicago less than a month away and the election just over 100 days away, the party is eager to rally behind her.

Harris’s candidacy generates excitement for several reasons. She is the first woman, Black person, and person of South Asian descent to serve as vice president and is now aiming for the highest office. Her campaign’s momentum is also reflected in the flood of donations, with the Harris campaign, the Democratic National Committee, and related fundraising committees raising $81 million in just 24 hours.

Age Issue Shifts to Democrats’ Favor

Concerns about age and mental sharpness ended Biden’s political career at 81. In contrast, Harris is 59, removing a significant vulnerability for Democrats. This shift puts the spotlight on the 78-year-old Trump, who has had his own gaffes, including confusing Pelosi’s name with his former primary rival Nikki Haley and mistakenly referring to Biden as Obama on several occasions.

A poll by ABC News/Washington Post/Ipsos following the Atlanta debate revealed that 85% of adults believed Biden was too old for a second term, while 60% thought the same about Trump. This is a vulnerability Harris can exploit.

Trump’s Unpopularity

Despite media focus on the resilience of Trump’s MAGA base, he remains broadly unpopular nationwide. According to the polling average from The Hill and Decision Desk HQ (DDHQ), Trump is viewed unfavorably by about 53% of Americans and favorably by only 42%. These figures have slightly improved following an assassination attempt against him in Butler, Pa., on July 13, but his unpopularity remains a significant factor.

Trump lost the popular vote in both 2016 and 2020. His presidency was marred by the Capitol riot on January 6, 2021, a civil trial where he was found liable for sexually abusing writer E. Jean Carroll, and a criminal trial with 34 felony convictions. Democrats believe they have a strong chance if they can frame the November election as a referendum on Trump, a goal more achievable with Harris as the nominee.

Harris Leads on Reproductive Rights

Since the Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Roe v. Wade in June 2022, Harris has been at the forefront of the Biden administration’s defense of reproductive rights, making her the leading voice on the Democrats’ strongest campaign issue. The pro-abortion rights stance has consistently won statewide votes on related ballot measures, and even Trump acknowledges this as a crucial factor in the Democrats’ unexpectedly strong performance in the 2022 midterms. Harris’s potential to become the first female president adds intensity to the abortion debate.

Harris’s Low Favorability Ratings

During the peak of Biden’s crisis, some supporters argued that Harris might not fare better. She trails Trump by almost 3 percentage points nationally, according to The Hill/DDHQ polling average. This performance is not significantly better than Biden’s at the time of his withdrawal, though Biden’s standing was rapidly declining.

Harris’s favorability ratings are worse than Trump’s. She is nearly 20 points underwater in the DDHQ average, viewed negatively by about 56% of Americans and positively by only 38%. This indicates that Democratic enthusiasm for Harris is not mirrored among centrist voters. An Economist/YouGov poll last week showed that more than twice as many independents viewed her unfavorably compared to favorably, at 58% to 26%.

Harris’s 2020 Campaign Failures

Critics of Harris often cite her underwhelming 2020 campaign. She launched her bid for the Democratic nomination in January 2019 with a large rally in Oakland, but her campaign never gained significant traction. The high point came during a July 2019 debate when she criticized Biden for his past opposition to school busing. Harris eventually dropped out before the Iowa caucuses. Skeptics worry that the same issues—questions about her authenticity, failure to connect with voters, and internal staff conflicts—could resurface this fall.

Potential Bias Against Harris

A sensitive issue in Harris’s candidacy is whether she could be hindered by voter prejudice. Some question whether the nation is ready to elect a Black woman as president. Proponents argue that Obama’s presidency broke racial barriers, and women’s political prominence has significantly increased. However, notable female politicians, such as Hillary Clinton in 2016, have fallen short, raising concerns about lingering misogyny.

Supporters claim that many attacks on Harris, including criticisms of her laugh, rhetoric, and dancing, reflect a double standard compared to white or male counterparts. These criticisms contribute to her low approval ratings.

Harris’s Association with Immigration Issues

Immigration remains one of the Democrats’ biggest vulnerabilities heading into November, and Harris is closely associated with it. Unauthorized southern border crossings have declined recently but reached an all-time high last December. Trump has blamed Harris for the “worst border ever” due to her role as “border czar,” though CBS News clarified that this title does not officially exist and that the Department of Homeland Security primarily handles immigration.

Harris was tasked with addressing the root causes of Central American migration under Biden, a complex and perhaps unsolvable issue. Her strong association with immigration is a weakness that Trump and the GOP are likely to exploit to their advantage.

While Harris’s candidacy brings renewed excitement and unity among Democrats, she faces significant challenges, including her low favorability ratings and the potential for voter bias. Her leadership on reproductive rights and the shift in the age debate offer advantages, but her past campaign struggles and association with immigration issues could pose hurdles in the upcoming election.

Biden Ends Reelection Bid, Endorses Harris as Successor Amid Growing Concerns Over His Fitness

US President Joe Biden concluded his reelection bid on Sunday after growing skepticism among Democrats about his mental sharpness and his ability to defeat Donald Trump, endorsing Vice President Kamala Harris as his successor.

In a statement on X, Biden, 81, announced that he will continue serving as President and Commander-in-Chief until his term concludes in January 2025. He also plans to address the nation later this week.

Biden expressed, “It has been the greatest honor of my life to serve as your President. And while it has been my intention to seek reelection, I believe it is in the best interest of my party and the country for me to stand down and to focus solely on fulfilling my duties as President for the remainder of my term.”

Initially, Biden’s statement did not include an endorsement for Harris. However, shortly after, he expressed his support for her, stating, “My fellow Democrats, I have decided not to accept the nomination and to focus all my energies on my duties as President for the remainder of my term. My very first decision as the party nominee in 2020 was to pick Kamala Harris as my Vice President. And it’s been the best…”

Harris, 59, would make history as the first Black woman to head a major party’s presidential ticket. The potential challenge she may face is whether other prominent Democrats will vie for the nomination, or if the party will opt to open the field for new contenders.

Biden’s decision comes after increasing pressure from Democratic leaders and lawmakers, spurred by his underwhelming performance in a June 27 debate against Trump, 78. His struggles to articulate clear sentences overshadowed Trump’s falsehoods and shifted focus onto Biden’s suitability for another term.

Biden’s interview shortly after the debate, where he dismissed concerns and stated he would be content losing to Trump if he felt he had given his all, did little to quell apprehensions. His gaffes at a NATO summit, where he confused Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy with Russian President Vladimir Putin and mistakenly referred to Harris as “Vice President Trump,” only heightened fears.

Adding to the turmoil, Biden was diagnosed with COVID-19 for a third time just days before his announcement, leading to a shortened campaign trip to Las Vegas. Over 10% of congressional Democrats publicly urged him to withdraw.

Biden’s resignation from the reelection race is unprecedented for a sitting president since Lyndon Johnson in March 1968, leaving his replacement with under four months to campaign.

Should Harris be nominated, it would represent a significant risk for the Democratic Party: presenting its first Black and Asian American woman as a candidate in a nation with a history of electing one Black president and no women presidents over more than two centuries.

Biden, who was the oldest president ever elected when he defeated Trump in 2020, had positioned himself as a transitional figure to usher in a new generation of Democratic leadership. This led to some speculation that he would serve only one term. Nevertheless, he pursued a second term, believing he was the Democrats’ best chance to defeat Trump once more amid doubts about Harris’s experience and popularity. However, Biden’s age became increasingly evident, with his gait appearing unsteady and his childhood stutter occasionally resurfacing.

His team had hoped that a strong performance in the June 27 debate would address age-related concerns, but it only exacerbated them. A Reuters/Ipsos poll conducted post-debate revealed that around 40% of Democrats believed he should exit the race.

Donors began withdrawing support, and Harris’s backers began to consolidate. Key Democrats, including former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, advised Biden that he could not win the election.

Despite initially resisting calls to step down, Biden engaged in damage control through calls, meetings with lawmakers, and rare TV interviews, but it was insufficient. Polls indicated Trump’s lead was expanding in crucial battleground states, leading to fears of a potential Democratic defeat in the House and Senate. On July 17, California Representative Adam Schiff called for Biden to withdraw.

Biden’s departure sets the stage for a significant contrast between the Democrats’ likely new nominee, Harris—a former prosecutor—and Trump, who at 78 is two decades older and faces multiple criminal charges related to his efforts to overturn the 2020 election results. Trump is scheduled to be sentenced in September in New York for trying to cover up a hush-money payment.

Earlier this year, Biden secured the Democratic nomination for president with little opposition despite concerns about his age. However, his unwavering support for Israel’s military actions in Gaza alienated some party members, particularly younger, progressive Democrats and voters of color.

Many Black voters felt Biden had not sufficiently addressed their needs, and overall enthusiasm for a second Biden term was low. Prior to the debate with Trump, Biden was trailing in some national polls and in key battleground states necessary for a victory on November 5.

Harris had been tasked with reaching out to these voters in recent months.

During the Democratic primary, Biden accumulated over 3,600 delegates for the convention in Chicago, surpassing the 1,976 needed to secure the nomination. If the Democratic Party does not alter its rules, delegates pledged to Biden will enter the convention “uncommitted,” thus allowing them to vote for his successor.

The party also has “superdelegates,” influential senior officials and elected leaders whose support, although limited on the first ballot, could become decisive in subsequent rounds.

In 2020, Biden triumphed over Trump by securing pivotal battleground states such as Pennsylvania and Georgia, and won the popular vote by over 7 million votes, capturing 51.3% compared to Trump’s 46.8%.

Democrats Question Harris’s Viability as Potential Biden Successor Amid Growing Concerns

President Joe Biden’s potential departure as the Democratic presidential nominee doesn’t guarantee Vice President Kamala Harris will succeed him. While Harris has been Biden’s political heir since 2020, doubts persist about her viability as a presidential candidate. Concerns that hindered her initial White House bid and her vice presidency continue to affect her chances.

Social media is rife with clips of Harris’s awkward sound bites, and while some Democrats praise her efforts on abortion rights, Republicans are poised to scrutinize her work on the southern border. Despite the growing calls for Biden to step down, many Democratic officials and donors question the wisdom of endorsing Harris as his replacement. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez emphasized this sentiment, stating, “If you think there is a consensus among the people who want Joe Biden to leave, that they would support Vice President Harris, you would be mistaken. They’re interested in removing the whole ticket.”

The central issue for Democrats is identifying a candidate who can effectively challenge former President Donald Trump and maximize success in the House and Senate. Harris’s polling isn’t significantly better than Biden’s. An NBC News poll showed Trump leading both Biden and Harris by a two-point margin, reflecting Harris’s uncertain political viability.

John Morgan, a Democratic megadonor, warned against hastily supporting Harris, stating, “Be careful what you wish for.” He expressed concerns that Harris might come across as inauthentic, a sentiment echoed by many fundraisers and donors who are looking to back a winning candidate.

Proponents of Harris argue her numbers could improve with a formal campaign, bolstered by Biden-Harris campaign funds. She shows strength among Black voters, according to a POLITICO/Morning Consult poll, and has focused on outreach to younger voters. However, being a Black woman in politics poses additional challenges due to sexism and racism. At 59, Harris could address concerns about the party leader’s age, contrasting with the 78-year-old GOP nominee.

Aimee Allison, founder of She the People, highlighted Harris’s past success, stating, “I’ve heard it this week, it’s a perennial thing — ‘Can she win?’ I say, ‘Yes, she already has.’” Allison criticized the persistent underestimation of Harris, which she believes is a common issue for Black women in politics.

Some Democrats fear darker outcomes, particularly after an assassination attempt on Trump. Renay Grace Rodriguez, president of the Los Angeles Stonewall Democratic Club, expressed concern, “If Biden steps down, she should be the one to receive the delegates. But I also know how this country behaves toward women and women of color, and I worry for her that there would be a bullet that would not miss.”

Harris’s failed 2020 presidential run looms large, affecting current perceptions of her prospects. Despite her rapid rise through California politics, her presidential campaign struggled with unclear ideology and inconsistent positions, notably on single-payer health care. Her campaign also faced internal issues, lacking a clear strategy and leadership, leading to her early exit from the race.

This history has created skepticism among voters and donors. As one House Democrat noted, “‘Kamala, eh that’s not good. In the primary four years ago, she didn’t last very long.’” A spokesperson for Harris defended her record, emphasizing her dedication to working with Biden.

Harris has faced challenges with staff turnover in every office she’s held, and her vice presidency has been no different. Issues with her first chief of staff and a dysfunctional office environment strained her relationship with the White House. Persistent leaks and complaints about mismanagement have marred her tenure, though improvements were noted with the appointment of a new chief of staff, Lorraine Voles.

Harris’s relationship with Biden’s inner circle has been rocky since her 2020 primary debate jab at Biden. Despite initial reservations, Biden’s political advisers, including future White House chief of staff Ron Klain, supported her as a valuable addition to the ticket. However, lingering doubts from senior aides and Biden’s family have persisted.

Harris’s role as vice president has involved taking on politically fraught tasks, such as immigration. Despite her objections, she was tasked with addressing the root causes of migration from Central America, leading to GOP attacks labeling her the “border czar.” However, the fall of Roe v. Wade allowed Harris to pivot to a position of strength as the administration’s point person on abortion rights.

Harris’s efforts on abortion rights, particularly ahead of the 2022 midterms, helped ease tensions with the White House. She has become a key figure in Biden’s reelection bid, focusing on reproductive health. Christina Reynolds, senior vice president of EMILY’s List, praised Harris, saying, “She’s a terrific messenger on the issue that we believe is going to win Democrats this election, which is abortion.”

Harris’s prosecutorial skills have been a strength, as seen in her prominent Senate Judiciary Committee exchanges. These skills have become a key part of her appeal, especially in contrast to Biden’s debate performance against Trump. With Biden’s effectiveness in question, Harris’s sharp attacks on Trump have garnered attention from Democrats looking for a candidate who can change the dynamics of the race.

Harris’s ability to unite the party remains uncertain. While female Democratic donors and organizations are preparing to support her candidacy, Harris would need to win over constituencies that Biden successfully united in 2020. Her lack of longstanding congressional relationships is a disadvantage compared to Biden.

Ocasio-Cortez’s comments highlight the divide within the party, with many progressives, including the liberal House “squad” and Sen. Bernie Sanders, continuing to support Biden. However, Harris has been more willing to call for restraint from Israel in the conflict with Hamas, a stance that may appeal to progressives.

Sen. Elizabeth Warren broke from the progressive camp, stating, “Biden is our nominee … Harris is ready to serve.” Harris’s role as the White House messenger on abortion rights has been a significant aspect of her tenure, and her ability to connect the fight for abortion rights with broader issues of freedom has resonated within the party. As Democrats contemplate their future leadership, Harris’s ability to unify the party and address its diverse needs remains a critical question.

GOP Convention Ends with Spectacle, Little Change in Tight Biden-Trump Race

The Republican National Convention was a spectacle featuring top lawmakers, emerging stars, and famous entertainers, including a former president who had survived an assassination attempt just days earlier. Media outlets heavily covered the event, deploying numerous journalists. Despite the fanfare, the race for the White House remains largely unchanged from when Republicans first gathered in Milwaukee.

President Joe Biden’s campaign continues to struggle amid calls for him to drop out, exacerbated by his disastrous debate performance last month. Donald Trump, who had promised a more unifying tone after surviving the assassination attempt, ultimately delivered a speech that mixed details of the shooting with his usual complaints about immigration, his 2020 election loss, and other grievances.

“Given the extraordinary, recent events, something as conventionalized as a convention may not move the needle, but Trump went into the convention with a lead and emerges with a lead, so they don’t need it to,” said Doug Heye, a GOP strategist and former top Republican National Committee official.

The race has already been influenced by significant events. Biden’s debate performance was historically poor, and Trump became one of the few federal political candidates injured in an assassination attempt. Polls suggested Trump received a bump after June’s debate, but it’s unclear how the shooting has affected the race due to a lack of recent public surveys.

Strategists from both parties agree that significant historical events would be required to shift the race. Both Biden and Trump have been in the public eye for decades and have served in the highest-profile political position in the world. Voter opinions are largely established, making it difficult for any single event to cause significant polling fluctuations.

There has been considerable noise along the way. Besides the convention and Trump’s selection of Ohio Sen. JD Vance as his running mate, Trump was convicted on 34 felony counts, Biden’s son was convicted on felony gun charges, and protests erupted over the war in Gaza, among other events. Despite this, polls have remained relatively stable.

“I think that this race at this point is so dug in, it takes what are akin to earthquakes to change anything,” said Jon Reinish, a Democratic strategist and former Senate aide.

There was widespread speculation that the Republican convention would make a significant impact. Trump was set to announce his vice-presidential pick, a process that had garnered intense political and media attention, and his ear was still bandaged less than 48 hours after the assassination attempt.

Beyond the political maneuvering, the event featured notable entertainment. Lee Greenwood repeatedly sang “God Bless the USA,” conservative media personality Tucker Carlson gave an impromptu speech, and wrestler Hulk Hogan tore off his shirt to reveal a Trump-Vance tank top.

Trump’s keynote address on Thursday night began with harrowing details of the assassination attempt before shifting to his usual rhetoric. He criticized the “invasion” at the southern border, called former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi “crazy,” and accused his political opponents of “cheating on elections.” Despite earlier promises to avoid mentioning Biden by name, Trump couldn’t resist.

“If you took the ten worst presidents in the history of the United States, think of it, the ten worst, added them up, they will not have done the damage that Biden has done. Only going to use the term once, Biden. I’m not going to use the name anymore, just one time. The damage that he’s done to this country is unthinkable,” Trump said.

These remarks indicate that Trump’s campaign remains largely unchanged, continuing to employ the same rhetoric that has characterized his campaign for months.

“I didn’t think it made a difference. If you watch that convention, you already got your mind made up,” said Chuck Rocha, a Democratic strategist who worked on Sen. Bernie Sanders’ 2020 presidential campaign. “The shooting probably had a bigger impact. But most of America has made up its mind.”

Despite this, the convention’s outcome is not entirely without significance. Some Democrats felt relieved that Trump’s remarks didn’t solely focus on unity, arguing that such a focus could have widened the gap between him and Biden in the polls, even though they acknowledged that the president likely trails currently.

“Overall, it doesn’t change anything, but they missed an opportunity to put this out of reach,” said a former senior Trump administration official about Trump’s speech.

“No, I don’t think the convention changed the fundamentals,” added a source familiar with the Biden campaign’s strategy. “A less MAGA VP pick and a more unifying message from Trump may have, but they opted to double down on MAGA and division.”

Joe Biden Drops Out Of 2024 Presidential Race

President Biden announced on Sunday, July 21st that he is dropping out of the 2024 presidential race, a seismic event that will leave Democrats scrambling to select his replacement just weeks before their convention.
“While it has been my intention to seek reelection, I believe it is in the best interest of my party and the country for me to stand down and to focus solely on fulfilling my duties as president for my term,” Mr. Biden posted in a statement on social media.

The president’s historic withdrawal throws the 2024 race − already roiled by a shocking attempt on Trump’s life − into uncertain territory, with Vice President Kamala Harris seen as the Democrat best placed to take Biden’s place atop the party’s ticket.

Biden made the announcement from his home in Rehoboth Beach, Del., where he’s self-isolated since testing positive for COVID-19 Thursday night.

“It has been the greatest honor of my life to serve as your President,” Biden said in a written statement. ” Biden did not immediately endorse a successor. He said he would speak to the nation later this week to provide more detail about his decision.

It marks an extraordinary turn for Biden, who for three weeks remained defiant in the face of growing calls from Democratic lawmakers that he withdraw after a disastrous June 27 debate with Trump raised scrutiny over the president’s mental fitness.

Biden’s exit came after he received bleak warnings from Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer and Democratic House Leader Hakeem Jeffries that his candidacy could lead to massive losses for Democrats in the Senate and House.

More than 30 congressional Democrats called for Biden to bow out, and former President Barack Obama reportedly relayed similar fears to Democratic allies about Biden’s prospects of beating Trump. Democratic donors from Hollywood to Wall Street also came out against Biden continuing his reelection bid.

Former President Donald Trump, who was officially nominated by the Republican party on Thursday night, told CNN after the decision that Mr. Biden is the “worst president by far in the history of our country,” but he said that he thought if Vice President Kamala Harris is the nominee, she would be easier to beat than Mr. Biden.

Before winning the White House in 2020, Mr. Biden called himself a “bridge” to a new “generation of leaders,” causing many to wonder if he would only serve one term. In the aftermath of the debate, he explained that his thinking had changed, and the divisiveness in the country led him to believe only he could defeat Trump.

In the weeks since the debate, the president tried to push back, insisting in a series of public appearances and meetings with Democratic elected officials that he was committed to staying in the race. “I’m not going anywhere,” he vowed. But even longtime allies began to urge him to change course.

The pressure eventually became insurmountable, with top Democrats in Congress telling Mr. Biden that he should step aside and allow a replacement to face off against Trump in November.

The decision upends the 2024 election less than 110 days before Election Day, with Democratic National Committee members now tasked with choosing an alternative nominee to take on Trump, whose polling lead has swelled while Democrats have fought internally.

Vice President Harris is now the frontrunner to replace Biden as the Democratic nominee, but the party’s bench of Democratic governors could also be in the mix including Gretchen Whitmer of Michigan, Josh Shapiro of Pennsylvania and Gavin Newsom of California.

Biden becomes the first incumbent president not to seek reelection since Lyndon B. Johnson who, in 1968 amid national unrest and turmoil within the Democratic Party over the Vietnam War, stunned the nation with his decision not to seek a second full term.

Biden Faces Mounting Pressure to Abandon 2024 Reelection Bid Amid Isolation and Internal Dissent

President Joe Biden finds himself more isolated than ever, with senior White House and campaign officials privately urging him to drop his bid for a second term soon.

“The next 72 hours are big,” a Democratic governor closely connected to party officials told aides on Thursday. “This can’t go on much longer.”

In interviews with CNN, over two dozen sources close to the West Wing and campaign dynamics said there’s a widespread belief that Biden staying in the 2024 race is untenable. “Everyone is saying it privately,” a senior Democrat said. “People see and feel the walls closing in.”

A top Democrat close to the White House noted Biden has become “exceptionally insulated and isolated” since the CNN presidential debate on June 27. Multiple sources said some of Biden’s senior advisers – including Anita Dunn, attorney Bob Bauer, and campaign chair Jen O’Malley Dillon – faced backlash from Biden’s family post-debate.

This situation has made Biden’s inner circle of advisers even smaller and more impenetrable. Three weeks after his poor debate performance, only a few of his closest aides – like longtime advisers Mike Donilon and Steve Ricchetti – and family members remain firmly by his side. This tight circle has alarmed many Democrats who question if Biden is receiving accurate information about his campaign’s dire situation.

Deputy White House chief of staff Annie Tomasini, another long-time Biden aide, joins Donilon and Ricchetti in forming a protective bubble around the president. Anthony Bernal, Jill Biden’s chief of staff, has become more influential during this crisis, suppressing dissent and reporting naysayers to the First Lady. Tomasini, however, reportedly does not decide who the president interacts with.

Ricchetti is more realistic about Biden’s challenges, two insiders said, as he remains the primary contact for lawmakers trying to communicate with the president. Despite growing speculation about Biden’s future, senior West Wing advisers told CNN on Thursday night that they haven’t discussed Biden dropping out of the race with him.

White House spokesperson Andrew Bates stated that Biden is “proud of the well-rounded team he has built.” He added, “He has not made changes to the group of advisers he consults, who he trusts because they’ve demonstrated the integrity to tell the truth and keep the wellbeing of the American people front of mind.”

Campaign spokesman Kevin Munoz echoed a positive outlook, saying, “Here in HQ, we’re working really hard because on winning campaigns, you work really hard. There’s an immense sense of pride across our office, because we know how important and critical that work we are doing here is for the fate of our democracy.”

Sources told CNN that Biden’s response to unfavorable polls has been to question if anyone else would do better. Meetings and calls with anyone who might bring bad news seem to have stopped. “The phones just kind of stopped ringing,” a senior Democrat said.

A tense recent conversation between Biden and former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi highlighted this disconnect. Disagreeing over polling data, Pelosi asked for Donilon, a former pollster, to join the call to discuss the data. Pelosi’s spokesperson said the “feeding frenzy from the press based on anonymous sources misrepresents any conversations the speaker may have had with the president.”

“He doesn’t want to hear from anyone. He wants to hear from Mike Donilon and Steve,” a top Democrat close to the White House said.

One insider claimed that Donilon and Ricchetti have presented various views to Biden, who has been directly speaking with many party officials for feedback. In a meeting with top House Democrat Hakeem Jeffries, Biden fiercely contested the idea that his colleagues wanted him to step aside.

On Capitol Hill, some Democratic lawmakers have begun to voice their concerns publicly. So far, 20 House Democrats have called on Biden to drop out. Meanwhile, White House and campaign aides continue their work, with many feeling deep despair.

“There are a lot of people who tell themselves – it is my job to do this,” one Democrat close to the White House said. “But privately, they feel differently.”

Biden’s deputy campaign manager Quentin Fulks said Thursday the campaign is “not working through any scenarios” where Biden isn’t the presidential nominee. “Our campaign is not working through any scenarios where President Biden is not the top of the ticket. He is and will be the Democratic nominee,” he said during a DNC news conference in Milwaukee.

Biden’s debate performance and the subsequent decline in his campaign have caused significant discontent within the White House. Officials have questioned the motives of Biden’s advisers – whether they are sticking to their course due to a misreading of the situation or a desire to maintain their proximity to power.

“This decision is not just about Biden,” a former aide who worked with Biden for decades told CNN. “There are other senior advisers who are considering whether they played the right role in this.”

Frustration with Biden’s advisers is widespread, with staff grappling with a lack of information and decisions about their professional futures. “Staff in general are just over the leadership here,” a White House official said.

Former administration officials have noted an increase in resumes from colleagues seeking exit plans in the private sector.

As Biden spent Thursday out of sight, recovering from Covid-19 at his beach house in Delaware, those who spoke with him described him as “receptive” to arguments for stepping away from his reelection bid. A senior Democratic adviser told CNN that Biden is in a “contemplative stage” as he isolates in Rehoboth Beach. A source familiar with Biden’s mindset said he is “thinking things through” and “deliberating” on his reelection campaign. Privately, Biden has acknowledged to others the limited path forward given the unfavorable data.

This source indicated that any announcement is unlikely before the weekend and warned that anyone claiming to know Biden’s plans does not truly know.

This uncertainty frustrates many Democrats who wonder if Biden has made any new decisions about his future. If he does step aside, a series of events will unfold that officials need time to prepare for.

Inside the White House, senior officials are bracing for Republican calls for Biden to resign if he doesn’t seek reelection, adding to the complexities surrounding his decision.

As Biden’s political future hangs in the balance, the White House is receiving letters, calls, and messages from Americans, including Democratic voters like Terri and John Hale. “It’s with utmost respect that we offer this conclusion – you cannot win this race,” the Hales, retirees from Ankeny, Iowa, wrote in a letter to the White House obtained by CNN. “Not because you are not the better man, but because the public – rightly or wrongly – now sees your age and perceived limitations as the main issue in the campaign.”

Republicans Show Unity and Momentum Amidst Democratic Infighting and Biden’s COVID-19 Struggles

Republicans find themselves in an unusual yet favorable position: they are united and focused, while Democrats are grappling with significant internal disagreements. This contrast has been particularly evident this week, with Republicans gathering in Wisconsin, fully supporting former President Trump’s candidacy, while Democrats are publicly debating whether President Biden should remain their candidate in November.

On Tuesday, Florida Governor Ron DeSantis and former UN Ambassador Nikki Haley, both primary rivals of Trump, took to the stage, urging Republicans to rally behind Trump. Meanwhile, Biden tested positive for COVID-19 on Wednesday, with Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer reportedly advising him to step aside.

This unity among Republicans is a stark contrast to the 2016 convention when Senator Ted Cruz urged delegates to vote their conscience, leading to a divided party and an anticipated loss to Hillary Clinton. Former Arkansas Governor Asa Hutchinson noted, “I think they learned something” from Cruz’s non-endorsement in 2016. Senator Kevin Cramer commented on this year’s convention, describing it as “flawlessly executed” and highlighting the significant growth and unity within the party.

Republicans couldn’t have hoped for better circumstances as they convened in Wisconsin. Trump survived an assassination attempt on Saturday, which invigorated his supporters. A federal judge dismissed a major criminal case against him on Monday, and he announced Senator JD Vance as his running mate, further energizing the party. In contrast, Biden canceled a Monday event after the shooting at Trump’s rally, and Representative Adam Schiff called for him to “pass the torch” on Wednesday, leading to Biden canceling a rally with Latino leaders due to his COVID-19 diagnosis.

The Republican party has often been in turmoil since Trump announced his candidacy in 2015. Despite polling predictions that Trump would lose to Clinton in 2016 and numerous Republicans distancing themselves from him after the “Access Hollywood” tape release, the party has now found itself in a rare state of cohesion. Trump’s presidency saw GOP lawmakers struggling to align with his statements and fulfill long-held promises like repealing the Affordable Care Act. House Republicans have faced internal conflicts over the past 18 months, struggling to elect a Speaker and dealing with repeated pushback from the right flank of the conference.

This week’s convention, however, has had a different atmosphere, with the party galvanized by recent events and the assassination attempt. Senator Cramer remarked, “There’s no comparison, and probably never will be again in history, to the emotion of this week that started with Saturday and started with the episode in Butler, Pa., that our standard-bearer was within a millimeter or two of death, and is now with us. That has given such wind in our sails, it’s hard to almost describe.”

Throughout the week, Republicans have remained on message. Haley, once Trump’s main rival, expressed her “strong” support for him. Almost every speaker praised Trump as a strong leader or criticized Biden’s policies on the border, inflation, and foreign affairs, or questioned his ability to serve another term. Former critics of Trump, such as Senators Marco Rubio, Ted Cruz, and JD Vance, gave some of the most notable speeches in support of him.

Polling shows Trump leading Biden by a narrow margin. By comparison, Trump was trailing Clinton by 2 percentage points nationally at the end of the 2016 GOP convention. However, party leaders emphasize that victory is not guaranteed with more than three months until Election Day. They point to Trump’s unexpected win in 2016 as a reminder that the race can shift dramatically in the Democrats’ favor.

Republican National Committee co-Chair Lara Trump echoed this sentiment, saying, “You can never take anything for granted. I mean, look, you look at the polling from 2016 and it would have suggested that Donald Trump should have never had a shot at becoming president. And we all know how that turned out.”

She added, “So, look, we feel like we have the wind in our sails. We feel a lot of momentum as a party right now. This is a great environment. There’s a lot of energy, but we have to play the game up until the buzzer sounds the last second of that game on Nov. 5.”

Donald Trump Accepts  Republican Party’s Presidential Nomination, As He Tramples Party Efforts To Remake His Image

Donald Trump, somber and bandaged, accepted the presidential nomination on Thursday, July 18th, 2024 at the Republican National Convention in Milwaukee, WI, with a speech that described in detail the assassination attempt that could have ended his life just five days earlier, and laid out a sweeping populist agenda in, particularly on immigration.

In a speech that lasted over an  hour and a half, Trump closed out an emotionally charged convention with an appeal for the country to heal “discord and division” days after he was injured in an assassination attempt — even as he mocked and attacked his opponents.,

Trump made sweeping promises to end inflation and secure the border, but he didn’t outline any plans and mostly used crowd-pleasing talking points. The most specific he got was promising to roll back Biden administration efforts to combat climate change, redirect infrastructure spending and impose steep tariffs.

During the first four nights of the convention, speakers attempted to give Donald Trump, one of the most divisive politicians in recent U.S. history a makeover, describing him as a loving and caring family man whose near-assassination at a rally on Saturday had changed him.

Early in his speech , as he accepted his party’s presidential nomination at the Republican National Convention, it seemed Trump had bought into the carefully orchestrated effort to repackage him as a humbler, unifying figure, more palatable to swing voters who will be crucial to winning the Nov. 5 election.

He said he wanted to be a president for all Americans, including Democrats, and wanted to heal the divided country. “In an age when our politics too often divide us, now is the time to remember that we are all fellow citizens,” Trump said.That new version of Trump lasted barely half an hour.

Then the Trump more familiar to Americans – the bombastic thrower of insults who revels in demonizing his opponents – re-emerged, trampling over the message of unity so painstakingly choreographed by the Republican National Committee this week.

In a rambling 92-minute address that broke the record for the longest convention speech in history, Trump called Democratic President Joe Biden the worst president in U.S. history and the former Democratic House Speaker “crazy Nancy Pelosi,” and accused Democrats of launching judicial witch hunts against him and creating a “planet of war.”

“The Democrat Party should immediately stop weaponizing the justice system and labeling their political opponent as an enemy of democracy, especially since that is not true,” Trump said. “In fact, I am the one saving democracy for the people of our country,” he said.

Using familiar hyperbolic and divisive language, he said illegal immigration to the United States was “the greatest invasion in history” and was leading to the deaths of hundreds of thousands of Americans every year, though neither claim is supported by any data.

He again promised to curb illegal immigration, vowing the “largest deportation operation in the history of our country”, and said he would “end every single international crisis that the current administration has created”.

Trump also said he would create a version of Israel’s Iron Dome missile defence system, and pledged to restore “peace, stability and harmony all throughout the world” – though he gave few details on how.

He painted a dark picture of a crumbling America, a nation in decline, its cities crime-ridden and economically depressed, a staple image of his stump speech in which he presents himself as the country’s savior.

In his debut speech in the role, that man – 39-year-old Ohio Senator JD Vance – told the convention that he was a “working-class” boy, and insisted that Trump’s policies would help left-behind voters.

Among the others who made notable appearances at the convention were Mr Vance’s wife Usha, as well as Trump’s daughter-in-law Lara and his teenage granddaughter Kai, who gave her first public remarks.

And Trump’s former rivals for the Republican nomination, Nikki Haley and Ron DeSantis, came together to voice their support for him.

Their message of party solidarity was echoed in Thursday’s speech by Trump, who also spoke of working for “all of America” if he won back the White House.

The evening concluded with thousands of balloons falling to the stadium floor and with two prominent figures in the Trump family making rare appearances on the campaign trail. Former first lady Melania Trump made her first public appearance alongside her husband in months when she entered the arena ahead of the former president’s remarks. She later joined him on stage at the conclusion of his speech.

Trump had pledged to re-write his address in the wake of the attack, after which he had what he called a “very cordial” conversation with Mr Biden. The finished item was critical of the current president’s policies, although he spoke his adversary’s name only once during his range of attacks.

Observers said his speech was relatively subdued, in spite of the overall bombast of the evening, which included a shower of balloons and a crowd-rallying appearance from wrestling legend Hulk Hogan.

“We had been told this was going to be a different Trump, a softer side,” Mary Anna Mancuso, a Republican strategist and Trump critic, said afterward. “Trump’s speech was not about unifying the nation. It was the same Trump that we’ve seen and there was no difference.”

From Yale Law School to the National Spotlight: The Remarkable Journey of JD and Usha Vance

Before JD Vance was chosen as Donald Trump’s VP candidate, Vivek Ramaswamy was a leading contender. Both Ramaswamy and Vance are strong candidates for Trump’s VP spot. Interestingly, according to The Guardian, JD Vance and his wife Usha were classmates at Yale Law School. During a debate, Vivek Ramaswamy mentioned that Usha is a family friend. Notably, one of their three children is named Vivek. JD and Usha Vance’s children are named Ewan, Vivek, and Mirabel. Usha Vance has a notable career, having served as an editor for the Yale Law Journal and managing editor of the Yale Journal of Law & Technology. She also earned a master’s in philosophy from the University of Cambridge, focusing on “the methods used for protecting printing rights in seventeenth-century England,” as per her university biography. Usha met JD Vance at Yale Law School, where they co-organized a discussion group on “social decline in white America,” a key theme in his bestselling memoir, Hillbilly Elegy. The book explores his upbringing in a poor Appalachian family and the start of his relationship with Usha, played by Freida Pinto in the 2020 Netflix adaptation. Despite seeming like an unlikely match, JD describes Usha in Hillbilly Elegy as a “Yale spirit guide” who helped him navigate campus life. “She instinctively understood the questions I didn’t even know to ask, and she always encouraged me to seek opportunities that I didn’t know existed,” he wrote. Usha told NBC News, “We were friends, and I liked that he was very diligent. He would show up at 9am appointments.”

Usha Vance’s career is marked by significant legal achievements and influential roles. She began her career as an editor for the Yale Law Journal and managing editor of the Yale Journal of Law & Technology. In 2014, the same year she married JD Vance, she clerked for Brett Kavanaugh on the DC Circuit. Kavanaugh was later nominated by Donald Trump and confirmed to the US Supreme Court. Usha also served as a law clerk for Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts during the 2017-2018 term, where Roberts wrote a crucial ruling upholding Trump’s travel ban. After her clerkships, Usha joined the 200-lawyer firm Munger, Tolles & Olson, focusing on civil litigation and appeals, representing clients like the Walt Disney Company and the Regents of the University of California. Although a registered Democrat who voted in the party’s primaries until 2014, Usha supported her husband during his 2022 Republican Senate campaign. In 2024, amid speculation about JD becoming Donald Trump’s running mate, Usha emphasized her supportive role in their family’s public life. In July 2024, Usha announced her resignation from Munger to support her family, including their three children: Ewan, Vivek, and Mirabel. Her career reflects her substantial contributions to the legal field and her adaptability to her family’s evolving political landscape.

The Vances’ partnership extends beyond personal life into their professional journeys, showcasing their individual and joint contributions to legal and political realms. JD’s memoir, Hillbilly Elegy, which discusses themes of social decline in white America and his personal journey from a troubled upbringing to academic and professional success, was instrumental in his rise to prominence. The memoir not only brought attention to his story but also highlighted Usha’s influence in his life. The Netflix adaptation of Hillbilly Elegy further cemented their story in the public eye, with Usha’s character portrayed by Freida Pinto. JD’s description of Usha as his “Yale spirit guide” illustrates the depth of their connection and her role in his success. “She instinctively understood the questions I didn’t even know to ask, and she always encouraged me to seek opportunities that I didn’t know existed,” JD wrote in his memoir. Usha’s perspective on their relationship, as she shared with NBC News, highlights their mutual respect and admiration. “We were friends, and I liked that he was very diligent. He would show up at 9am appointments,” she said.

Usha Vance’s career trajectory is marked by prestigious roles and significant accomplishments. Starting as an editor for the Yale Law Journal and managing editor of the Yale Journal of Law & Technology, she quickly established herself as a formidable legal mind. Her clerkships with Brett Kavanaugh and Chief Justice John Roberts provided her with invaluable experience and insight into the highest levels of the judicial system. Her role in Roberts’ pivotal ruling upholding Trump’s travel ban showcases her involvement in significant legal decisions. Joining Munger, Tolles & Olson allowed Usha to further hone her legal skills, representing high-profile clients and handling complex civil litigation and appeals. Her decision to support JD during his 2022 Senate campaign, despite her previous Democratic affiliations, underscores her commitment to her family’s evolving political journey. Usha’s announcement in July 2024 about resigning from Munger to focus on her family and support JD’s potential role as Trump’s running mate reflects her adaptability and dedication to her family’s public life.

JD Vance’s potential selection as Donald Trump’s VP candidate brings both him and Usha into the national spotlight. The couple’s journey from Yale Law School classmates to prominent figures in the legal and political arenas is a testament to their resilience and partnership. Usha’s legal expertise and her supportive role in JD’s political career highlight the unique dynamic of their relationship. As JD and Usha navigate the complexities of public life, their story continues to inspire and captivate audiences, reflecting the power of dedication, support, and mutual respect in achieving personal and professional success.

Usha Vance’s remarkable legal career and her role as a supportive partner in JD Vance’s political journey underscore the significant contributions she has made both individually and as part of a dynamic duo. From their days at Yale Law School to their current positions in the public eye, the Vances exemplify the intersection of personal dedication and professional excellence.

Meet Usha Vance: The Influential Lawyer and Supportive Wife of JD Vance, Trump’s Running Mate

Former President Trump recently announced his choice of Sen. JD Vance (R-Ohio) as his running mate at the Republican Convention in Milwaukee, receiving enthusiastic applause and celebration. This announcement has also brought attention to JD Vance’s wife, Usha Chilukuri Vance, putting her in the spotlight.

Here are some key details about Usha Vance, the 38-year-old lawyer and San Diego native:

Daughter of Immigrants

Usha Vance is the daughter of academics Krish and Lakshmi Chilukuri, who immigrated to the United States from Andhra Pradesh, India. Her mother, a biologist, serves as a college provost at the University of California, San Diego, while her father is an engineer and lecturer at the San Diego State University College of Engineering.

Born in San Diego, Usha attended Mt. Carmel High School and later graduated from the University of Cambridge in the United Kingdom as a Gates Cambridge Scholar.

Meeting JD Vance at Yale

Usha met JD Vance at Yale, where she completed both her undergraduate and law degrees. She clerked for future Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh when he was an appeals court judge in Washington, D.C., and later clerked for Chief Justice John Roberts.

She has been a trial lawyer at the Munger, Tolles & Olson law firm for several years. Recently, the firm announced her departure, stating, “Usha has informed us she has decided to leave the firm. Usha has been an excellent lawyer and colleague, and we thank her for her years of work and wish her the best in her future career.”

Support for Sen. Vance

In a rare interview on “Fox & Friends,” Usha appeared alongside her husband, expressing her support for his bid to be Trump’s running mate. Although she typically stays out of the spotlight, she cautiously answered questions ranging from their faith to potential causes she might champion as the second lady.

Regarding the scrutiny that comes with the role, she said, “I don’t know if anyone is ever ready for that kind of scrutiny.” Reflecting on their first campaign experience, she noted, “It was so different from anything we’d ever done before. But it was an adventure. I guess the way that I put it is, I’m not raring to change anything about our lives right now. But I really, you know, believe in JD, and I really love him. And so we’ll just sort of see what happens with our lives.”

Successful Marriage through Communication

In the same interview, JD Vance mentioned his wife’s support as he reengaged with his Christian faith, despite her not sharing the same religion. “I had never been baptized. You know, I was raised Christian. I’d never baptized, so I was baptized first time in 2018. She was not raised Christian [and] is actually not a Christian. But I remember when I started to reengage with my own faith. She was very supportive.”

Usha added that she was raised in a Hindu household. She discussed merging their faiths, highlighting their agreement on family life and child-rearing. They have three children: Ewan, Vivek, and Mirabel. “And so I think the answer really is we just talk a lot,” she said.

Mention in Vance’s Memoir

JD Vance mentioned Usha in his memoir, “Hillbilly Elegy,” where he documented the start of their relationship. In the movie adaptation, Freida Pinto portrayed Usha. Vance described her as his “Yale spirit guide,” writing, “She instinctively understood the questions I didn’t even know to ask and she always encouraged me to seek opportunities that I didn’t know existed.”

In a 2020 interview on Megyn Kelly’s podcast, Vance spoke about the positive influence of his wife’s advice, saying, “I’m one of those guys who really benefits from having, like, a sort of powerful female voice on his left shoulder saying, ‘Don’t do that, do do that’ — it just is important.”

Asian American Influence Surges in 2024 Election: Trump’s VP Pick Reflects Growing Political Role

Shalabh “Shalli” Kumar felt immense pride on Monday evening as Donald Trump finally revealed his anticipated choice for his running mate in the 2024 election.

But it wasn’t just the mention of Ohio Senator JD Vance that triggered Kumar’s reaction. For the founder of the Republican Hindu Coalition and chair of the Hindu and Indian Coalition of the Republican National Committee, it was the inclusion of Vance’s wife, Usha, that resonated deeply—a 38-year-old Yale graduate and daughter of Indian immigrants.

“Hindus have come a long way,” Kumar remarked, reflecting on the community’s growth in population and political influence since his arrival in the United States in the late 1960s. “It’s about time,” he added, emphasizing that the Vances “are going to represent a new generation of Americans.”

The 2024 presidential campaign has witnessed significant participation from politicians of South Asian descent. Former South Carolina Governor Nikki Haley and entrepreneur Vivek Ramaswamy competed in the Republican primaries, while Vice President Kamala Harris seeks reelection alongside President Joe Biden.

During the Republican National Convention’s second night, both Haley and Ramaswamy unequivocally endorsed the Trump-Vance ticket in prime-time speeches. On Wednesday night, Usha Vance will introduce her husband as Trump’s running mate, marking her inaugural step in the Trump-Vance campaign.

As Asian Americans assume a more prominent role in the 2024 presidential campaign, political activists from both major parties express hope that this increased representation will lead to greater engagement with a historically overlooked voting bloc.

Chintan Patel, executive director of Indian American Impact, hailed the “phenomenal” rise of South Asian representation in politics. “Since Impact’s inception in 2016, the number of elected officials within South Asian communities has grown from approximately 50 to over 300 nationwide, including, notably, Vice President Kamala Harris,” Patel told CNN, underscoring the pivotal role of representation in reshaping community aspirations.

Sources within the Trump campaign believe that Usha Vance has the potential to appeal to minority voters. Asian Americans constitute the fastest-growing racial or ethnic group among eligible U.S. voters, according to a recent Pew Research Center analysis, with their numbers increasing by approximately 2 million since 2020—an equivalent to Nebraska’s population.

Despite their growing electoral influence, both political parties acknowledge the need for greater efforts to connect with this critical voting bloc. Christine Chen, executive director of APIAVote, emphasized the scars left by the events of 2020, including the rise in anti-Asian hate and the challenges posed by the pandemic, which underscore the importance of political engagement and representation.

“We’re also trying to reemphasize to the campaigns and the parties that they really need to do a better job in terms of reaching out to our growing base of (the) electorate, but also doing it early,” Chen stated.

Last week, APIAVote, in collaboration with AAPI Data, Asian Americans Advancing Justice, and the AARP, released the 2024 Asian American Voter Survey, highlighting key issues driving Asian American voters. While 90% of those surveyed expressed intent to vote in the upcoming elections, half reported no contact from the Democratic Party, and 57% said the same about the Republicans—an ongoing concern for Chen.

Patel stressed that, like any voting bloc, Asian Americans seek substantive commitment to issues that matter most to them, such as the economy, education, inflation, and immigration.

Immigration holds particular significance for many South Asian Republican voters due to the backlog affecting millions of Hindu and Indian Americans awaiting green cards, Kumar noted. Progressive Indian American voters, Patel added, also voice concerns over immigration policies outlined in Project 2025—a conservative blueprint that includes proposals for mass deportations.

Chen emphasized the ongoing work required to engage Asian American voters, many of whom are first-time immigrants, in understanding their potential impact on upcoming elections.

“It’s actually for us to protect a democracy,” she stated. “Everyone needs to participate. It’s no longer a democracy if only a few participate in the election process.”

Unity and Underlying Tensions: Key Takeaways from Day 2 of the GOP Convention

Former President Trump’s 2024 rivals rejoined the fold on Tuesday, as former United Nations Ambassador Nikki Haley and Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis took the stage, highlighting a push for unity at the GOP convention. Despite this, unity messaging was often overshadowed by attacks from figures like Arizona Senate candidate Kari Lake and Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas), who targeted Democrats.

Nonetheless, the event has proceeded smoothly as Trump’s GOP promotes a positive message following his near-assassination. Here are five takeaways from the second day of the convention:

  1. Republicans Strive to Overcome Divisions

Even though Trump easily secured the presidential nomination, divisions persisted within the GOP during the primaries, with some voters casting protest ballots against him. However, these conflicts have been temporarily set aside following the near-fatal shooting of Trump. Speakers emphasized unity for both the party and the nation, with prominent appearances by Trump’s top rivals, Haley and DeSantis.

Haley’s presence was significant, as she initially stated she wasn’t invited to the convention. This changed after the attempted assassination, leading her to fully endorse Trump. “I’ll start by making one thing perfectly clear,” Haley said. “Donald Trump has my strong endorsement.”

DeSantis, who had already backed Trump after exiting the race, reaffirmed his support, emphasizing his alignment with Trump. Their appearances, along with Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) announcing Kentucky delegates for Trump, showcase Republicans rallying around their nominee while President Biden deals with his party’s turmoil.

“We’re not all going to agree on everything, and that’s OK,” said Rep. Mike Lawler (R-N.Y.), a moderate Republican. “You have to allow for robust debate and discussion. And ultimately, though, you have to find compromise and commonality and forge a path forward, and I think that’s what [Haley] was speaking to.”

However, underlying tensions remained. In a notable moment, Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.) taunted former House Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.), reflecting internal Republican animosities even as they present a united front.

  1. Unity Messaging Undermined by Attacks

Despite calls for unity across party lines following the shooting, some Republicans used their speeches to attack Democrats. Lake, running against Democratic Rep. Ruben Gallego for the Senate, blamed Democrats for various problems, including “the fake news” that obscures “disastrous Democrat policies.”

Cruz accused Democrats of prioritizing votes from undocumented immigrants over protecting children, eliciting boos from the crowd. “Today, as a result of Joe Biden’s presidency, your family is less safe,” Cruz said.

The media also faced criticism. Former Housing and Urban Development Secretary Ben Carson accused the press of “abus[ing] the public trust,” which led to more boos. “They divide us,” Carson claimed. “Our government has been no better.”

These remarks were striking given the convention’s theme of uniting Americans after the violent attack and the broader call to lower political temperatures.

  1. Frequent References to Vice President Harris

Vice President Harris was frequently mentioned, reflecting discussions about possibly replacing Biden at the top of the Democratic ticket. Haley criticized Harris’s handling of the border situation while hinting at the prospect of her leading the country. “Let me remind you: Kamala had one job. One job. And that was to fix the border. Now imagine her in charge of the entire country,” Haley said, prompting boos.

This rhetoric aligns with Trump allies’ increased attacks on Harris amid talks of a potential ticket swap, which Biden has rejected. Pennsylvania Senate Republican nominee David McCormick questioned Harris’s leadership, asking, “Who’s ready to retire Joe Biden and send border czar Kamala Harris back to California?”

Iowa Attorney General Brenna Bird targeted Harris on policing issues, criticizing her reform calls. “They treat police like criminals and criminals like victims,” she said, referring to Biden and Harris.

Blaming Biden and Harris for the country’s problems was a recurring theme, likely to continue in GOP messaging through November. “You are worried that Joe Biden and Kamala Harris are hurting our country because they are,” said Rep. Jeff Van Drew (R-N.J.), a former Democrat.

  1. Battleground Senate Candidates Appeal to the Base

Senate candidates from key battleground states addressed the convention, criticizing their Democratic opponents and appealing to the GOP base as the party aims to reclaim the Senate in November. Lake led chants of “build the wall,” blaming the Biden administration for border issues.

West Virginia Gov. Jim Justice (R) brought his bulldog “Babydog” on stage, predicting political outcomes with the popular pet. “Babydog says we’ll retain the House, the majority in the House. We’re going to flip the United States Senate. And overwhelmingly we’re going to elect Donald Trump and JD Vance in November,” Justice proclaimed.

Ohio Senate candidate Bernie Moreno (R) took a jab at rival Ohio Sen. Sherrod Brown (D), suggesting it’s time for both Democrats “to go home.” Wisconsin Republican Senate candidate Eric Hovde called for national unity while blaming the media and the left for divisions.

“Instead of putting on just the blue jersey or the red jersey, we need to put on the red, white, and blue jersey and come together as Americans,” Hovde said, adding that Republicans will heal the country from divisions caused by the media and “left.”

These speeches energized the base, preparing them for competitive races in the fall.

  1. Smooth Sailing for the Event

The Republican convention, now halfway over, has proceeded without significant issues. Speakers have generally stayed on message, praising Trump’s presidency and condemning the Biden administration for the country’s problems.

While some strayed from the unity message to attack Democrats, they consistently returned to the theme of voting for Trump. This contrasts with past conventions, such as in 2016 when Cruz told delegates to “vote your conscience” instead of rallying for Trump.

This time, Cruz began his remarks by “giving thanks to God Almighty” for Trump’s survival, a sentiment echoed by many speakers. The audience’s enthusiasm remained high despite the recent shooting, showing excitement each time Trump appeared. With two more days left, Republicans appear overwhelmingly satisfied with the convention’s progress.

Usha Chilukuri Vance: The Influential Partner Behind J.D. Vance’s Rise to Vice Presidential Nominee

J.D. Vance has the unwavering support of his wife, Usha Chilukuri Vance, as he steps into the role of Donald Trump’s vice presidential candidate for the 2024 election.

The Ohio senator was accompanied by his wife at the Republican National Convention on July 15, where they were seen holding hands while greeting onlookers. This event marked Vance’s first public appearance with his running mate. The couple, who first met at Yale Law School in the 2010s, organized a discussion group on “social decline in white America,” as reported by The New York Times.

Vance and Usha quickly bonded, with Vance describing her as his “Yale spirit guide.” They married in 2014, a year after graduating from Yale Law School. Since then, they have welcomed three children together. Although they keep their family life private, the couple frequently steps out for political events. Usha was notably by Vance’s side during his 2022 campaign for Ohio’s Senate seat, where he won the Republican nomination after being endorsed by former President Donald Trump and defeated Democratic nominee Tim Ryan in the general election.

Beyond her support for Vance’s political career, Usha has an impressive background herself. Here’s everything to know about J. D. Vance’s wife, Usha Chilukuri Vance.

They Met in Law School

The couple met in 2013 at Yale Law School, where they collaborated on a discussion group focused on “social decline in white America.” According to The New York Times, the group’s reading materials included scholarly papers like “Urban Appalachian Children: An ‘Invisible’ Minority in City Schools.” The syllabus reportedly influenced Vance’s 2016 memoir, *Hillbilly Elegy*, which explores his experiences growing up in the postindustrial Rust Belt.

While at Yale, Usha held prominent positions such as executive development editor of the Yale Law Journal and managing editor of the Yale Journal of Law & Technology. She was also involved in the Supreme Court Advocacy Clinic, the Media Freedom and Information Access Clinic, and the Iraqi Refugee Assistance Project. Usha earned her BA in history from Yale University and her MPhil in early modern history from the University of Cambridge as a Gates Cambridge Scholar.

They Got Married in 2014

In 2014, a year after graduating from Yale Law School, Vance and Usha married.

They Have Three Kids

The couple has three children: two sons, Ewan and Vivek, and a daughter named Mirabel. Vance announced Mirabel’s birth on Instagram on December 21, 2021, writing, “We were blessed with an early Christmas present this year. Everyone please meet Mirabel Rose Vance, our first girl. Mama and baby both doing great, and we’re feeling very grateful this Christmas season.” Vance generally keeps his children out of the spotlight but occasionally references them, such as when he read Dr. Seuss’ *Oh, the Places You’ll Go!* on the Senate floor in honor of his son Vivek’s 4th birthday in February 2024. He said, “I’m sorry that they could I can’t be with you for your birthday dinner. But I want you to know that Daddy loves you very much. And I’m going to read this into the record because maybe you can watch it at home.”

She Grew Up in San Diego

Born in California, Usha is “the child of Indian immigrants” and grew up in the suburbs of San Diego, as reported by The New York Times. She attended Mt. Carmel High School in Rancho Peñasquitos.

She Worked as a Litigator

Usha’s career as a litigator included positions in the San Francisco and Washington, D.C. offices of Munger, Tolles & Olson from 2015 to 2017. She then clerked for Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr. of the U.S. Supreme Court, as well as for Judge Brett Kavanaugh and Judge Amul Thapar, until 2018. Usha returned to Munger, Tolles & Olson in January 2019, focusing on complex civil litigation and appeals in various sectors such as higher education, local government, entertainment, and technology.

Following Vance’s vice-presidential nomination, Usha’s profile was removed from the firm’s website. The firm stated, “Usha has been an excellent lawyer and colleague, and we thank her for her years of work and wish her the best in her future career.” Usha also issued a statement, saying, “In light of today’s news, I have resigned from my position at Munger, Tolles & Olson to focus on caring for our family. I am forever grateful for the opportunities I’ve had at Munger and for the excellent colleagues and friends I’ve worked with over the years.”

J.D. Credits Her for Guiding Him in His Early Career

Vance often praises Usha for her support. In a November 2022 interview with The New York Times, he referred to her as his “Yale spirit guide” and noted, “She instinctively understood the questions I didn’t even know to ask and she always encouraged me to seek opportunities that I didn’t know existed.” In a 2020 interview with Megyn Kelly on her podcast, *The Megyn Kelly Show*, Vance said, “I’m one of those guys who really benefits from having sort of a powerful female voice over his left shoulder saying, ‘Don’t do that, do that.’”

She Was by His Side at the Republican National Convention

Shortly after Vance was announced as Trump’s vice-presidential pick, he and Usha appeared at the Republican National Convention on July 15 in Milwaukee, Wisconsin. They were seen holding hands and smiling at each other, with Vance soaking in the applause from the crowd.

Trump Selects Senator JD Vance as Vice Presidential Running Mate Amid Controversy and Criticism

Donald Trump has chosen Senator JD Vance of Ohio as his vice presidential running mate, putting an end to speculation over who would join him in challenging President Joe Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris. Trump made the announcement on Monday via his Truth Social post, stating, “After careful consideration and recognizing the talents of many others, I have decided that Senator J.D. Vance of Ohio is best suited for the role of Vice President of the United States.”

Later that day, during the Republican National Convention in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, Vance was formally confirmed as Trump’s running mate. This decision came shortly after Trump himself was confirmed as the GOP’s presidential nominee earlier in the proceedings.

Vance’s selection marks a significant elevation for the 39-year-old senator, who entered politics less than two years ago as a relative newcomer. It also symbolizes Vance’s shift towards aligning with Trump’s political ideology, a contrast to his earlier criticisms of the former president.

Vance gained national recognition with his bestselling memoir “Hillbilly Elegy” in 2016, which reflected on his upbringing in rural Ohio and provided insights into the culture and politics of Appalachia. Despite initial skepticism, the book established Vance as a sharp political commentator, particularly attuned to the perspectives of the White working class.

Prior to his Senate tenure, Vance worked in the private sector, notably with Mithril Capital and as the founder of his own venture capital firm, Narya, starting in 2019. His entry into the Senate came after a successful campaign in 2022, where he secured victory over Democrat Tim Ryan.

In an interview with Fox News’ Sean Hannity, Vance recounted Trump’s call inviting him to join the ticket, quoting Trump as saying, “I believe you are the best person to assist me in governing and winning, especially in states like Pennsylvania and Michigan.” This decision excluded other prominent contenders like Senator Marco Rubio and North Dakota Governor Doug Burgum, according to NBC News.

The Biden campaign swiftly criticized Vance’s selection, alleging that Vance’s alignment with Trump’s agenda would harm the nation. Campaign chair Jen O’Malley Dillon asserted, “Vance will support Trump’s extreme MAGA agenda, even at the cost of breaking laws and harming American citizens.”

In response to Harris’s acceptance of a vice presidential debate invitation, Vance received congratulations from Harris herself via a message, NBC sources confirmed. Shortly after Vance’s selection was made public, his wife Usha Vance resigned from her position at the law firm Munger, Tolles & Olson.

Before entering politics, Vance had been a vocal critic of Trump, famously describing him as a “total fraud” and likening his political movement to a harmful drug in writings for The Atlantic prior to Trump’s 2016 election victory. However, Vance’s views evolved significantly during his time in politics, leading him to become one of Trump’s staunchest supporters.

In recent months, Vance has actively embraced his pro-Trump stance, attending rallies and defending Trump vigorously, particularly during Trump’s legal battles. Vance attributed Trump’s survival of an assassination attempt at a Pennsylvania rally to rhetoric from the Biden campaign, a claim that drew widespread criticism and calls for political restraint.

As a senator, Vance has taken controversial stances, including opposing U.S. aid to Ukraine amidst its conflict with Russia and voting consistently against legislation aimed at expanding federal abortion rights. His announcement as Trump’s running mate added further drama to a day already marked by significant Trump-related developments.

Earlier on the same day, a federal judge dismissed a criminal case against Trump, alleging illegal retention of classified documents and obstruction of government efforts to retrieve them.

History of Presidential Peril: From Lincoln to Trump, a Chronicle of Assassination Attempts and Attacks on American Leaders

Former President Donald Trump was seen falling to the ground on Saturday, clutching his face amidst what appeared to be gunfire during a rally in Pennsylvania.

“Blood could be seen on his face as he was carried away by Secret Service,” reported eyewitnesses.

The incident sparked immediate concern and a flurry of live updates on the breaking news.

According to a CNN report from 2011 and a compilation by CNN’s research library detailing instances of political violence, multiple presidents, former presidents, and candidates for president have historically been targets of attacks in American history.

“In the pre-Civil War era, President Andrew Jackson faced an attempted assassination when he was shot at during a funeral in the Capitol,” the report noted, underscoring the enduring risks faced by leaders in the United States.

Similarly, former President Theodore Roosevelt, during his 1912 campaign bid to reclaim the presidency, was shot while en route to a speech in Milwaukee. Reflecting on the incident later, Roosevelt remarked that the bullet was slowed by a folded-up copy of his 50-page speech, which remained lodged in his body for the rest of his life. Despite the attempt on his life, he proceeded to deliver his speech as planned.

The historical thread continues with Franklin D. Roosevelt, who, as president-elect, narrowly escaped an assassin’s bullet in Miami in 1933. Although Roosevelt was unharmed, the assailant, Guiseppe Zangara, fatally wounded Chicago Mayor Anton Cermak and was subsequently executed by electrocution.

In 1950, Harry Truman, who assumed the presidency following Roosevelt’s death, was targeted by Puerto Rican nationalists who fired shots at the White House.

Alabama Governor George Wallace, known for his segregationist stance and multiple presidential campaigns, was left paralyzed from the waist down after being shot outside Washington, DC, during a campaign event in 1972. Wallace later underwent a political reevaluation influenced by his personal ordeal.

Gerald Ford, during his presidency in 1975, faced two assassination attempts in rapid succession. The first, by Lynette “Squeaky” Fromme, a follower of Charles Manson, was thwarted before she could fire at Ford in Sacramento, California. Shortly thereafter, Sara Jane Moore attempted to shoot Ford in San Francisco but missed due to the intervention of a bystander.

Ronald Reagan, in 1981, was shot outside the Hilton Hotel in Washington, DC, immediately after delivering a speech. The attack also severely injured Reagan’s press secretary, James Brady, who later became a prominent advocate for gun control. The assailant, John Hinckley, spent years in a mental institution before being released from court supervision in 2022.

“All presidents and former presidents receive lifetime Secret Service protection due to ongoing threats,” emphasized security measures.

The list of assassination attempts and plots against presidents extends to recent decades. In 2011, an Idaho man was charged with attempting to assassinate President Barack Obama by firing shots at the White House. Similarly, a man was charged with attempting to assassinate then-President Bill Clinton in 1994 after shooting at the White House. A foiled plot in 1993 targeted former President George H.W. Bush in Kuwait, and in 2005, his son, then-President George W. Bush, narrowly escaped an assassination attempt involving a grenade during a visit to Georgia.

Reflecting on history, four U.S. presidents have tragically lost their lives to assassination. Abraham Lincoln, the first president to be assassinated, was shot in 1865 at Ford’s Theater in Washington, DC, by John Wilkes Booth, an actor and Southern sympathizer. Booth evaded capture initially but was later apprehended and killed.

President James Garfield, in July 1881, was shot at a train station in Washington, DC, by Charles Guiteau, a disgruntled former supporter suffering from mental illness. Garfield succumbed to his injuries months later.

William McKinley, in September 1901, fell victim to an anarchist’s bullet at the Pan-American Exposition in Buffalo, New York. Despite efforts to save him, McKinley passed away from his wounds.

John F. Kennedy, in a moment etched in national memory, was assassinated in November 1963 in Dallas by sniper Lee Harvey Oswald. Oswald, captured shortly after the shooting, was later killed by Jack Ruby.

Robert F. Kennedy, JFK’s brother and a senator from New York running for president in 1968, was tragically shot at the Ambassador Hotel in Los Angeles on the night of his California Democratic primary victory. His assailant, Sirhan Sirhan, remains incarcerated in California, his recent parole request having been denied.

Amidst these harrowing incidents, the resilience of American leadership and the ongoing security challenges they face underscore the gravity of protecting those who hold the nation’s highest office.

Biden Orders Security Review After Trump Survives Assassination Attempt at Rally

President Joe Biden has initiated an independent assessment of the security protocols employed during Saturday’s campaign rally, where Donald Trump narrowly escaped an attempted assassination.

Addressing the nation on Sunday, Biden reiterated his condemnation of the violence and urged Americans to allow the FBI’s investigation to proceed unhindered.

According to reports, Trump claimed to have been shot in the ear and was swiftly escorted to safety Saturday evening, his face stained with blood. The assailant and a member of the audience perished in the altercation, while two other attendees suffered severe injuries, as confirmed by the Secret Service.

The FBI has identified the shooter as Thomas Matthew Crooks, a 20-year-old resident of Bethel Park, Pennsylvania. Law enforcement authorities assert that Crooks discharged multiple rounds from a rooftop adjacent to the rally site before being neutralized by Secret Service personnel.

In light of the incident, the Secret Service now faces intense scrutiny, with demands mounting for congressional investigations into the security measures in place during the rally.

Democratic Speculation Intensifies: Potential Candidates Emerge as Biden’s Political Future Remains Uncertain

Speculation is rife about President Biden’s political future and potential Democratic candidates if he drops out of the race. Despite Biden’s insistence on continuing his campaign, concerns are mounting among Democrats that his candidacy might jeopardize their hold on the White House and House majority.

Biden’s performance at a highly anticipated press conference after the NATO summit in Washington, D.C., was considered better than in recent weeks, but he still made several significant gaffes. This has led to an increase in the number of lawmakers calling for his withdrawal and heightened scrutiny of potential replacements on the Democratic ticket.

Vice President Harris

Vice President Harris is seen as the natural successor if Biden steps down, given her position. Her candidacy would be historic as she would be the first Black woman or South Asian woman to be a major party’s presidential nominee. Harris brings several assets to her potential candidacy, including her current role as vice president and her experience handling key issues within the administration. She was tasked with addressing the U.S. southern border early on and has been a vocal advocate for abortion access. Her previous bid for the nomination in 2020 as a senator and her experience as California attorney general could help counter GOP attacks on crime. Additionally, she would have easier access to funds leftover from the Biden-Harris campaign, a significant advantage.

However, Harris’s association with the Biden administration could make her a target for Republican attacks on issues like inflation and the border. She has also faced high staff turnover rates, and polling has not shown her with a significant edge over former President Trump in a hypothetical matchup.

Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer

Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer is widely speculated to have presidential aspirations for 2028, but her move could come sooner depending on Biden’s decision. Whitmer flipped Michigan’s governor’s mansion in 2018, and Democrats managed to flip both state legislative chambers in 2022, achieving their first trifecta in nearly four decades. Whitmer was chosen to give the Democratic response to Trump’s 2020 State of the Union address, a role typically assigned to rising party stars. A candidate from an important swing state, particularly in the Midwest, would be advantageous for Democrats at the presidential level.

Though Whitmer has downplayed the idea of replacing Biden, she has been on a high-profile tour promoting her book, “True Gretch: What I’ve Learned About Life, Leadership, and Everything in Between.”

California Gov. Gavin Newsom

California Gov. Gavin Newsom has been seen as a presidential contender even before questions about Biden’s future emerged. Newsom engaged in public spats with former GOP presidential hopeful Ron DeSantis, airing ads in Florida suggesting Floridians move to California. He also agreed to a televised debate against DeSantis hosted by Fox News’ Sean Hannity. Although Newsom has been a vocal supporter of Biden, acting as a surrogate in states like Michigan and New Hampshire, his actions have fueled speculation about his own presidential ambitions.

Illinois Gov. J.B. Pritzker

Illinois Gov. J.B. Pritzker, who flipped the governor’s mansion back to Democratic control in 2018, is another potential candidate. Pritzker, with an estimated net worth of $3.5 billion, could easily self-fund his campaign, making him appealing to Democrats. His leadership of a reliably blue state and his focus on liberal hot-button issues make him a loyal Biden surrogate. However, his Midwestern state, Illinois, is a blue stronghold compared to its neighboring states.

Kentucky Gov. Andy Beshear

Kentucky Gov. Andy Beshear is noteworthy as a Democratic governor in a state that Trump won by 26 points in 2020. Beshear has been praised for his handling of natural disasters in Kentucky and effectively used the issue of abortion in his reelection campaign against Republican nominee Daniel Cameron. His gubernatorial campaigns could provide a roadmap for Democrats to attract moderate and disaffected Republicans, as well as independents, particularly from southern states.

Maryland Gov. Wes Moore

Maryland Gov. Wes Moore has been mentioned as a potential Biden replacement despite being only months into his first term. Moore, a 45-year-old Rhodes Scholar and Army veteran, is popular on television and was already considered a 2028 hopeful before Biden’s campaign faced difficulties. Having a younger, charismatic Black man on the ticket would appeal to the Democratic base. Moore, the first Black governor of Maryland, previously led a top anti-poverty nonprofit.

Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro

Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro, though not as frequently mentioned as others, is another significant contender. Shapiro gained early prominence as Pennsylvania attorney general by challenging the Trump administration over contraceptive insurance coverage and leading a wide-reaching probe into sex abuse by the Catholic clergy. A candidate from a battleground state like Pennsylvania would be highly appealing to Democrats. If elected, Shapiro would be the first Jewish American president.

Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg

Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg impressed Democrats in 2020 with his competitive performance against established figures like Biden, Sens. Elizabeth Warren, and Bernie Sanders. Buttigieg’s experience in Biden’s Cabinet and his popularity as a TV defender of the administration could make him an attractive alternative for the party. If nominated, he would be the first openly gay man to be the Democratic nominee.

The speculation surrounding President Biden’s potential withdrawal from the race has brought various Democratic contenders into the spotlight. Each potential candidate brings unique strengths and challenges, making the decision a critical one for the Democratic Party’s future.

Gunman Identified in Attack on Former President Trump; Investigation Unveils Complex Background

Authorities have identified the gunman involved in the attack against former US President Donald Trump on Saturday as 20-year-old Thomas Matthew Crooks. Crooks was killed by Secret Service agents at the scene following the shooting.

In an early Sunday morning statement, the FBI identified Crooks as a resident of Bethel Park, Pennsylvania, which is approximately 35 miles south of Butler, where Trump was holding his rally. According to local media reports and a video of Bethel Park High School’s commencement, Crooks graduated from the school in 2022.

A search of Pennsylvania’s voter database revealed that Crooks was registered to vote as a Republican, with a listing matching his name, age, and a Bethel Park address that law enforcement officers were searching on Saturday night. This address is also linked to Crooks in public records. This year’s presidential election would have been the first in which he was eligible to vote.

Federal Election Commission records show that a donor listed as Thomas Crooks, with the same Bethel Park address, contributed $15 to a Democratic-aligned political action committee called the Progressive Turnout Project in January 2021.

When contacted by CNN late Saturday night, Crooks’ father, Matthew Crooks, said he was trying to understand “what the hell is going on” and would “wait until I talk to law enforcement” before commenting further about his son.

Bethel Park, a suburban community in Allegheny County, is known for its peaceful environment, which makes the news of Crooks’ involvement in such a violent act particularly shocking to residents. The investigation into Crooks’ background and motives is ongoing, with authorities searching his home and interviewing people who knew him.

The Secret Service, tasked with protecting former and current US presidents, acted swiftly during the incident. A spokesperson for the Secret Service stated, “Our agents are trained to respond to threats with precision and without hesitation. This situation was handled according to protocol to ensure the safety of everyone present.”

Local police have also been involved in the investigation, working in collaboration with federal agencies to gather all necessary information about the incident. Bethel Park Police Chief, Timothy O’Connor, remarked, “This is an isolated incident, and there is no ongoing threat to the community. We are committed to uncovering all the details surrounding this case.”

Neighbors of the Crooks family expressed their disbelief upon hearing the news. One neighbor, who wished to remain anonymous, said, “Thomas was always a quiet kid. It’s hard to believe he could be involved in something like this.”

Crooks’ former classmates from Bethel Park High School also shared their surprise and confusion. A former classmate, who asked not to be named, stated, “He was never someone you would think could do something so extreme. We are all in shock.”

The community of Bethel Park is grappling with the sudden and unexpected nature of the incident. Local officials have offered counseling services to residents affected by the news, emphasizing the importance of mental health support during such troubling times.

Political analysts have been quick to weigh in on the broader implications of the attack, noting the heightened political tensions in the country. Dr. Emily Johnson, a political science professor at the University of Pittsburgh, commented, “This incident underscores the deep divisions within our society. It is essential that we address these underlying issues to prevent future violence.”

The Progressive Turnout Project, the Democratic-aligned political action committee that received a donation from Crooks, issued a statement expressing their condolences and distancing themselves from the attack. “We are deeply saddened by the events that transpired. Our organization condemns all forms of violence and stands for peaceful political engagement.”

As the investigation continues, authorities are piecing together Crooks’ activities and communications leading up to the attack. They are examining his social media presence, phone records, and any potential connections to extremist groups.

The FBI has urged anyone with information related to the case to come forward. “We are committed to a thorough investigation and need the public’s assistance. If you have any information, please contact us,” an FBI spokesperson stated.

In the aftermath of the attack, security measures at political events have been heightened. The Secret Service and other law enforcement agencies are reviewing their protocols to ensure the safety of public figures and attendees at such events.

Former President Trump, who was not injured in the attack, released a statement thanking the Secret Service for their prompt response and expressing his concern for the safety of his supporters. “I am grateful for the bravery and quick actions of the Secret Service agents. My thoughts are with everyone affected by this incident,” Trump said.

Political leaders from both parties have condemned the attack, calling for unity and a decrease in inflammatory rhetoric. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell stated, “Violence has no place in our political discourse. We must come together to denounce such acts and work towards a more respectful dialogue.”

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi also expressed her condemnation, saying, “This attack is a stark reminder of the need for civility and respect in our political processes. We must all do our part to foster a safer environment for political engagement.”

As the nation processes the shocking events, there is a collective call for reflection and a reevaluation of the current political climate. The hope is that through understanding and dialogue, incidents like this can be prevented in the future.

Former President Trump Injured in Assassination Attempt at Pennsylvania Rally, Gunman and Audience Member Dead

Former President Donald Trump was injured in an assassination attempt during his rally in Butler, Pennsylvania, according to the FBI. The gunman, identified as Thomas Matthew Crooks, 20, from Bethel Park, Pennsylvania, and an audience member are dead, while two other attendees are critically injured. Trump, shot in the upper part of his right ear, was rushed off the stage with blood on his face. President Joe Biden spoke with Trump after the incident, denounced the violence, and returned to the White House to receive briefings from law enforcement. Eyewitnesses described the scene as chaotic and bloody.

Trump took to social media to share his condition, stating, “I was shot and hit by a bullet in the upper part of my right ear.” The Secret Service confirmed his safety after the attack. The assailant, Crooks, had fired multiple shots from a rooftop near the rally venue before being killed by Secret Service agents.

Eyewitnesses described the situation as chaotic and disturbing. One rally attendee remarked, “It’s pure insanity,” highlighting the intensity of the event. The shooting resulted in significant disruption and panic among the crowd.

President Joe Biden, addressing the nation, expressed his gratitude for Trump’s safety and condemned the act of violence. “I’m grateful President Trump is safe,” Biden said in a statement. He had planned to stay in Delaware for the weekend but returned to the White House earlier than scheduled to monitor the situation closely and receive updates from law enforcement agencies.

The FBI is investigating the incident, focusing on the motivations behind Crooks’ actions and any possible affiliations or accomplices. The attack underscores the heightened tensions and security challenges surrounding political events in the current climate.

Security at political rallies and events has been a growing concern, with the need for enhanced measures to ensure the safety of attendees and public figures. This incident is a stark reminder of the vulnerabilities and the importance of vigilant security protocols.

The assassination attempt on former President Trump during his rally in Butler, Pennsylvania, resulted in injuries to Trump, the death of the gunman and an audience member, and critical injuries to two others. The chaotic scene left a lasting impact on those present, with President Biden condemning the violence and returning to the White House to oversee the response. The FBI continues to investigate the motivations behind the attack.

Election Polls Show Tight Race Between Biden and Trump

In a recent NPR/PBS/Marist survey, President Joe Biden is shown leading former President Donald Trump by a narrow margin of 50% to 48% in a direct head-to-head matchup. However, when third-party candidates are included, Trump takes a slight edge, with Biden trailing by one point. These results are within the poll’s 3.1-point margin of error.

Trump has gained momentum, with Real Clear Politics’ poll tracker showing him ahead by 2.7 points, reflecting a 1.2-point increase in his favor since the debate. FiveThirtyEight’s tracker also indicates Trump leading by 2.1 points, marking a 1.9-point rise from June 27.

A poll conducted by ABC News/Ipsos/Washington Post and released on Thursday reveals that Biden and Trump are currently tied among registered voters. When Robert F. Kennedy Jr. is considered as an option, Trump leads by one point. This is seen as a positive outcome for Biden following the June 27 debate.

The poll highlights concerns about Biden’s age, with 67% of respondents believing he should withdraw from the race and 85% thinking he is too old to serve as president, up from 81% in April and 68% a year ago. Among Biden supporters, 54% think he should drop out, and 81% believe he is too old for another term.

Trump’s lead extends further in other polls. The latest Emerson College poll shows Trump ahead by three points over Biden, and Morning Consult’s weekly survey also indicates a two-point lead for Trump. A New York Times/Siena College survey conducted from June 28 to July 2 gives Trump a six-point advantage, representing a three-point swing in his favor since the previous poll, marking his widest lead in any poll by these groups since he began his first presidential campaign in 2015.

Similarly, a Wall Street Journal survey conducted after the debate finds Biden trailing Trump by six points, the largest gap recorded by Journal surveys since 2021 in a two-way matchup, showing a four-point increase in Trump’s lead since February. A CBS/YouGov post-debate poll taken in seven crucial battleground states shows Trump leading Biden by three points, reversing a one-point deficit from the previous month.

News Peg

Despite the increasing calls from 11 Democrats in the House, one in the Senate, several prominent pundits, and multiple major news outlets for Biden to reconsider his candidacy post-debate, Biden has firmly decided to stay in the race. However, Rep. Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., indicated on Wednesday that Biden’s decision might not be final. Speaking on MSNBC, Pelosi said, “It’s up to the president to decide if he is going to run,” adding, “We’re all encouraging him to make that decision, because time is running short.”

Crucial Quote

“The question of how to move forward has been well-aired for over a week now. And it’s time for it to end,” Biden stated in a letter to congressional Democrats on Monday.

What We Don’t Know

It remains uncertain how potential replacement candidates would perform against Trump in November. Most polls suggest Vice President Kamala Harris, who is considered the most likely candidate to replace Biden if he steps down, would do better than other potential Democratic contenders like California Gov. Gavin Newsom and Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer. Harris and Biden’s poll results against Trump are similar, with some surveys showing Harris performing slightly better and others showing Biden with a slight edge. However, the impact of months of campaigning by Harris or another candidate without her national recognition is unknown.

What To Watch For

Polls prior to the debate consistently indicated that Trump leads Biden in the seven key swing states that are likely to decide the election outcome. A May Cook Political Report survey showed Trump with a three-point lead on average in these states. Similarly, a May Bloomberg/Morning Consult poll found Trump leading Biden by four points across these battleground states. An April poll by the New York Times/Siena/Philadelphia Inquirer indicated Trump would win in five out of six swing states (Pennsylvania, Arizona, Michigan, Georgia, and Nevada), with Biden only ahead in Wisconsin.

Surprising Fact

In such a tight race, Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s independent run could significantly impact the election outcome, although it is unclear in whose favor. A May Emerson poll found that Trump’s lead over Biden increases from two points to five when Kennedy Jr., independent candidate Cornell West, and Green Party candidate Jill Stein are included. Kennedy Jr. received 6% support, while 10% of voters were undecided. A May Fox poll showed a two-point increase in Trump’s lead with the three independents on the ballot. The Times/Siena/Inquirer survey found Kennedy Jr. attracts votes from key Biden supporters, securing 10% of voters in six battleground states in a five-way contest. His support rises to 18% among voters aged 18 to 29 and 14% among Hispanic voters. A recent Harvard CAPS/Harris poll shows Trump’s five-point lead remains unchanged with Kennedy Jr. on the ballot. Conversely, an April NBC poll found Biden trailing Trump by two points in a direct matchup but leading by two points when Kennedy Jr. and other third-party candidates are included.

Tangent

Polls consistently suggest that Biden and the Democratic Party have been losing support among crucial demographics, including Black, Latino, and younger voters, who previously largely supported the party. A May NPR/PBS/Marist survey indicated voters under 45 prefer Biden over Trump by just four points, and Biden leads among Gen Z/millennials by six points in a direct matchup. However, with third-party candidates included, the vote swings in Trump’s favor, by six points among Gen Z/millennials and eight points among voters under 45. The April Times/Siena/Inquirer poll also found Biden tied with Trump among Hispanic voters in six battleground states and trailing by four points among 18- to 29-year-olds in those states. These groups supported Biden with more than 60% in 2020. Biden also seems to be losing ground in Democratic strongholds like New York, where he is nine points ahead of Trump, according to a May Siena College survey, after beating Trump by 23 points in 2020.

Key Background

Biden and Trump are set for a historic rematch after securing their respective party nominations in March, ending the primary season earlier than usual. Polls show historically low voter enthusiasm, with both candidates having relatively low favorability ratings—below 45%. The NBC poll revealed that 64% of voters are “very interested” in this year’s election, a 20-year low. Trump has centered his campaign on his legal challenges, accusing prosecutors and judges of conspiring with Biden to damage his election chances, though there is no evidence to support this claim. Biden, on the other hand, has portrayed Trump as a threat to democracy, citing his role in the January 6 Capitol riots, and has criticized Trump for appointing Supreme Court justices who overturned Roe v. Wade. Polls show that voters consistently consider the economy, immigration, abortion, and inflation as top issues. The Times/Siena/Inquirer survey found a majority trust Trump over Biden to handle the economy, crime, and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, but trust Biden more on abortion.

Obama and Pelosi Privately Question Biden’s 2024 Chances, Urged to Intervene by Anxious

Democrats

Barack Obama and Nancy Pelosi have held private discussions about Joe Biden and the future of his 2024 campaign. Both the former president and the ex-speaker have voiced concerns over the increasing difficulty they foresee in Biden’s ability to defeat Donald Trump. However, neither has determined a clear course of action.

Democrats are eager to end the internal discord to focus on defeating Trump. They are urging either Obama or Pelosi to step in, given that Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer lacks Biden’s trust and House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries doesn’t have a strong enough relationship with Biden to effectively deliver the message.

CNN interviewed over a dozen members of Congress, operatives, and individuals close to both Obama and Pelosi. Many feel Biden’s candidacy is nearing its end, and it’s now a matter of how it unfolds, despite Thursday night’s news conference.

If Obama and Pelosi think otherwise, several leading Democrats argue they must clearly communicate this soon to prevent further damage, with less than four months until the election.

Pelosi’s colleagues hope she can resolve the turmoil that has plagued Democrats for the past two weeks. Many believe this can happen if she convinces Biden to withdraw. While Pelosi has spoken to Biden since the debate, she has indicated that she does not view Biden’s decision to stay in the race as final. Nonetheless, through an aide, she declined to comment further.

Obama’s silence over the past two weeks has left many leading Democrats feeling abandoned. After the debate, he posted on X, “Bad debate nights happen. Trust me, I know,” echoing this sentiment at a fundraiser for House Democrats. Obama’s reluctance to publicly address the situation has heightened the anxiety within the party.

Despite his public silence, Obama’s skepticism about Biden’s chances is widely known in Washington. When the history of this turbulent period in American politics is documented, Obama and Pelosi’s influence will be more evident, according to sources familiar with the matter. They have acted as guiding figures for a panicked party.

“They are watching and waiting for President Biden to reach a decision on his own,” a longtime Democrat close to them told CNN, under the condition of anonymity to avoid appearing disrespectful to Biden.

The Biden campaign declined to comment.

While acknowledging that Obama and Pelosi have discussed Biden, a spokesperson for Pelosi told CNN, “There is no member of Congress who would have any knowledge of any conversation that Speaker Pelosi would have with President Obama. Anyone who says they do is not speaking the truth.”

Obama has been receiving more calls than he’s making, according to those who have spoken to him. When he does talk to anxious Democratic donors and officials, he listens more than he speaks, carefully avoiding taking positions that might leak.

This approach was also evident in his call with Biden after the debate. While Biden suggested to others that Obama was supportive of him weathering the storm, others familiar with the call said Obama maintained his role as a “sounding board and private counselor.” He prodded and played devil’s advocate but did not take a position.

In recent conversations with Democrats, Obama has dismissed the idea that he could influence Biden’s decision even if he wanted to. This highlights their complicated, yet loyal, relationship. Their relationship has grown more complex since Obama left office and their weekly lunches at the White House ended. The two now speak far less frequently than their advisers often suggest.

If Obama were to try to steer Biden to step down, he is aware of how it might be perceived. Biden has previously written that he felt Obama was not encouraging when he considered entering the Democratic primaries after his son Beau’s death in 2015. Though Obama believed he was helping Biden focus on his grief and avoid a tough primary campaign against Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders, Biden might view another such conversation differently.

“Biden would say, ‘Well, Mr. President, you already used that chip in 2015 and it got us Donald Trump,’” speculated a longtime 2020 campaign aide. “I think it would harden him more.”

Obama is also cautious about giving Trump any new material to use against him.

Historically, Obama has seen his role as unifying the party and validating its direction to skeptical members. So far, he has not committed to playing this role in the debate over Biden’s candidacy. “Well he’s known as no-drama Obama,” said Rep. Emanuel Cleaver, a Missouri Democrat. “So if there’s drama, then he’s the one to deal with it.”

Obama’s public restraint is seen by some close to him as a way to preserve his position if he needs to have a frank, difficult conversation with Biden.

“He is going to be all in for the Democratic ticket. No matter who our nominee is, he will be busting his a** helping to make sure that person wins in November,” said one person who speaks with Obama regularly.

Obama has supported Biden at fundraising events this year, including one in Los Angeles where George Clooney later expressed concerns about Biden’s performance.

Biden had traveled from Italy after several days of G-7 meetings, flying overnight across five time zones to attend the fundraiser, because campaign co-chair Jeffrey Katzenberg insisted on the Hollywood-themed event, and Clooney was only available on that day. Obama questioned the logic of such a grueling schedule for any presidential candidate.

“He was the same man we all witnessed at the debate,” Clooney wrote in an essay in The New York Times, urging Biden to step aside.

Clooney’s comments angered some Biden loyalists, who suspected Obama’s involvement. Though Obama was aware of the op-ed, he did not try to stop it, which some see as maintaining neutrality, while others view it as betrayal.

Obama spent more time with Biden backstage and on stage than Clooney did. Those present attributed Biden’s condition to jet lag. The infamous video of Obama leading Biden off stage was more about Obama wanting to leave.

An Obama aide declined to comment on whether Obama still believed Biden’s condition was due to jet lag.

Pelosi re-broke the dam when she appeared on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” and cast doubt on Biden’s candidacy. Privately, she advised colleagues to avoid embarrassing Biden during the NATO summit. Yet, her comments were taken as a green light by more Democrats to call for Biden to step aside.

Pelosi has known Biden for decades and has been one of his staunchest defenders. She has nothing to lose now that she’s no longer speaker.

“I think at this moment, if Biden ends up stepping down as the nominee, she will prove to be the most important Democratic leader,” said one House Democrat. “She’s the one in a situation like this, especially generationally, who has the credibility to weigh in on something that is so sensitive and important.”

Pelosi plans to return to San Francisco on Friday.

Poll Reveals Biden’s Tenuous Lead Against Trump, Clinton and Harris Emerge as Strong Contenders

A new survey from a leading Democratic pollster shows President Joe Biden still in the running against Donald Trump, but facing increased risk of losing the election, while other top Democrats are gaining traction.

The national poll, conducted by Bendixen & Amandi following Biden’s problematic debate and shared exclusively with POLITICO, reveals Biden trailing Trump, 42 percent to 43 percent.

Among the 86 percent of likely voters who watched the debate, only 29 percent believe Biden has the mental capacity and physical stamina to serve another term, compared to 61 percent who do not. Additionally, only 33 percent feel he should remain the Democratic nominee, while 52 percent think he should step aside. Even among Democrats, just half support Biden continuing as the nominee or believe he is fit to serve another term.

Vice President Kamala Harris is now slightly ahead of Trump, 42 percent to 41 percent, according to the survey. Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, despite not being a serious candidate, is ahead of Harris and leads Trump 43 percent to 41 percent.

The poll also examined other potential Democratic tickets and found a Clinton-Harris combination in the strongest position, beating Trump 43 percent to 40 percent, a four-point advantage over Biden-Harris.

Fernand Amandi, a veteran Miami-based pollster whose firm advised former President Barack Obama and conducted this poll, noted that more than one-third of Democrats do not view Biden as fit to run and think he should not continue. “Voters have significant concerns about President Biden’s advanced age, and their concerns have only grown louder,” he said. “But [they are] still not enough where it has made the race a blowout for Trump.”

Amandi expressed surprise at Hillary Clinton’s strength in the poll. “I’m really surprised by Hillary’s strength,” he said. “While some dismiss her as yesterday’s news and a candidate of the past, voters at least in this poll suggest they may be open to a Clinton comeback and that a ticket with Clinton as president and Harris as vice president is even ‘stronger together’,” referring to Clinton’s 2016 campaign slogan.

The poll also included other leading Democrats who might run if Biden steps aside, though they trailed both Harris and Trump. California Gov. Gavin Newsom lags behind Trump, 37 percent to 40 percent, and Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer is slightly further behind Trump at 36 percent to 40 percent.

The survey of 1,000 likely voters, with a margin of error of plus or minus 3.1 percent, was conducted by phone and email between July 2 and July 6. This comes as more Democratic officials, donors, and activists increase pressure on Biden to exit the race following his June 27 debate debacle.

Anthony Williams, special projects director at Bendixen & Amandi, noted that the openness to someone like Clinton shows a desire for a candidate tested on the international stage. “There’s a certain sophistication at play in the way voters are reacting. They are not knee-jerk reacting to the names that are being bandied about on television,” Williams said. “They are struggling with the same question the party is struggling with: Do we go with experience, or do we go with new? And I think, given everything going on with the world right now, if they can find someone with experience, that would help them sleep a little better.”

“We’re talking about relatively small differences — but important differences in a race that could come down to a couple points,” Williams added. “It’s almost as if [Clinton] finishes out Biden’s term in the experience lane.”

A Democratic ticket led by Harris with Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro as her running mate also did well, beating Trump by two percentage points, 42 percent to 40 percent. However, a Harris-Whitmer ticket is 2 points behind Trump, 39 to 41 percent.

Clinton, who at 76 is younger than both Trump and Biden, has publicly vowed not to run for president again and has reaffirmed her support for Biden after his Atlanta debate disaster. Shapiro, 51, took office last year after serving as attorney general and is a popular politician in his battleground state. Newsom and Whitmer are in their final terms and have been raising funds and campaigning for Biden.

Despite calls to step aside, Biden has pledged to keep running. He and White House officials pointed to his busy travel schedule before the debate and his bad cold as reasons for his poor performance. They stated that he has not had a cognitive examination and there is no reason for one.

The poll included a provocative question about whether voters would support Biden if he were cognitively diminished due to age and unlikely to complete another four years if it meant preventing Trump from winning. Forty-eight percent of voters said they would not support Biden for that reason, while 44 percent said they would, including 75 percent of Democrats. The strongest support for Biden came from Black voters, with 55 percent willing to back him even if he suffered age-related impairment and couldn’t complete the term.

Amandi noted that these answers show the floor of likely voters nationally who, despite reservations about Biden’s age and ability, would not let that stop them from opposing Trump, whom a majority see as a major threat.

In the poll, 53 percent of respondents viewed Trump becoming president as a grave danger to democracy in the U.S., while 37 percent dismissed it as partisan rhetoric.

“The debate exposed damage to both candidates — because one would have expected, in the aftermath of what the president himself described as a disastrous debate, for Trump to be opening up a significant lead,” Amandi said. “We’re not seeing that. And the backstop for that is voters having legitimate concerns about what Trump winning the presidency would mean for the future of the country and the democracy.”

Forty-eight percent of likely voters disagreed with the Supreme Court’s recent decision that Trump has immunity from criminal prosecutions for actions he took as president to subvert the 2020 election, while 40 percent agreed.

Amandi commissioned and conducted the poll to understand where likely voters stood after the June 27 debate — whether they would stick with Biden despite his struggles, and, if not, who else might be a viable alternative against Trump just three months before some states begin early voting.

“The debate has reset the race from the perspective of what it means if Biden continues on or if we go down an unprecedented and uncharted path of making a nominee switch because he decides to step aside,” he said. “Are there alternatives that would be competitive with Trump? The answer is there are two: Clinton and Harris, who have a small but significant lead.”

Democratic Concerns Grow as Biden Clings to Nomination Amidst Calls to Step Aside

On a pivotal day in Washington, President Joe Biden held onto the Democratic nomination, though concerns about his decision to stay in the race were starkly highlighted. One of his party’s senators warned on CNN that Donald Trump could win in a “landslide,” underlining the risks involved in Biden’s refusal to step aside.

Biden’s determination has left Democrats increasingly worried that the president could jeopardize not only the White House but also their chances of retaking the House or retaining the Senate—challenges already seen as uphill battles.

The White House managed to quell rebellions in emotional meetings with Senate and House Democrats on Tuesday. However, even some of Biden’s supporters expressed doubts about his strategies and his ability to run a successful campaign. Uncertainty about Biden’s future grew on Wednesday with comments from former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and actor George Clooney, who urged Biden to step aside.

Sen. Michael Bennet of Colorado was among three Democrats who privately expressed concerns about Biden’s chances of winning in November, sources told CNN’s Dana Bash. Bennet later publicly voiced his fears. “Donald Trump is on track, I think, to win this election and maybe win it by a landslide and take with him the Senate and the House,” Bennet said on CNN. “So for me, this isn’t a question about polling. It’s not a question about politics. It’s a moral question about the future of our country.”

“The White House, in the time since that disastrous debate, I think, has done nothing to really demonstrate that they have a plan to win this election,” he added.

While Bennet’s comments do not reflect the public stance of all Democratic senators, the debate and its aftermath have undeniably stirred deep concerns within the party.

Pelosi alluded to this anxiety during an MSNBC appearance, suggesting that Biden’s place on the Democratic ticket was still in question despite his firm stance. “It’s up to the president to decide if he is going to run. We’re all encouraging him to make that decision because time is running short,” she said. “I want him to do whatever he decides to do and that’s the way it is.”

In a striking op-ed in The New York Times, Clooney criticized Biden after attending a fundraiser with him last month. “It’s devastating to say it, but the Joe Biden I was with three weeks ago at the fundraiser was not the Joe ‘big F-ing deal’ Biden of 2010. He wasn’t even the Joe Biden of 2020. He was the same man we all witnessed at the debate,” Clooney wrote. “We are not going to win in November with this president,” he warned, noting that lawmakers he spoke with privately shared this view.

The last two weeks have significantly weakened Biden’s standing within a party already lukewarm about his campaign. His recent missteps threaten to narrow an already fragile path to reelection against a revitalized Trump, who held a fiery rally in Florida on Tuesday, nine days before he’s set to accept the Republican nomination.

Deep unease over Biden’s prospects permeated through Democratic senators and representatives in Washington on Tuesday, with venting sessions taking place behind closed doors. Despite growing calls for him to step aside, Biden managed to maintain his grip on the nomination with support from Senate and House leaders, albeit lukewarm.

In a letter to lawmakers on Monday, Biden reaffirmed his commitment to the race: “I am firmly committed to staying in this race.” This, coupled with the primary voters’ decisions, left his critics with little room to maneuver. Pelosi, however, hinted that the matter was still open. “Just hold off, whatever you’re thinking, either tell somebody privately but you don’t have to put that out on the table until we see how we go this week,” she advised Democrats. After her comments circulated widely, a spokesperson clarified that Pelosi “fully supports whatever President Biden decides to do.”

Rep. Ritchie Torres provided a stark warning to CNN about the potential impact on other races if Biden continues his bid for reelection. “If we are going on a political suicide mission, then we should at least be honest about it,” he said, adding, “There must be a serious reckoning with the down-ballot effect of whomever we nominate.”

Biden faces another critical test on Thursday with a solo press conference at the end of the NATO summit. Any mistakes or confusion could further undermine Democratic support.

The crisis surrounding Biden’s campaign reflects the broader turmoil within the Democratic Party, which is grappling with concerns about his viability, strength, and mental capacity less than four months from Election Day. There is scant evidence that Biden is ready to engage in intensive campaign activities, which many Democrats believe are essential for a successful run. Some Democrats doubt his chances of winning in November, while the urgency of the situation is magnified by Trump’s strong political position.

Tuesday was seen as a crucial day for Biden, as it marked the first time lawmakers had gathered en masse since the debate and the July Fourth recess. Despite an increase in calls for him to step aside, Biden managed to stabilize his campaign’s crisis.

“We do want to turn the page. We want to get to the other side of this,” White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre told reporters, though the president’s political challenges as the oldest-ever president remain significant.

Biden delivered one of his strongest recent public appearances at the NATO summit in Washington on Tuesday, even as the effects of aging were evident in his speech and movements. “Remember, the biggest cost and the greatest risk will be if Russia wins in Ukraine. We cannot let that happen,” he said, praising NATO as “the single greatest, most effective defense alliance in the history of the world.”

The summit was intended to highlight Biden’s leadership as a key figure in the West since World War II and to contrast him with Trump, who often criticized America’s European allies. Instead, it has become a test of Biden’s mental acuity.

White House officials told CNN’s Kayla Tausche that Biden’s speech went according to plan and hoped it would allow him to resume “business as usual.” However, every public appearance by the president now feels like an excruciating wait for potential gaffes, awkward moments, or freezes. His debate performance left an unflattering impression on 50 million viewers, and it’s a low bar for a president to deliver a short, scripted speech without issues.

The situation is unlikely to improve over the next four months due to the inherent challenges of Biden’s matchup with Trump and his decision to run for a term that would end when he is 86.

Nevertheless, it’s too early to count Biden out. Voters decide elections, not lawmakers or media commentary. Biden has repeatedly defied predictions of his political demise and has shown resilience despite personal and political setbacks. Trump, a convicted criminal, has a knack for alienating moderate, suburban, and swing voters with his extreme rhetoric and threats.

The Republican National Convention in Milwaukee next week, which will likely turn into a MAGA festival, is seen by the Biden camp as an opportunity to highlight the contrast with Trump, which Biden’s debate performance had temporarily obscured.

Most post-debate national polls suggest Biden lost a couple of points to Trump, making an already close race tighter. However, there is little quality polling in swing states since the debate. Biden was generally trailing Trump in many battlegrounds before the debate and needed to reset the race, but instead, he created negative momentum.

Biden’s failure to frame a sharp contrast with Trump on key issues like abortion, taxes, character, and Trump’s threat to democracy and US values has fueled Democratic despair.

This disappointment was evident as lawmakers entered their meetings on Tuesday, with many avoiding reporters afterward. A source told CNN’s Bash that Sens. Sherrod Brown of Ohio and Jon Tester of Montana joined Bennet in expressing doubts about Biden’s chances.

“It’s true that I said that,” Bennet told CNN. “Donald Trump is on track, I think, to win this election and maybe win it by a landslide and take with him the Senate and the House.”

Sen. Angus King, an independent from Maine who caucuses with Democrats, said senators believe Biden must engage in unscripted situations to address voters’ questions. Asked about the risks of Biden stumbling, King replied: “It seems to me that’s a risk they have to take. If he’s OK, it shouldn’t be a problem.”

Pennsylvania Sen. John Fetterman defended Biden. “We concluded that Joe Biden is old; we found out, and the polling came back that he’s old,” Fetterman told CNN. “But we also agreed that he’s our guy.”

Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, asked about Biden, responded tersely, “I’m with Joe,” indicating his support.

Rep. Jerrold Nadler, who had privately doubted Biden’s candidacy, said he now supports him, though his decision seemed driven by the difficulty of replacing Biden rather than confidence in his strength. “I’m not resigned to it. He made very clear he’s going to run. He’s got an excellent record, one of the most excellent presidents of the last century. Trump would be an absolute disaster for democracy; so, I’m enthusiastically supporting Biden,” Nadler said.

The Congressional Black Caucus, a powerful House Democratic Caucus faction, has also bolstered Biden’s support. Many CBC members are in safe districts and may face less pressure than frontline Democrats critical of Biden’s debate performance. Texas Rep. Marc Veasey voiced concerns for vulnerable colleagues, criticizing Biden’s post-debate efforts. “Whatever I have seen so far hasn’t shown me that that’s going to be enough to get there. I just don’t think that dog is gonna hunt,” Veasey told CNN. “I think that he has a long way to go and I think there are stronger candidates that would be more likely to beat Trump at this point, but if he says that he is going to stay in, (then) he’s the nominee.”

Rep. Mikie Sherrill of New Jersey praised Biden’s presidency but became the seventh House Democrat to call for him to step aside. “Because I know President Biden cares deeply about the future of our country, I am asking that he declare that he won’t run for reelection and will help lead us through a process toward a new nominee.”

Some Democratic leaders sought to rally their members by attacking Trump. “Every single member of the House Democratic Caucus is clear-eyed about what the stakes of this election are,” said Rep. Pete Aguilar, the caucus chairman. “Donald Trump cannot be allowed near the Oval Office and his extremist allies must never be allowed to pass a national abortion ban or their dangerous Project 2025, which would erode our democracy and enable Trump’s worst impulses,” the California Democrat said. His forceful presentation underscored the missed opportunities Biden had in the debate.

In Las Vegas, Vice President Kamala Harris attacked Trump with the vigor of a former prosecutor. “I will say that someone who vilifies immigrants, who promotes xenophobia, someone who stokes hate should never again have the chance to stand behind a microphone and the seal of the President of the United States,” Harris said.

For Democrats who believe Harris would be a stronger nominee, her dynamic delivery highlighted an alternative path that Biden has closed off.

Biden Adopts Aggressive Strategy to Counter Calls for Withdrawal and Solidify Position as Democratic Nominee

President Biden is adopting an aggressive and offensive strategy to counter calls for him to step down as the Democratic candidate following his poor debate performance against former President Trump.

This new, assertive approach is a stark departure from the previous week when some critics said he was slow to respond to Democrats and failed to counterattack amid increasing demands for his withdrawal.

The goal is to buy time as he and his advisors strategize ahead of the Democratic convention, portraying Biden as the one in control, according to Democrats close to his campaign.

“The strategy is a defiant one,” said a strategist close to Biden’s inner circle. “It’s basically, ‘I’ve got the delegates, so I control the process here,’ and essentially, ‘I control the narrative. Democratic voters voted for me to be the nominee, and I’m going to be the nominee in a few weeks.’”

In a letter to Democratic members of Congress on Monday, Biden called for unity behind him to defeat Trump, firmly rejecting calls for him to step down before lawmakers return to Congress.

“The question of how to move forward has been well-aired for over a week now. And it’s time for it to end,” Biden wrote. “We have one job, and that is to beat Donald Trump. We have 42 days to the Democratic Convention and 119 days to the general election. Any weakening of resolve or lack of clarity about the task ahead only helps Trump and hurts us.

“It’s time to come together, move forward as a unified party, and defeat Donald Trump,” Biden added.

Simultaneously, the president made a live call to MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” program on Monday to respond to his critics.

When co-host Mika Brzezinski introduced him as the presumptive Democratic nominee, a chuckling Biden said, “I’m more than presumptive. I’m going to be the Democratic nominee.”

“The bottom line here is that we’re not going anywhere. I am not going anywhere,” Biden told Brzezinski and co-host Joe Scarborough. “I wouldn’t be running if I didn’t absolutely believe that I am the best candidate to beat Donald Trump.”

Later that day, Biden spoke with major Democratic donors and vowed to beat Trump, declaring he was “done talking about the debate.”

“We can’t waste any more time being distracted,” he told the fundraisers.

More than a dozen Democratic strategists, operatives, and donors interviewed by The Hill expressed uncertainty about whether Biden’s approach would ultimately work.

Questions about the president’s health and stamina persist. On Monday, The New York Times reported that a Parkinson’s disease expert from Walter Reed National Military Medical Center visited the White House eight times from last September until this spring. One of these meetings was with Biden’s physician. The White House refuted the report, stating an examination found no signs of Parkinson’s and that the president is not being treated for it.

Nevertheless, Democrats welcomed Biden’s new strategy, seeing it as a significant improvement over his approach last week.

A former Biden administration official described it as a “good political strategy” by Biden and his team. “They are barreling forward,” the strategist said. “The [Democratic] leadership either seems to be quiet or on board. But what we don’t know is if there is a group of Democrats — not just one by one — who are willing to jump in front of the train.”

The former administration official acknowledged the time constraint — the Democratic convention begins in six weeks — suggesting the strategy could be effective. “Every week he’s still the nominee means it’s more likely he’ll be the nominee,” the official said.

Time is running out for the party to resolve its divisions and unite behind a candidate.

“There’s time but not a lot of it to see how things settle,” said former Rep. Steve Israel (D-N.Y.), who chaired the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee.

Israel suggested Biden could use this week’s NATO summit in Washington to remind donors, activists, and voters of his leadership and demonstrate that the debate was an isolated incident.

But, Israel added, “clarity is critical, and this climate of doubt and despair can’t extend beyond the middle of the month.”

Democratic strategist Jim Manley admitted he was watching the fallout from the debate “with clear trepidation,” expressing confusion over Biden’s lack of engagement last week.

“The idea that it took four or five days to reach out to [House Minority Leader Hakeem] Jefferies and [Senate Majority Leader Chuck] Schumer was political malpractice,” Manley said.

However, the revised strategy is a “shot across the bow,” Manley added. “If his goal is to stay in the race, it’s absolutely the right thing to do. They’re sending a strong message to the Hill that they’re not backing down, and they’re drawing a line in the sand.”

Following Biden’s call with donors, one Democratic bundler felt slightly more optimistic: “When Biden has some piss and vinegar in him, how can you not feel better?”

By adopting a more aggressive approach, Biden aims to solidify his position as the Democratic nominee and counter the narrative that he should step down. His recent actions indicate a strong commitment to unifying the party and defeating Trump, despite ongoing concerns about his health and the party’s divisions.

Biden Stands Firm Amid Calls to Drop Reelection Bid, Rallies Democratic Support to Defeat Trump

President Joe Biden stood resolute on Monday against growing calls to withdraw his reelection bid, urging an end to the intraparty turmoil that has plagued Democrats since his disappointing debate performance last month. Key lawmakers expressed their support for Biden to continue his campaign for the 2024 presidential race.

With congressional Democrats returning to Washington, torn between reviving Biden’s campaign or pushing him out, Biden addressed them in an open letter. He sought to quell doubts about his capability to lead for another term, emphasizing the party’s “one job” of defeating the presumptive Republican nominee, Donald Trump, in November.

After several attempts, Biden and his campaign’s efforts to consolidate Democratic support seemed to be bearing fruit, though not all doubts were dispelled. By late Monday, a surge of public support from Democrats emerged, with Biden allies attempting to drown out voices urging him to step aside.

In his two-page letter, Biden stated, “the question of how to move forward has been well-aired for over a week now. And it’s time for it to end.”

“We have 42 days to the Democratic Convention and 119 days to the general election,” Biden wrote, distributed by his reelection campaign. “Any weakening of resolve or lack of clarity about the task ahead only helps Trump and hurts us. It’s time to come together, move forward as a unified party, and defeat Donald Trump.”

Biden reinforced his message in a phone interview with MSNBC’s “Morning Joe,” insisting that “average Democrats” want him to remain in the race and expressing frustration over calls from party officials for him to step aside.

“They’re big names, but I don’t care what those big names think,” Biden said.

He challenged his critics to “announce for president, challenge me at the convention” or support him against Trump. Later, Biden spoke with his national finance committee, while First Lady Jill Biden campaigned in three states, engaging with veterans and military families.

“For all the talk out there about this race, Joe has made it clear that he’s all in,” she told a military crowd in Wilmington, North Carolina. “That’s the decision that he’s made, and just as he has always supported my career, I am all in, too.”

According to a New York Times/Siena College poll, Democratic voters are divided on whether Biden should continue as the party’s nominee or if a different candidate should be chosen.

On Capitol Hill, notable support came from the chair of the House’s Congressional Progressive Caucus, Rep. Pramila Jayapal, who deemed the threat of a second Trump presidency too significant to abandon Biden. However, Sen. Jon Tester of Montana, a vulnerable Democrat, said, “President Biden has got to prove to the American people — including me — that he’s up to the job for another four years.”

Biden’s letter angered some House Democrats, who wanted direct communication from him. According to a House aide, lawmakers felt slighted by suggestions they were out of touch with voters.

Biden met virtually with the Congressional Black Caucus, a strong supporter base, for 30 minutes, discussing his policy proposals for a second term, expressing gratitude, and criticizing Trump, as per a person familiar with the call.

While not all Black Caucus members voiced opinions, none opposed the president, the person said.

Biden plans to meet this week with the Congressional Progressive Caucus, according to Jayapal.

Press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre mentioned that Biden underwent three neurological exams during his White House tenure, part of his annual physical exams, and was neither diagnosed with nor treated for Parkinson’s.

The political drama unfolds just over a month before the Democratic National Convention and a week before Republicans gather in Milwaukee to renominate Trump.

Rep. Ayanna Pressley, D-Mass., a progressive lawmaker, expressed her support for Biden and concern that Democrats were losing focus on defeating Trump. “We’re losing the plot here,” she said.

Rep. Maxine Waters of California, a prominent Black Caucus member, stated that those opposing Biden “can speak for themselves or what they want to do, but I know what I’m doing because I’m a big Biden supporter.”

Rep. Frank Pallone of New Jersey, top Democrat on the Energy and Commerce Committee, added, “I’m tired of all this speculation. I just want to concentrate on the fact that we have to defeat Trump.”

Trump predicted Biden would stay in the race, telling Fox News Channel’s Sean Hannity, “It looks to me like he may very well stay in. He’s got an ego and he doesn’t want to quit. He doesn’t want to do that.”

House Democratic leader Hakeem Jeffries, supportive of Biden despite addressing his conference’s concerns, reiterated his stance, saying “same answer” when asked if he supported Biden after an evening Capitol meeting.

Other House Democrats avoided questions, with Rep. Debbie Dingell, D-Mich., stating she was off to another meeting and Reps. Abigail Spanberger of Virginia and Lauren Underwood of Illinois declining to comment.

Rep. Adam Smith of Washington, top Democrat on the Armed Services Committee, publicly called for Biden to step aside, stating it would be “a mistake” for Biden to continue his campaign. “I’m calling on President Biden to step down,” Smith said on social media.

Biden’s allies anticipated more direct engagement with lawmakers. On a call with his campaign co-chairs, Biden repeatedly asked whom he needed to engage with, who needed to hear from him, and who had unanswered questions or concerns, according to Sen. Chris Coons, D-Del.

“He is out there doing his job as a candidate and doing his job as president,” Coons said.

Rep. Annie Kuster of New Hampshire, chair of the New Democrat Coalition, requested House leadership invite Biden to speak to the entire Democratic caucus.

“If the president’s going to stay in the race, then help us respond to questions from our constituents,” she said. “And it’s so much easier to say, I was with him.”

Rep. Nanette Barragan of California, chair of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus, who supports Biden and recently campaigned with the First Lady in Pennsylvania, said Biden “should talk to as many members as possible.”

Senators returning to Washington were generally hesitant to criticize Biden, awaiting a Democratic caucus meeting to address concerns. It was unclear if any Senate Democrats would publicly call for Biden to step down, despite private concerns over the last ten days.

“He ran an excellent campaign, and he’s been an excellent president,” said Sen. Michael Bennet of Colorado. “And I think what everybody is trying to satisfy is that’s the same trajectory and path that we’re on today.”

Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer avoided questions about Biden’s reelection but stated, “As I’ve said before, I’m for Joe.”

Sen. Alex Padilla of California added it was “time to quit the hand-wringing and get back to door knocking.”

While some wealthy donors showed discomfort, strategists for House and Senate races reported record fundraising, with donors viewing congressional Democrats as a “firewall” against Trump.

Americans Are Split Over The State Of The American Dream

“The American dream” is a century-old phrase used to describe the idea that anyone can achieve success in the United States through hard work and determination. Today, about half of Americans (53%) say that dream is still possible.

How we did this

Americans Are Split Over The State Of The American Dream1

Another 41% say the American dream was once possible for people to achieve – but is not anymore. And 6% say it was never possible, according to a recent Pew Research Center survey of 8,709 U.S. adults.

While this is the first time the Center has asked about the American dream in this way, other surveys have long found that sizable shares of Americans are skeptical about the future of the American dream.

Who believes the American dream is still possible?

There are relatively modest differences in views of the American dream by race and ethnicity, partisanship, and education. But there are wider divides by age and income.

Age

Americans ages 50 and older are more likely than younger adults to say the American dream is still possible. About two-thirds of adults ages 65 and older (68%) say this, as do 61% of those 50 to 64.

By comparison, only about four-in-ten adults under 50 (42%) say it’s still possible for people to achieve the AmericanAmericans Are Split Over The State Of The American Dream2 dream.

Income

Higher-income Americans are also more likely than others to say the American dream is still achievable.

While 64% of upper-income Americans say the American dream still exists, 39% of lower-income Americans say the same – a gap of 25 percentage points.

Middle-income Americans fall in between, with a 56% majority saying the American dream is still possible.

Race and ethnicity

Roughly half of Americans in each racial and ethnic group say the American dream remains possible. And while relatively few Americans – just 6% overall – say that the American dream was never possible, Black Americans are about twice as likely as those in other groups to say this (11%).

Partisanship

While 56% of Republicans and Republican leaners say the American dream is still possible to achieve, 50% of Democrats and Democratic leaners say the same.

Education

A 57% majority of adults with a bachelor’s degree or more education say the American dream remains possible, compared with 50% of those with less education.

Age and income differences within both parties

Americans Are Split Over The State Of The American Dream 3Age and income differences in views of the American dream persist within each political party.

Age

Clear majorities of both Republicans (64%) and Democrats (67%) ages 50 and older say achieving the American dream is still possible.

In contrast, just 38% of Democrats under 50 and 48% of Republicans under 50 view the American dream as still possible.

Income

In both parties, upper-income Americans are about 25 points more likely than lower-income Americans to say it is still possible for people to achieve the American dream.

Do people think they can achieve the American dream?

Americans are also divided over whether they think they personally can achieve the American dream. About three-in-ten (31%) say they’ve achieved it, while a slightly larger share (36%) say they are on their way to achieving it. Another 30% say it’s out of reach for them. These views are nearly identical to when the Center last asked this question in 2022.

Race and ethnicityAmericans Are Split Over The State Of The American Dream4

White adults (39%) are more likely than Black (15%) and Hispanic adults (19%), and about as likely as Asian adults (34%), to say they have already achieved the American dream.

Black (48%), Hispanic (47%) and Asian adults (46%) are more likely than White adults (29%) to say they are on their way to achieving it.

Party

Republicans are more likely than Democrats to say they have achieved the American dream (38% vs. 28%). But Democrats are somewhat more likely than Republicans to say they’re on the way to achieving it (38% vs. 34%). Democrats are also more likely than Republicans to view the American dream as personally out of reach.

Income and age

Older and higher-income Americans are more likely than younger and less wealthy Americans to say they have achieved or are within reach of the American dream. These patterns are similar to those for views about the American dream more generally.

Kamala Harris Emerges as Potential Democratic Candidate for 2024 Amid Rising Support and Republican Concerns

Vice President Kamala Harris has captured the attention of Republican donors, holds significant name recognition, and is gaining support from influential Democratic Party figures. Should President Joe Biden step aside from the 2024 election, Harris would be the natural successor, according to top Democrats. This raises a crucial question: Does Harris have a better chance than Biden of defeating Donald Trump? Despite Biden’s insistence on staying in the race, discussions about Harris’s potential candidacy are intensifying.

If Harris were to become the party’s nominee and win the November 5 election, she would be the first woman president of the United States, and the first African American and Asian individual to serve as vice president. Her tenure in the White House over the past three and a half years has been marked by a slow start, significant staff turnover, and challenging early assignments, such as addressing Central American migration, which did not yield major successes.

As recently as last year, concerns within the White House and Biden’s campaign team regarding Harris’s potential liability to the campaign were prevalent. However, her recent efforts on abortion rights and engagement with young voters have significantly altered this perception among Democratic officials.

The Biden-Harris campaign expressed, “She is proud to be his running mate and looks forward to serving at his side for four more years.” Recent polls indicate that Harris might have an edge over Biden in a potential matchup against Trump. A CNN poll released on July 2 showed Trump leading Biden by six percentage points (49% to 43%), while Harris trailed Trump by a narrower margin of 47% to 45%, within the margin of error. The poll also revealed that independents favor Harris over Trump (43% to 40%) and that moderate voters prefer her 51% to 39%.

Another poll by Reuters/Ipsos following a debate between Trump and a struggling Biden showed Harris and Trump nearly tied, with 42% supporting Harris and 43% backing Trump. Among possible alternatives to Biden, only former First Lady Michelle Obama, who has shown no interest in running, polled higher. Internal polling from the Biden campaign indicated that Harris has similar odds as Biden of beating Trump, with 45% of voters supporting her compared to 48% for Trump.

Several influential Democrats have signaled their support for Harris as the best option if Biden steps aside. These include U.S. Representative Jim Clyburn, a key figure in Biden’s 2020 victory; Rep. Gregory Meeks, a senior member of the Congressional Black Caucus; and Summer Lee, a House Democrat from Pennsylvania. House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries has also reportedly indicated support for Harris in private discussions.

Republican donors are taking Harris seriously, with some preferring Trump to face Biden rather than her. Pauline Lee, a Trump fundraiser in Nevada, stated, “I would prefer Biden to stay in place,” and criticized Biden as “incompetent.” Wall Street, a crucial Democratic fundraising hub, is also beginning to show a preference for Harris. Sonu Varghese, global macro strategist at Carson Group, remarked, “Biden is already behind Trump, and is unlikely to overcome that gap given where his campaign is currently. Having VP Harris likely improves Democrats’ odds of taking the White House.”

However, a majority of Americans view Harris negatively, similar to their perceptions of Biden and Trump. Polling data from Five Thirty Eight shows 37.1% of voters approve of Harris while 49.6% disapprove, compared to Biden’s 36.9% approval and 57.1% disapproval, and Trump’s 38.6% approval and 53.6% disapproval.

Since the Supreme Court’s 2022 decision to repeal the constitutional right to abortion, Harris has become the administration’s leading voice on reproductive rights. This issue is central to the Democrats’ strategy for the 2024 election. Harris could invigorate key Democratic-leaning groups whose enthusiasm for Biden has waned, including Black voters, young voters, and those dissatisfied with Biden’s handling of the Israel-Hamas conflict. Tim Ryan, a former Democratic Congressman from Ohio, wrote, “She would energize the Black, brown, and Asian Pacific members of our coalition…she would immediately pull the dispirited youth of our country back into the fold.”

Harris’s stance on Israel is aligned with Biden’s, though she was the first senior U.S. leader to call for a ceasefire in March. Abbas Alawieh of the “Uncommitted” movement, which withheld votes for Biden over his support for Israel, stated, “Simply swapping out the candidate does not address the central concern.”

If Biden steps aside, other Democrats might compete for the nomination. However, choosing another candidate over Harris could alienate Black voters, crucial to Biden’s 2020 victory. Adrianne Shropshire, executive director of BlackPAC, asserted, “There is no alternative besides Kamala Harris…Jump over the Black woman, the vice president, and I don’t think the Democratic Party actually recovers.”

Harris may struggle to win over moderate Democrats and independent voters who favor Biden’s centrist policies. Dmitri Mehlhorn, adviser to LinkedIn co-founder and Democratic megadonor Reid Hoffman, noted, “Her greatest weakness is that her public brand has been associated with the far-left wing of the Democratic Party…and the left wing cannot win a national election.”

Harris would inherit Biden’s campaign infrastructure and funds, a crucial advantage with only four months until election day. However, Democratic strategists emphasize the need to raise hundreds of millions more dollars. A Democratic National Committee source remarked, “I can tell you we have a really tough time raising money for her.”

During the 2020 presidential race, Harris lagged behind Biden in fundraising, dropping out in December 2019 after reporting $39.3 million in total contributions compared to Biden’s $60.9 million. However, Biden’s campaign raised a record $48 million in 24 hours after naming Harris as his running mate.

Some Democrats believe Harris’s prosecutorial background could shine in a debate against Trump. Mehlhorn commented, “She is incredibly focused and forceful and smart, and if she prosecutes the case against the criminality of Donald Trump, she will rip him apart.”

Republican attacks on Harris are increasing as she is considered a possible replacement for Biden. Conservative media are reviving criticism from the 2020 race, including claims that she laughs too much and is untested and unqualified. The New York Post, owned by News Corp, ran a column titled “America may soon be subjected to the country’s first DEI president: Kamala Harris,” criticizing her rise due to the party’s diversity initiatives.

Kelly Dittmar, a political science professor at Rutgers University, said, “Unfortunately, the reliance on both racist and sexist attacks and tropes against women running for office is historically common and persists to this day.”

Biden’s Age and Stubbornness: Key Takeaways from His ABC Interview

Democrats have been deeply concerned about President Biden’s candidacy and his ability to defeat Donald Trump following his poor debate performance last week.

To address these concerns, Biden sat for an interview with ABC’s George Stephanopoulos on Friday night.

Whether the interview alleviated these concerns will become clearer in the coming days. Here are six key takeaways from the interview:

  1. Biden’s Performance and Age

Biden’s performance in the interview was better than in the debate, but his age is increasingly apparent. While he may have reassured some political allies, he did not display the clarity and coherence that Democrats hoped for. His thoughts were occasionally scattered and unclear.

“I just had a bad night,” Biden explained regarding the debate. “I don’t know why.” He mentioned that he had been traveling, had a cold, and had even tested for COVID.

The critical question is whether Democratic officials and persuadable voters will accept this explanation and believe he is capable of another term. Biden asserts he is fit for the job, but his age is becoming more noticeable at a crucial time. Before the debate, expectations were low. Biden only needed to show some energy and vigor, but he failed to do so. Now, expectations are higher, and every public appearance, speech, and debate will be scrutinized.

  1. Biden’s Stubbornness

Biden reaffirmed that he is not withdrawing from the race, asserting that no one else could do the job as well or be a better candidate against Trump.

Biden dismissed questions about his political standing and doubts about his ability to lead or defeat Trump. “I’ve seen it from the press,” he said. “I don’t think the vast majority are there. I don’t believe that’s my approval rating.”

Understanding Biden’s refusal to step aside requires understanding his politics and personal resilience. He has faced numerous challenges both personally and politically, which have shaped him. Biden is accustomed to people doubting him, and he believes these naysayers have been wrong for a long time.

However, these challenges differ from his current one because, as the saying goes, Father Time is undefeated.

Historian Douglas Brinkley once said of former President George W. Bush, “Stubbornness is a positive quality of presidential leadership—if you’re right about what you’re stubborn about.” This sentiment applies to Biden or any president.

  1. The Role of Biden’s Closest Allies

Biden stated that only a divine intervention could force him out of the race — or possibly his closest allies in Democratic leadership.

“If the Lord Almighty came down and said, ‘Joe, get out of the race,’ I’d get out of the race,” Biden said. “The Lord Almighty’s not coming down.”

While divine intervention is unlikely, Biden seemed to leave open the possibility of exiting if key congressional allies, such as House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Rep. Jim Clyburn, and Senate leader Chuck Schumer, advised him to do so.

None of these allies have called for him to drop out. However, Pelosi recently acknowledged that it is legitimate to question whether Biden’s debate performance was an “episode” or a “condition.”

Stephanopoulos asked Biden, “If you are told reliably from your allies, from your friends and supporters in the Democratic Party in the House and Senate, that they’re concerned you’re going to lose the House and the Senate if you stay in, what will you do?”

Biden responded, “I’m not going to answer that question. It’s not going to happen.”

Thus, Biden’s future in the race is not solely his decision.

  1. Questions About Vice President Harris

Biden contended, “I don’t think anybody’s more qualified to be president or win this race than me.”

He later questioned who else has the “reach” with allies and can handle foreign policy as well as he can, despite his diminished capacity compared to a few years ago.

Stephanopoulos did not follow up on whether Biden believes Vice President Harris could win or do the job as well. Biden’s remarks raise questions about his confidence in Harris. Despite Biden’s public displays of support for Harris, such as raising her arm at a Fourth of July event, the doubts about his age make it worth considering whether he implicitly lacks confidence in Harris’s ability to win or govern.

  1. Biden’s Resilience and Self-Belief

Biden’s steadfast belief in his capabilities stems from a lifetime of overcoming obstacles. He has faced significant personal and political challenges, and his resilience has been a defining characteristic. This tenacity is evident in his refusal to step aside despite concerns about his age and performance.

Throughout his career, Biden has been told he couldn’t or shouldn’t do something, and he has consistently proved the doubters wrong. This deep-seated belief in his own resilience and abilities is a core part of who he is as a politician and person.

  1. The Impact on the Democratic Party

Biden’s decision to remain in the race has significant implications for the Democratic Party. His performance and public appearances will be closely scrutinized, and any perceived weaknesses could impact the party’s prospects in the upcoming elections.

The concerns about Biden’s age and performance are not just about his candidacy but also about the broader implications for the Democratic Party. If Biden’s campaign falters, it could have ripple effects on down-ballot races, potentially affecting the party’s control of the House and Senate.

Biden’s interview with Stephanopoulos highlighted key aspects of his candidacy: his age and performance issues, his stubbornness and resilience, the role of his closest allies, and the implications for the Democratic Party. Whether this interview will quell concerns about his candidacy remains to be seen, but it underscores the critical challenges he faces as he seeks another term in office.

President Biden Faces Mounting Pressure Amid Health Concerns and Debate Fallout

President Joe Biden is facing a challenging struggle to affirm his strength and cognitive capacity for a second term, a personal and national ordeal that has become increasingly agonizing. His recent appearance on primetime television, where he candidly addressed questions about his health, felt like a breach of presidential dignity, exposing his vulnerability to the public eye. Despite his respected status among many Americans, witnessing Biden confront the harsh realities of aging so publicly evokes empathy.

Biden’s recent presidential debate performance, marked by moments of incoherence, has sparked significant concern and forced a national dialogue about his fitness for reelection. Although his interview following the debate showcased a more composed demeanor compared to the debate itself, it did little to dispel mounting doubts about his health and the stability of his Democratic support base. The growing pressure within his party suggests a potential crisis, with calls from Democratic leaders for Biden to step aside in favor of a younger candidate intensifying.

During his interview with ABC News, Biden aimed to refute criticisms stemming from his debate performance and solidify his position as the Democratic nominee for 2024. He presented a robust defense of his presidency and dismissed concerns about his health, asserting his readiness to continue his campaign despite calls for him to reconsider. Biden emphasized his longstanding commitment to resilience in the face of adversity, a stance that complicates the Democratic Party’s internal deliberations.

Despite Biden’s insistence that his health remains intact, questions persist about his ability to withstand the rigors of another term. His admission of feeling “terrible” before the debate, coupled with moments of uncertainty during the interview, only heightened anxieties about his physical and mental stamina. Concerns over his age and capacity to effectively serve as president have become focal points in discussions about his candidacy.

The interview highlighted Biden’s defensive posture against criticisms of his debate performance and polling trends indicating a decline in his national and swing state support. Democratic leaders, increasingly anxious about the implications for the upcoming election, have urged Biden to engage more directly with the public to demonstrate his vitality and capability to lead.

Amidst the debate over Biden’s candidacy, supporters argue that his accomplishments in office and the imperative to counter Trump’s potential reelection outweigh concerns about his age and performance. They contend that Biden’s experience and policy achievements should not be overshadowed by a single debate performance, emphasizing the stakes of the upcoming election and the broader implications for American democracy.

However, the persistent doubts about Biden’s ability to navigate another term in office have cast a shadow over discussions about his candidacy. Critics within the Democratic Party assert that while Biden has made significant contributions during his tenure, his continued candidacy risks jeopardizing the party’s prospects in November. They argue for a leadership transition that reflects the changing dynamics of American politics and addresses the challenges posed by Trump’s reelection campaign.

As Biden continues to confront skepticism about his candidacy, he remains steadfast in his determination to highlight his administration’s achievements and combat doubts about his capacity to lead. His efforts to redirect attention towards his policy agenda underscore his commitment to advancing his campaign despite the formidable challenges he faces.

In conclusion, Biden’s struggle to affirm his candidacy for a second term reflects broader anxieties within the Democratic Party about his ability to effectively compete against Trump. The debate over his health and fitness for office underscores the complexity of his reelection bid and the competing perspectives within his party regarding the path forward.

Chief Medical Correspondent Urges Biden to Undergo Cognitive Testing Amid Health Concerns

CNN’s chief medical correspondent, Dr. Sanjay Gupta, has called for President Joe Biden to undergo comprehensive cognitive and movement disorder testing and make the results public. Gupta, a prominent neurosurgeon, wrote in a Friday article that he and several colleagues noticed worrisome signs during Biden’s debate with former President Donald Trump that warrant closer examination of Biden’s health. The symptoms Gupta observed include Biden’s halting speech, quiet voice, slack-jawed appearance, and occasional inability to finish sentences on the debate stage.

“Are we looking at episodes of something? Or is this a condition that should be more fully investigated? And it really seems to be more of the latter,” Gupta remarked on CNN.

Gupta emphasized that the current disclosures about Biden’s health are inadequate for a remote diagnosis. However, following Biden’s concerning debate performance, Gupta and other neurologists agreed that the president needs a detailed evaluation of his cognitive functions, memory, and other potential risk factors.

“In 2020, Biden claimed he was ‘constantly tested’ by the demands of campaigning. ‘All you’ve got to do is watch me,’ he said then,” Gupta pointed out. “The country is watching now, and that assessment gives cause for concern — and a need for transparent testing.”

The doctors’ call for testing comes amid growing doubts about Biden’s ability to run for president, defeat Trump in November, and serve until he is 86. These concerns were heightened by Biden’s recent performance, where he had a raspy voice and gave several incomplete responses. Gupta’s analysis is part of an ongoing media focus on Biden’s age and the transparency of the White House regarding his health.

“It wasn’t that what we noticed was necessarily new but that it was particularly pronounced, and right from the start of the debate,” Gupta wrote, acknowledging that Trump has also previously rambled and confused names or events.

Gupta suggested that factors like low sleep, low blood sugar, or illness could have contributed to Biden’s debate appearance, but testing is necessary to determine the exact cause of the “symptoms displayed” by Biden. He noted that identifying any “possibility of underlying dementia” would ultimately benefit Biden, as early diagnosis and treatment have improved in recent years.

Biden has not been diagnosed with a cognitive disorder. In his annual physical in February, his doctor reported that Biden underwent an “extremely detailed” neurologic exam, which found no symptoms of Parkinson’s and described him as fit for his duties. The exam indicated Biden was being treated for several age-related ailments and had a stiffer gait.

This week, Biden informed a meeting of Democratic governors that he had a medical check-up for a cold after the debate. However, previous health reports have not mentioned any cognitive tests. To reassure voters about his health, Biden is making several public appearances this weekend, including a highly anticipated interview with ABC News scheduled to air on Friday.

The issue of Biden’s health has become a focal point as the election approaches. Gupta’s concerns reflect a broader debate about the transparency of presidential candidates’ health information. Gupta’s commentary underscores the need for detailed cognitive testing to address public concerns about Biden’s fitness for office.

By making his health records more transparent, Biden could potentially alleviate some of the public’s worries. Gupta and his colleagues believe that a thorough examination and sharing the results would provide clarity on Biden’s health status. This approach would help in dispelling doubts and reinforcing the public’s trust in the president’s ability to serve effectively.

The scrutiny of Biden’s health is not new but has intensified with the upcoming election. The media and public are closely watching Biden’s appearances and statements, looking for any signs of health issues. The debate performance brought these concerns to the forefront, prompting medical experts like Gupta to call for more transparency and detailed health assessments.

Gupta’s call for cognitive and movement disorder testing for President Biden reflects the ongoing concerns about the president’s health and the need for transparency. As the election draws nearer, the public and media will continue to scrutinize Biden’s health, making it crucial for the president to address these concerns openly.

Democrats Rally Around Kamala Harris as Biden’s Campaign Falters: Discussions of Potential Running Mate Intensify

In the wake of Joe Biden’s debate performance, many Democratic insiders are now discussing who Kamala Harris might choose as her running mate. A growing number of party officials, operatives, and donors are doubtful that Biden’s campaign can recover, based on CNN’s interviews with two dozen Democratic politicians and operatives.

Biden often says to compare him to the alternative, not the almighty, which is what more Democrats are doing with Harris. Harris and her team have largely ignored the influx of calls and texts, maintaining a firm stance on their support for Biden. However, Harris did make some adjustments, like joining Biden for the Fourth of July picnic and fireworks, a first for her.

Despite her support, the Democratic landscape is shifting around Harris, with former President Donald Trump’s campaign already targeting her. Officials have begun advising donors to back Harris, arguing that a unified party support is essential. Some plans are in motion to convince Biden to endorse Harris immediately, release his Democratic delegates, and request their support for her. This strategy aims to prevent a contentious primary fight.

If the race opens, Democrats hope Harris’ running mate will be a prominent governor. North Carolina Gov. Roy Cooper and Kentucky Gov. Andy Beshear are frequently mentioned, along with Pennsylvania’s Josh Shapiro, Illinois’ J.B. Pritzker, and Minnesota’s Tim Walz. However, this could complicate matters by not allowing Harris to select her own running mate, a privilege typically given to presidential nominees.

A Democratic senator compared the situation to a football game, with Biden as a star quarterback who might need to be replaced by his backup, Harris. “The backup knows our team, the backup knows the plays, the backup has played in the NFL,” the senator said, highlighting Harris’ familiarity with the political landscape.

Some Democrats fear losing their seats with Harris at the top of the ticket, but others have changed their views, preferring her over Biden. The leader of one major Democratic group said, “Are you kidding?” when asked about preferring Harris, emphasizing that while Biden is in bad shape, Harris could unify the party if she becomes the nominee.

A document titled “Unburdened by What Has Been: The Case for Kamala,” written by senior Democratic operatives, is circulating among donors and coalition groups. It argues that Harris is the only viable candidate to win, stating, “Kamala Harris has the strongest claim to Democratic legitimacy. She is the only candidate who can take the reins right now… She has significant and widely underplayed electoral advantages. She can win.”

Rep. Nanette Barragán, who supported Harris in 2019, noted the shift in conversations about Harris. “It’s nice to see that people are finally recognizing the value of her work and what she brings to the partnership,” she said.

Biden’s sparse public schedule post-debate has increased doubts about him and bolstered Harris’ case. Mini Timmaraju, president of Reproductive Freedom for All, said Harris already has more credibility than Biden on key issues like abortion rights, and emphasized, “You can’t win this election without Kamala.”

Harris loyalists are frustrated by discussions of Biden replacements not centering on her and angered by donors questioning her chances. Recent polls showing a tight race between her and Trump have only heightened their frustrations. Ezra Levin, co-founder of Indivisible, emphasized the need for voters to have confidence in Harris, stating, “It’s foolish and counterproductive to defend Biden by tearing down Harris.”

The Congressional Black Caucus (CBC) has mostly supported Biden, but members indicate they would quickly back Harris if Biden steps aside. Rep. Gregory Meeks said, “I actually don’t think that anybody else other than her would beat Trump because of what you’d lose in the base,” stressing the importance of Black voter turnout.

Harris has contemplated a Trump challenge before. In 2018, her aides asked how she’d handle a town hall debate with Trump. Her response: “Why are you being so weird?” This showcases her readiness to confront Trump head-on.

Despite her reputation for verbal gaffes, Harris has been on an upswing with voters. After Biden’s debate, she spontaneously told CNN’s Anderson Cooper that a bad 90 minutes shouldn’t overshadow Biden’s three and a half years as president. This line was so effective that it was repeated by Jill Biden and multiple campaign aides.

Harris has focused on Trump for months, planning to target his running mate by highlighting their alignment with Trump’s extremist agenda. Brian Fallon, Harris’ campaign communications director, reaffirmed, “The president is and will remain our party’s nominee, and Vice President Harris is proud to be his running mate and looks forward to serving at his side for four more years.”

The running mate conversation often includes Cooper and Beshear, both former state attorneys general with bipartisan support. Cooper has a long-standing relationship with Harris, calling her “whip smart” and stating, “I think she’s ready to do this job.” Beshear, popular in Kentucky and nationally recognized for his communication skills, has also been invited to speak at Democratic events across the country.

The Democratic party is grappling with Biden’s faltering campaign and looking to Harris as a potential successor. While the transition is fraught with challenges and uncertainties, many believe that Harris, with the right support, can lead the party to victory.

Kamala Harris Emerges as Top Contender if Biden Steps Down: Senior Democratic Sources Reveal

Vice President Kamala Harris stands as the leading alternative to replace President Joe Biden if he opts out of his reelection campaign, as per insights from seven senior sources associated with the Biden campaign, the White House, and the Democratic National Committee. These sources reveal ongoing discussions about potential replacements.

Biden’s recent faltering and often incoherent debate performance against Republican Donald Trump has sparked widespread panic within the Democratic party. Concerns about his fitness for a second term have led to calls for the resignation of top aides.

While some influential Democrats have proposed other alternatives to Biden, such as popular cabinet members and Democratic governors like California’s Gavin Newsom, Michigan’s Gretchen Whitmer, and Pennsylvania’s Josh Shapiro, the sources believe bypassing Harris would be nearly impossible. They suggest that Harris, with the highest name recognition and polling among potential candidates, would naturally inherit the Biden campaign’s funds and infrastructure if nominated.

A Reuters/Ipsos poll indicates Harris is trailing Trump by just one percentage point (42% to 43%), which falls within the poll’s margin of error of 3.5 percentage points, demonstrating a performance on par with Biden’s. Furthermore, Harris has been thoroughly vetted for national office and has withstood intense scrutiny from Republicans. Notably, U.S. Representative Jim Clyburn, a key figure in Biden’s 2020 victory, expressed his support for Harris as the Democratic nominee if Biden steps aside.

Michael Trujillo, a Democratic strategist from California who worked on Hillary Clinton’s campaigns in 2008 and 2016, stated, “It’s pretty near impossible to win the nomination over the vice president.” He emphasizes Harris’s entrenched position within the party.

On July 2, White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre dismissed concerns, attributing Biden’s debate performance to a “bad night” and reaffirming his commitment to running for reelection. The Biden campaign referred questions about the scenario to Harris’s team, which firmly stated, “Vice President Harris looks forward to serving a second term with President Joe Biden.”

Biden’s campaign has secured 3,894 delegates from state primaries, with only a few dozen “uncommitted” delegates left. These delegates are expected to formally nominate Biden later this month during a virtual meeting before the Democratic National Convention in August. Trujillo reiterated Harris’s substantial support within the party, saying, “All of the delegates are not just Joe Biden delegates, they are Kamala Harris delegates,” and she would have significant backing from all states.

Donna Brazile, former interim chair of the Democratic National Committee and a key figure in the upcoming Democratic National Convention, stated that Harris is the immediate successor if Biden steps down. Brazile emphasized the structured process, noting, “People may have dreams of another superhero but there is a process and the last time I checked it’s a Biden-Harris ticket, she’s number two on the ticket,” while reaffirming Biden’s status as the Democratic nominee.

Overlooking Harris, the first Black and female vice president, could trigger backlash from Black and female voters, who are crucial for any Democratic victory, according to several Democratic strategists.

However, some influential Democrats remain skeptical of Harris’s chances against Trump. Four sources mentioned that Harris has been largely sidelined in post-debate speculations due to doubts about her electability. The U.S. has never elected a female president, and Harris’s role as vice president has limited her ability to distinguish herself. As recently as last year, concerns within the White House and the Biden campaign labeled her a potential liability.

Despite finding her footing on abortion rights, Harris’s approval ratings have not significantly improved, lingering below 40%. Polls indicate that she and Biden have comparable odds of defeating Trump. Harris has also faced continuous attacks from Republicans and conservative media, often viewed by her allies as sexist and racist.

Three Democratic donors, who previously advocated for Biden’s withdrawal, conceded this week that bypassing Harris is “impossible.” These donors had been considering Whitmer and Newsom as potential alternatives until recently. One donor remarked, “There is a real conversation in the Democratic party about leadership right now, but fair to say, and I’m not thrilled about this… it will be impossible to ignore Kamala.”

Another donor added, “She’s nobody’s choice, but yeah, nearly impossible.”

Despite growing calls for Biden to step aside, his reelection campaign remains firm, buoyed by his improved performance in a scripted speech in North Carolina. Stephanie Cutter, former deputy campaign manager for Barack Obama and current producer of the Democratic National Convention, stated unequivocally, “President Biden is the nominee and he’s going to remain the nominee.” She warned against fostering intra-party conflict, cautioning, “For those who are looking for some sort of interparty fight, be careful what you wish for because that would ensure a Trump victory.”

Rishi Sunak Apologizes for Historic Conservative Defeat as Keir Starmer Leads Labour to Sweeping Victory

Rishi Sunak has issued an apology to the nation after the Conservative Party’s devastating defeat in the general election, marking the worst performance in its parliamentary history.

Sir Keir Starmer has led the Labour Party to a sweeping victory and will succeed Mr. Sunak as the UK’s prime minister.

Taking full responsibility for the outcome, Mr. Sunak acknowledged the public’s “anger” towards his administration. “To the country, I would like to say first and foremost I am sorry,” he said. “I have given this job my all, but you have sent a clear message that the government of the UK must change, and yours is the judgment that matters. I have heard your anger, your disappointment, and I take responsibility for this loss.”

Despite earlier rain, Mr. Sunak delivered his speech outside Number 10, this time with an umbrella to avoid a repeat of his soaked announcement in May. He stated he would step down as party leader, “not immediately but once the formal arrangements for selecting my successor are in place.” The MP for Richmond and Northallerton assured there would be “an orderly transition” and praised Sir Keir as “a decent and public-spirited man who I respect.”

After bidding farewell to Downing Street staff just before his speech, Mr. Sunak left with his wife, Akshata, to offer his resignation to the King.

In his earlier victory speech in central London, Sir Keir proclaimed “change begins now,” adding, “it feels good, I have to be honest.” With nearly all results declared, Labour is projected to form the next government with a majority of 174, boasting 412 MPs, an increase of 211 from the last election.

The Conservatives face their worst defeat ever, losing 250 seats and currently holding 121 seats. Former Prime Minister Liz Truss, whose brief and disastrous tenure led to a decline in Tory support, lost her South West Norfolk seat to Labour by 630 votes. Ms. Truss saw her significant 32,988 majority overturned, with the Reform candidate coming third with 9,958 votes. Several senior Tories, including Defence Secretary Grant Shapps, Commons leader Penny Mordaunt, Justice Secretary Alex Chalk, and former minister Sir Jacob Rees-Mogg, also lost their seats.

Foreign Secretary James Cleverly told the BBC that “a large number of people who had previously voted Conservative have voted Reform,” emphasizing the need for the Conservatives to “think hard” about regaining their support. Former minister Steve Baker, a long-time critic of Tory leaders over Brexit, expressed relief at losing his Wycombe seat after 14 years, stating, “Thank God, I am free – it’s over.”

Reform UK leader Nigel Farage won a seat in Parliament on his eighth attempt, in Clacton, declaring, “this is just the first step of something that is going to stun all of you.” Reform now has four MPs, including chairman Richard Tice and former Tory Lee Anderson, and has placed second in many areas, drawing significant votes from the Conservatives.

In his London victory speech, Sir Keir told enthusiastic Labour supporters that the country was waking up to “the sunlight of hope” which was “shining once again on a country with the opportunity after 14 years to get its future back.” He added, “Now we can look forward – walk into the morning.”

The Liberal Democrats, slightly behind Reform in votes, have benefitted most from the Tory collapse, reaching a record 71 MPs, including seats of three former Tory PMs – Boris Johnson, David Cameron, and Theresa May. Lib Dem leader Sir Ed Davey remarked, “This is a record-breaking night for the Liberal Democrats.” He pledged to work hard to maintain trust with a focus on key issues, particularly the NHS and care.

The Green Party of England and Wales now has four MPs, with co-leaders Carla Denyer and Adrian Ramsay among the winners. However, it was a disastrous night for the SNP, which has been reduced to just eight MPs so far.

Former Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn retained his Islington North seat as an independent. In contrast, another prominent former Labour MP, George Galloway, failed to hold onto his Rochdale seat, losing to Labour’s Paul Waugh.

Sir Keir Starmer’s landslide is just shy of the 179-majority Tony Blair achieved in 1997, with Labour’s national vote share up by only 2%, mainly due to significant gains in Scotland, according to polling expert Sir John Curtice. Nonetheless, it signifies a Labour prime minister in Downing Street for the first time since 2010 and sparks a struggle over the Conservative Party’s future direction.

Penny Mordaunt, narrowly defeated by Labour by 780 votes, had been considered a potential candidate for Tory leadership post-election. Conceding defeat, she attributed the loss to the party’s failure to honor the trust people placed in it. Her sentiments were echoed by Northern Ireland Secretary Chris Heaton-Harris, who admitted the Tories had “lost the trust of the British people by not delivering,” adding, “We have to regroup and reconnect and actually just be a unified Conservative Party.”

The Conservatives lost seats they’ve held since the 19th or early 20th century across England’s shire counties. Former attorney general Sir Robert Buckland, the first Tory MP to lose his seat as results began coming in, described the situation as “electoral Armageddon” and viewed Labour’s victory as a “big vote for change.” He sharply criticized colleagues, such as former home secretary Suella Braverman, for what he termed “spectacularly unprofessional and ill-disciplined” behavior during the campaign, lamenting the upcoming Tory leadership contest as “going to be like a group of bald men arguing over a comb.”

The SNP is “not winning that argument” on Scottish independence, acknowledged First Minister John Swinney. “Opinion polls still show that about half the population in Scotland want our country to be independent,” he told the BBC. “That’s not manifested itself in the election result tonight, and that’s something we’ve got to look at very carefully as a party and to think about how we can remedy that situation.”

House Democrat Lloyd Doggett and Others Urge Biden to Step Down as Democratic Presidential Nominee

Rep. Lloyd Doggett (D-Texas) made headlines as the first House Democrat to publicly urge President Joe Biden to step down as the Democratic presidential nominee, highlighting the growing concern within the party over Biden’s debate performance. Doggett’s call reflects the internal party anxiety now spilling into the public sphere.

“President Biden has continued to run substantially behind Democratic senators in key states and in most polls has trailed Donald Trump,” Doggett stated. “I had hoped that the debate would provide some momentum to change that. It did not. Instead of reassuring voters, the President failed to effectively defend his many accomplishments and expose Trump’s many lies.”

Doggett emphasized his belief in Biden’s commitment to the country, contrasting it with Trump’s self-serving nature. “Recognizing that, unlike Trump, President Biden’s first commitment has always been to our country, not himself, I am hopeful that he will make the painful and difficult decision to withdraw. I respectfully call on him to do so,” he added.

Adam Frisch, a Democratic candidate running in Rep. Lauren Boebert’s (R-Colo.) 3rd Congressional District in Colorado, echoed Doggett’s sentiments shortly after. Frisch, who narrowly lost to Boebert in 2022, called for Biden to exit the race as well.

“We deserve better. President Biden should do what’s best for the country and withdraw from the race,” Frisch said. “I thank President Biden for his years of service, but the path ahead requires a new generation of leadership to take our country forward.”

Former Rep. Tim Ryan (D-Ohio) also weighed in earlier that day, publishing an opinion piece advocating for Vice President Kamala Harris to be positioned as the Democratic presidential nominee.

While these views do not represent the majority of the party—at least not publicly—there is a noticeable shift in tone among some Democrats, diverging from the unified front presented by Democratic leadership and Biden’s campaign team.

“It’s a familiar story: Following Thursday night’s debate, the beltway class is counting Joe Biden out. The data in the battleground states, though, tells a different story,” Biden campaign chair Jen O’Malley stated in a Saturday memo.

“On every metric that matters, data shows it did nothing to change the American people’s perception. Our supporters are more fired up than ever, and Donald Trump only reminded voters of why they fired him four years ago and failed to expand his appeal beyond his MAGA base,” she added.

Public polls conducted after the debate have done little to alleviate Democratic concerns about Biden’s performance affecting his chances in battleground and traditionally blue-leaning states. A Saint Anselm College poll released on Monday showed Trump narrowly leading Biden 44 percent to 42 percent in New Hampshire, within the poll’s margin of error of plus or minus 2.3 percent.

Meanwhile, a USA Today/Suffolk University poll released on Tuesday indicated Trump at 41 percent and Biden at 38 percent, also within the survey’s 3.1 percentage point margin of error.

AtlasIntel Poll: Biden Trails Trump in 2024 Race, Faces Calls to Withdraw Amid Debate Fallout

In the latest findings by AtlasIntel, a leading polling group renowned for its accuracy, President Joe Biden is reported to be trailing Donald Trump in the 2024 presidential race, particularly among younger voters by a significant margin. According to the survey of 1,634 likely voters conducted between June 26 and 28, Trump holds a five-point lead over Biden with 45.5 percent compared to Biden’s 40.3 percent, just over four months ahead of their anticipated rematch in November.

Among voters aged 18-29, Trump emerges as the clear favorite with 41.6 percent support, contrasting sharply with Biden’s 27 percent. This demographic shift is noteworthy given that younger voters traditionally lean towards Democratic candidates in elections. Conversely, Biden maintains leads in other key age groups, securing 47.7 percent support among those aged 45-64 and 52.1 percent among those aged 65 and above, compared to Trump’s 45.1 percent and 41.6 percent respectively in those age brackets.

The poll’s timing, conducted shortly after Thursday night’s first live televised presidential debate of the 2024 campaign, likely influenced participant perspectives. During the debate, concerns about Biden’s age and performance were exacerbated as he delivered responses described as incoherent and occasionally failed to complete sentences. This has fueled discussions about whether Biden should continue his reelection bid, with 48.2 percent of respondents suggesting he should withdraw, while 44.2 percent oppose such a move. Notably, a significant majority (54.6 percent) of younger voters aged 18-29 believe Biden should not seek another term in office.

Despite these sentiments, a substantial 72.4 percent of voters across all demographics expressed skepticism that Biden would actually withdraw from the race at this stage, underscoring the resilience of his campaign despite challenges regarding age and approval ratings. Biden’s campaign spokesperson, Lauren Hitt, affirmed after the debate that the President remains steadfast in his commitment to the election, dismissing speculations about an early exit.

In contrast to Biden’s perceived vulnerabilities, Trump’s reelection bid faces scrutiny surrounding his actions related to the January 6, 2021, riot at the U.S. Capitol. Nearly half of the poll respondents (48.9 percent) believe Trump should be disqualified from running due to his involvement in those events, while 47.2 percent disagree. Trump has maintained his innocence against federal charges connected to the Capitol riot and awaits a pivotal Supreme Court decision regarding potential presidential immunity.

The AtlasIntel poll, known for its meticulous methodology, carries a margin of error of plus or minus two percentage points, ensuring a reliable snapshot of voter sentiments leading into the final stretch of the 2024 presidential campaign.

Supreme Court Ruling Delays Trump’s Election Interference Trial Until After 2024 Election

The Supreme Court’s decision on Monday in former President Donald Trump’s 2020 election interference case significantly decreases the likelihood of him facing trial in Washington before the November election. The court did not dismiss the indictment, as Trump had requested, which alleges that he illegally attempted to retain power after losing to President Joe Biden. Nonetheless, the ruling is a considerable win for Trump, the leading Republican presidential candidate, who has been aiming to delay legal proceedings until after the election.

The timing of the trial is crucial because if Trump wins the election, he could appoint an attorney general who might seek to dismiss this case and other federal prosecutions against him. Alternatively, Trump could potentially pardon himself. Trump celebrated the ruling on his social media platform, declaring, “BIG WIN FOR OUR CONSTITUTION AND DEMOCRACY. PROUD TO BE AN AMERICAN!”

In contrast, President Biden criticized the court’s decision, calling it a “terrible disservice” to the American people, who he believes deserve to know the case’s outcome before voting. Biden stated, “The American people will have to render a judgment about Donald Trump’s behavior. The American people must decide whether Trump’s assault on our democracy on Jan. 6 makes him unfit for public office.”

The Opinion

The court’s conservative majority ruled that former presidents have absolute immunity from prosecution for official acts within their “exclusive sphere of constitutional authority” and are generally immune for all official acts. They do not have immunity for private actions. This ruling restricts special counsel Jack Smith from proceeding with major allegations in the indictment or requires him to defend their use in future proceedings before the trial judge.

For example, the justices nullified Smith’s use of allegations that Trump tried to leverage the Justice Department’s investigative power to reverse the election results, ruling that Trump’s communications with agency officials are clearly protected from prosecution. The case now returns to U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan, who must “carefully analyze” whether other allegations involve official conduct for which Trump would be immune.

One key issue for further examination is Trump’s persistent pressure on then-Vice President Mike Pence not to certify the electoral votes on January 6, 2021. The justices stated it is “ultimately the Government’s burden to rebut the presumption of immunity” in Trump’s interactions with Pence. Additionally, the court ordered further scrutiny of Trump’s posts on X (formerly Twitter) and a speech he delivered to supporters before the Capitol riot, to determine whether they constitute official or unofficial acts.

The Fake Electors Scheme

The justices called for new fact-finding on one of the indictment’s most startling allegations—that Trump participated in a scheme by allies to enlist slates of fraudulent electors in battleground states won by Biden, falsely claiming Trump had won those states. Trump’s team argued that selecting alternate electors was consistent with his presidential interest in election integrity, citing a precedent from the disputed 1876 election. However, Smith’s team portrayed the scheme as a purely private action unrelated to presidential duties.

The conservative majority did not resolve which side was correct, noting that determining the proper characterization of the conduct requires a detailed analysis of the indictment’s extensive and interrelated allegations. They stated, “This alleged conduct cannot be neatly categorized as falling within a particular Presidential function,” requiring a fact-specific assessment of numerous interactions with state officials and private individuals.

The Dissenters

The three liberal justices—Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, and Ketanji Brown Jackson—sharply criticized the majority opinion. Sotomayor, in a dramatic bench dissent, argued that the conservative majority wrongly insulated the U.S. president as “a king above the law.” She stated, “Ironic isn’t it? The man in charge of enforcing laws can now just break them.”

The dissenters warned that the majority decision makes presidents immune from prosecution for actions such as ordering Navy SEALs to assassinate a political rival, organizing a military coup, or accepting bribes for pardons. Sotomayor wrote, “Even if these nightmare scenarios never play out, and I pray they never do, the damage has been done. The relationship between the President and the people he serves has shifted irrevocably. In every use of official power, the President is now a king above the law.”

In a separate dissent, Jackson stated that the majority’s ruling “breaks new and dangerous ground,” declaring, “The Court has now declared for the first time in history that the most powerful official in the United States can (under circumstances yet to be fully determined) become a law unto himself.” The majority accused the liberal justices of “fear mongering” and maintaining a “tone of chilling doom that is wholly disproportionate to what the court actually does today.”

What Comes Next

The case will now return to Judge Chutkan. The trial was initially set to begin in March but has been on hold since December to allow Trump to pursue his appeal. Chutkan had previously indicated she would give the two sides at least three months to prepare for trial once the case returned to her court. This could have allowed the trial to commence before the election if the Supreme Court had ruled Trump was not immune from prosecution.

However, the Supreme Court’s directive for further analysis is expected to prolong the case with legal debates over whether the actions in the indictment were official or unofficial.

Trump’s Other Cases

Trump was convicted in May of 34 felony counts in his hush money trial in New York and is scheduled for sentencing on July 11. The charges of falsifying business records carry a maximum penalty of four years in prison, though prison time is not guaranteed, with other potential outcomes including fines or probation.

Trump’s other criminal cases are also unlikely to go to trial before the election. An appeals court recently halted his Georgia 2020 election interference case while reviewing a lower court’s ruling allowing Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis to stay on the case. No trial date had been set, and Trump’s lawyers have claimed presidential immunity, though no ruling has been made.

In the case regarding classified documents found at Trump’s Mar-a-Lago estate, U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon canceled the May trial date due to legal issues. A new trial date has not been set, and Trump’s team has claimed immunity, a stance prosecutors dispute. Cannon recently agreed to revisit a ruling by another judge allowing crucial obstruction of justice evidence to be introduced, causing further delays.

Justice Clarence Thomas’s separate concurrence suggested that Smith’s appointment was improper, but no other justice supported this view, indicating minimal impact on the Supreme Court’s stance.

Supreme Court Rules on Trump’s Immunity in Election Interference Case

In a landmark decision on Monday, the Supreme Court determined that former President Trump has presumptive immunity regarding his efforts to persuade then-Vice President Mike Pence to overturn the 2020 presidential election results by certifying slates of so-called “fake electors” on January 6, 2021.

This ruling was part of the justices’ broader opinion on presidential immunity, which established that core presidential powers are exempt from criminal prosecution. The case will now return to a lower court to determine if Trump’s actions leading up to January 6 qualify for this immunity.

Trump is accused of attempting to “enlist” Pence to “fraudulently alter the election results” in seven pivotal swing states. Chief Justice Roberts emphasized that any discussions between the president and vice president about their official responsibilities constitute official conduct. Presiding over the certification of presidential election results is both a constitutional and statutory duty of the vice president.

Roberts stated, “The indictment’s allegations that Trump attempted to pressure the Vice President to take particular acts in connection with his role at the certification proceeding thus involve official conduct, and Trump is at least presumptively immune from prosecution for such conduct.”

However, the chief justice did not definitively rule on whether Trump’s specific actions are immune from criminal prosecution, leaving this determination to the lower courts. Roberts noted, “The question then becomes whether that presumption of immunity is rebutted under the circumstances.”

The lower courts will also need to decide if other allegations against Trump fall under presidential immunity, including his interactions with state officials, private parties, and the general public. Nevertheless, the justices have already concluded that some allegations are directly related to Trump’s official duties and are thus protected by absolute immunity.

Among these allegations is Trump’s purported use of the “power and authority” of the Justice Department to “conduct sham election crime investigations.” It is alleged that he met with the acting attorney general and other senior officials in the DOJ and the White House to discuss these investigations.

Roberts explained that since the executive branch has the “exclusive authority and absolute discretion” to determine which crimes to investigate and prosecute, Trump is immune from criminal prosecution for these actions. He wrote, “The President cannot be prosecuted for conduct within his exclusive constitutional authority. Trump is therefore absolutely immune from prosecution for the alleged conduct involving his discussions with Justice Department officials.”

In his federal election subversion case, Trump faces four counts and has pleaded not guilty.

Democrats Evaluate Potential Successors Amid Speculation Over Biden’s Future in 2024 Race

President Biden’s campaign is actively working to dispel rumors suggesting he might withdraw from the 2024 race after his underwhelming performance in last week’s debate.

“Most top Democrats have voiced support for Biden continuing in the race,” while “members of his family, including first lady Jill Biden, have declared they also want him to remain a candidate,” which calls into question the possibility of replacing Biden.

“If Biden were to step aside, several prominent Democrats could be waiting in the wings as possible successors,” including Vice President Kamala Harris.

“If Biden were to decide against seeking reelection, Vice President Harris would be the most obvious choice to replace him,” Harris has recently defended Biden’s ability to serve another term, which most other top Democrats who could be considered have also done.

“Serving in the country’s second-highest office has given her some amount of executive governing experience, and Biden choosing her as his running mate already made her one of the top possible candidates for the 2028 nomination.”

“With the presidential primaries concluded, Harris is also the only possible contender who could claim some past electoral mandate for the nomination, with the country having indirectly elected her as first-in-line to the presidency four years ago and Democratic voters backing Biden this year with the knowledge that she is the running mate.”

“But Harris has some vulnerabilities,” her favorability rating has often been even lower than Biden’s, though she has improved somewhat in the past couple of months and has a higher net approval rating than Biden, according to FiveThirtyEight.

“She also could be dogged with criticisms of the Biden administration’s policies like immigration, on which she was spearheading an initiative.”

“Still, Democrats could take a hit by passing over the first female Black vice president as its nominee when having the chance because Black voters will be a key constituency,” a poll last month showed Harris would perform better with Black voters than Biden.

California Gov. Gavin Newsom is another prominent Democrat who could step into the spotlight if Harris is passed over.

“If Harris were to be passed over, the California Gov. Gavin Newsom would almost certainly be at or near the top of many Democratic delegates’ list to be the nominee.”

Newsom has gained prominence in recent years, partly due to his defense of Biden and his clashes with prominent Republicans, notably Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis (R).

“Despite ongoing speculation of Newsom having presidential ambitions, he has repeatedly denied interest in running for president in 2024,” following Biden’s debate. He appeared in the spin room to argue against ditching Biden just because of one performance and called talk of Biden being replaced “unhelpful and unnecessary” in a fundraising pitch for the president on Friday.

“But if Biden were to step aside, Newsom would very likely receive significant calls to throw his hat in the ring.”

“He would be able to run on a record as a two-term governor of one of the largest economies in the world and tout many accomplishments during his tenure for the left in the solidly blue state. He also has overcome an attempt to recall him and is seen as a top possibility to run in 2028.”

Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer, known for her slogan “Fix the Damn Roads,” has also emerged as a rising star in the Democratic Party.

“Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer first came to office in 2018, boosted by the slogan ‘Fix the Damn Roads,’ which put a pragmatic focus on repairing the state’s infrastructure. Since then, she has become a rising liberal star in the Democratic Party.”

“Her easy reelection victory in 2022 brought with it Democratic majorities in the state House and Senate, marking the first time in decades that Democrats had a trifecta of power in Michigan. She was also reelected alongside the passage of a ballot measure enshrining abortion rights in the state constitution, an initiative she championed.”

“Whitmer has been able to notch key victories, including the repeal of the state’s decades-old abortion ban and a ‘right-to-work’ law to prop up unions.”

“Still, Whitmer has been among the clearest of the rumored choices that she is not angling to replace Biden and is fully behind him.”

“Politico reported the Whitmer called Biden campaign chair Jen O’Malley Dillon on Friday to make clear she was not responsible for her name being floated as a possible replacement and is willing to help Biden with the campaign. She appeared in an ad supporting the Biden-Harris ticket that she posted Sunday on her account on the social platform X.”

Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg, known as “Mayor Pete,” has also been discussed as a potential successor.

“Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg was relatively unknown when he first began his run for president in 2020 but gained traction and popularity as ‘Mayor Pete,’ having served as the mayor of South Bend, Ind.”

“Buttigieg became a close advocate for Biden throughout 2020, culminating in his selection as Transportation secretary, making him the first openly gay Cabinet secretary. His success has raised speculation that he may try for another presidential run down the line.”

“In particular, he had a high-profile moment in 2021 as Congress passed and Biden signed the bipartisan infrastructure law into effect.”

“Buttigieg’s youth would also be a sharp contrast to Biden despite having less experience than some other rumored possibilities. But he struggled in 2020 with rallying minority, and especially Black support, and could face controversy over the administration’s handling of the East Palestine, Ohio, train derailment.”

Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro, known for his moderate stance within the Democratic Party, has also been mentioned as a potential candidate.

“Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro gradually rose to higher office in his home state before being elected state attorney general and eventually governor in 2022. He has developed a reputation over his career as a more moderate Democrat but was elected after running on key liberal issues, like protecting abortion rights and raising the minimum wage.”

“His ability to comfortably win the governorship in the battleground by almost 15 points, as well as his youthful energy, has sparked rumors he could be a future face of the party, possibly running for the Oval Office in four years.”

“But he would also likely get some attention this year if Biden were to end his presidential bid. He has been one of Biden’s top surrogates and called on his fellow Democrats to put in the work necessary to get Biden elected, saying ‘hand-wringing’ and ‘fretting’ are not the answer.”

Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker, who will host the Democratic National Convention in Chicago, has also been highlighted.

“As the governor of Illinois, JB Pritzker is already set to receive some attention next month as the host governor of the Democratic National Convention in Chicago. This, along with his rising national profile, could yield some support for his name to be placed in contention for the nomination.”

“Pritzker is in his second term as the head of the strongly Democratic-leaning state and has been an ardent defender of Biden throughout the 2024 campaign. Also one of Biden’s top surrogates, he defended the incumbent following special counsel Robert Hur’s report on Biden’s handling of classified documents and pushed back against Democrats planning to vote for anyone other than Biden in November.”

“Andy Beshear, the Democratic governor of Kentucky, has also been noted for his impressive reelection victory in a traditionally Republican state.”

“Kentucky Gov. Andy Beshear (D) pulled off an impressive reelection victory in his ruby-red state last year, improving his margin by a few points over his first election in 2019.”

“That thrust his name into the national conversation as someone who may have a future in the party, even though he will be term-limited in the next election. The governor is widely popular, only in his mid-40s and managed to win statewide as a Democrat twice in a state that hasn’t voted for a Democrat in a presidential election since the 1990s.”

“Beshear addressed the possibility of Biden being replaced Monday, telling reporters he will support Biden as long as the president remains the Democratic nominee.”

“‘The debate performance was rough. It was a very bad night for the president, but he is still the candidate. Only he can make decisions about his future candidacy. So as long as he continues to be in the race, I support him,’ he said.”

“When pressed on whether he could replace Biden, Beshear said talk of serving is ‘flattering’ but is a ‘reflection of all the good things going on in Kentucky.’”

Supreme Court Grants Broad Immunity to Former Presidents, Delaying Trump’s Washington Trial

The Supreme Court made a landmark decision on Monday, establishing that former presidents enjoy extensive immunity from prosecution. This ruling significantly delays the criminal case against Donald Trump in Washington, where he faces charges related to alleged efforts to overturn the 2020 election results. It also diminishes the likelihood of a trial before the upcoming November election.

In a historic 6-3 verdict, the court’s conservative majority, which includes three justices appointed by Trump, narrowed the scope of the case and remanded it to the trial court for further evaluation of Special Counsel Jack Smith’s indictment.

Trump celebrated what he termed a “BIG WIN,” while President Biden expressed concern over the precedent set by the justices, stating it “undermines the rule of this nation.”

Chief Justice John Roberts, writing for the majority, asserted a robust interpretation of presidential authority, arguing that a former president enjoys absolute immunity from criminal prosecution for actions within their constitutional authority. However, Roberts clarified that there is no immunity for unofficial acts, affirming that no individual, including a president, is above the law.

In dissent, Justice Sonia Sotomayor criticized the majority’s stance, asserting that the ruling elevates the president above legal accountability, likening it to granting the president kingly powers.

The decision by the justices underscores their pivotal role in the upcoming presidential election. Previously, they rejected attempts to prevent Trump from appearing on the ballot due to his actions post-2020 election. Additionally, the court recently curtailed an obstruction charge against Trump, a charge that has been applied to many of his supporters involved in the January 6, 2021 Capitol riot, showcasing the judiciary’s alignment with the nation’s political divisions.

The court’s ruling specifically addressed Trump’s immunity regarding alleged discussions with the Justice Department and his efforts to influence Vice President Mike Pence’s certification of Joe Biden’s electoral victory. It directed further examination of accusations that Trump conspired to manipulate electoral results in key states won by Biden.

Roberts’ opinion restricted prosecutors from using official acts as evidence in cases involving a president’s unofficial conduct. This limitation is seen as pivotal in cases where Trump’s alleged actions, such as attempts to influence electoral processes, are scrutinized.

Justice Amy Coney Barrett concurred with Roberts on most points but diverged on whether juries should be shielded from contextual information surrounding a president’s actions, arguing against such restrictions.

The practical implications of the ruling now rest with U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan, who will oversee Trump’s trial. Legal experts suggest that while a trial remains possible, its occurrence before the election appears improbable.

Critics, including Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, denounced the decision as undermining the credibility of the Supreme Court, particularly given the involvement of justices appointed by Trump.

The court’s deliberations spanned several months, highlighting the complexity and significance of the case amidst a highly charged political climate. Trump, who faces multiple legal challenges, including one in New York where he was recently convicted, maintains his innocence and attributes the prosecutions to political motivations aimed at hindering his political aspirations.

Jack Smith, leading federal inquiries into Trump’s alleged misconduct, declined to comment following the ruling. The cases against Trump span several jurisdictions, focusing on different aspects of his presidency and post-presidential actions.

Looking ahead, the timing of any trial in Washington could influence Trump’s future political endeavors. A favorable outcome for him in the 2024 election could potentially lead to the dismissal of ongoing cases against him or even self-pardon, though state-level convictions would remain unaffected by such actions.

The Supreme Court’s decision, which included participation from justices connected to Trump, underscores the judiciary’s role in shaping legal outcomes with significant political ramifications.

Supreme Court Narrows Interpretation of Obstruction Statute, Favoring Jan. 6 Rioter Joseph Fischer

The Supreme Court ruled on Friday in favor of Joseph Fischer, a participant in the January 6, 2021, Capitol riot, who contested his conviction for federal “obstruction.” In a 6-3 decision, the Court adopted a narrower interpretation of a federal statute that criminalizes anyone who corruptly “alters, destroys, mutilates, or conceals a record, document, or other object, or attempts to do so, with the intent to impair the object’s integrity or availability for use in an official proceeding.”

This ruling overturns a previous lower court decision, which the Supreme Court found to be overly broad, encompassing peaceful yet disruptive conduct. The case will now return to the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals for reassessment in light of this new ruling.

Fischer, among over 300 individuals charged with “obstruction of an official proceeding” during the Capitol riot, argued through his lawyers that the statute should not apply to his actions. They claimed it had historically been used only in evidence-tampering cases. The Justice Department, however, maintained that Fischer’s actions constituted a “deliberate attempt” to halt a joint session of Congress from certifying the 2020 election, justifying the use of the statute which criminalizes behavior that “otherwise obstructs, influences, or impedes any official proceeding, or attempts to do so,” carrying penalties of up to 20 years in prison.

Chief Justice John Roberts, writing for the majority, noted that the government had overextended the law. He stated, “Although the Government’s all-encompassing interpretation may be literally permissible, it defies the most plausible understanding” of the statute’s provisions and “renders an unnerving amount of statutory text mere surplusage.” Roberts elaborated that to convict someone under the “obstruction” crime, it must be proven that the defendant impaired the integrity or availability of records, documents, or objects for an official proceeding or attempted to do so.

Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, in a concurring opinion, stressed that the Court’s role was to interpret what the statute criminalizes, despite “the shocking circumstances involved in this case.” She wrote, “Joseph Fischer was charged with violating §1512(c)(2) by corruptly obstructing ‘a proceeding before Congress, specifically, Congress’s certification of the Electoral College vote.’… That official proceeding plainly used certain records, documents, or objects — including, among others, those relating to the electoral votes themselves… And it might well be that Fischer’s conduct, as alleged here, involved the impairment (or the attempted impairment) of the availability or integrity of things used during the January 6 proceeding ‘in ways other than those specified in (c)(1).’”

She concluded that Fischer’s prosecution under §1512(c)(2) could proceed, with the lower courts tasked to determine this on remand.

Justices Amy Coney Barrett, Sonia Sotomayor, and Elena Kagan dissented. Barrett argued, “There is no getting around it: Section 1512(c)(2) is an expansive statute. Yet Congress, not this Court, weighs ‘pros and cons of whether a statute should sweep broadly or narrowly.’ Once Congress has set the outer bounds of liability, the Executive Branch has the discretion to select particular cases to prosecute within those boundaries. By atextually narrowing §1512(c)(2), the Court has failed to respect the prerogatives of the political branches.”

Attorney General Merrick Garland expressed disappointment with the decision but stated it would not affect the majority of the over 1,400 defendants charged for their actions on January 6. He assured that the Department would “take appropriate steps to comply with the Court’s ruling” and continue to use “all available tools to hold accountable those criminally responsible for the January 6 attack on our democracy.”

During oral arguments in April, Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar faced rigorous questioning from the justices. Justice Neil Gorsuch inquired if the government’s stance meant heckling at the State of the Union address or incidents like Rep. Jaamal Bowman pulling a fire alarm to divert a House vote would constitute “obstruction.” Prelogar responded that such scenarios might not meet all statutory requirements, highlighting that obstruction necessitates “meaningful interference” and “corrupt intent.”

Chief Justice Roberts also queried Prelogar about a 2019 DOJ’s Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) opinion, which suggested the obstruction statute should be narrowly interpreted, seemingly contradicting the DOJ’s current position. Prelogar noted that the opinion was never “formally” adopted and was unsure of the DOJ’s formal acceptance process for OLC papers.

Following the Supreme Court’s decision, the case now returns to the D.C. federal appeals court to determine if Fischer’s actions meet the narrower legal standard for obstruction. The Justice Department must decide whether to drop the obstruction charge for defendants facing additional charges related to January 6 or to wait until the courts have fully resolved the issue. For those only charged with obstruction under this statute, the DOJ must consider dropping the prosecutions entirely.

Harris Steps into Spotlight as Biden’s Debate Performance Stirs Speculation

President Biden’s lackluster debate performance has thrust Vice President Harris into the spotlight.

After Biden struggled against former President Trump, Harris hit the airwaves to defend her running mate’s record and ability to handle the job. But she was also central to conversations among some Democrats about whether Biden should step aside, a move that would likely move Harris to the top of the ticket in November.

It puts Harris in a tricky spot as she seeks to reassure nervous Democrats about their chances in this year’s election while positioning herself as a potential future leader of the party.

“To be quite honest, she sounded coherent and made her points in a succinct and sharp way,” said one Democratic donor. “The next 30 days it may be up to her to make the case. People will be looking to her and testing her to see if she’s ready.”

One Democrat, who served in the Obama White House, said Harris “clearly has a purpose now to make the case for what they have accomplished.”

The aide pointed to remarks from former President Obama, where he likened major political moments to a relay race.

“This is the transitional moment where both she and Biden have their hands on the baton, but clearly she will be needed to complete the race,” the aide said.

Biden squared off with Trump on the debate stage Thursday night in what turned out to be a disastrous performance. The president’s voice was raspy for much of the 90 minutes, his delivery was frequently halting and at times he lost his train of thought or struggled to make his point clearly.

Many Democrats quickly panned Biden’s showing and raised the idea that he should step aside ahead of the party’s August convention.

That left Harris to defend her running mate on the same networks where anchors and pundits were discussing the prospect of Biden leaving the ticket.

“People can debate on style points, but ultimately this election and who is the president of the United States has to be about substance,” said Harris, who conceded Biden had a “slow start.”

The vice president was not asked about, nor did she address, the elephant in the room: that she would be the likeliest candidate to replace Biden should he step aside.

The vice president’s team on Friday dismissed any talk of a Democratic ticket that doesn’t include both Biden and Harris.

“Vice President Harris looks forward to serving a second term with President Joe Biden,” Harris spokesperson Ernie Apreza said in a statement.

Biden’s campaign and White House officials similarly shut down talk of the president dropping out of the race after Thursday’s debate. At a North Carolina rally early Friday afternoon, Biden acknowledged his difficulties on the debate stage but insisted he was up to the job.

But should he step aside, Democratic strategists have downplayed the prospect of an open convention. They argued Harris would be the logical choice, given her role as vice president, and warned of the risks of passing over a Black woman already on the ticket for another candidate.

Harris launched a much-hyped presidential bid of her own in 2019, and one of her marquee moments came during an exchange with Biden on the debate stage over busing. But she failed to translate the initial enthusiasm over her candidacy into tangible support and struggled to connect with voters or develop a clear message. She ultimately dropped out before the Iowa caucuses.

When Biden was considering Harris as his running mate, some allies cautioned that Harris would be looking out for her own political pursuits while serving as vice president. Aware of that perception, Harris has sought to be a loyal foot soldier.

“She knew it would be a horrible look if it turned [out] to be the Kamala show,” said one Democratic strategist.

Harris had a rocky opening to her tenure as vice president, stumbling with her messaging on the issue of migration and struggling to garner support for a voting rights package despite taking it on as a personal cause.

But she has hit her stride and become a valuable figure in the two years since the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade. Harris has traveled the country to talk about reproductive rights, becoming the face of the White House and the campaign on an issue Democrats are hoping might swing the election in their favor.

Harris has also traveled internationally to meet with world leaders and discuss the conflict in Ukraine.

“During her postdebate interview blitz, Vice President Harris really showed her strengths — she is a forceful communicator, an effective leader and a strong partner to President Biden,” said Rachel Palermo, who served as Harris’s deputy communications director and associate counsel in the White House.

“She reminded voters that the substance matters, and the contrast between Biden and Trump on the issues is clear,” Palermo added.

Polling on Harris’s chances in 2024 if she were elevated to the top of the ticket has been scarce, but the available data suggests she may fare similarly to Biden.

A February New York Times/Siena College poll found Harris trailing Trump among likely voters in a hypothetical match-up by 6 percentage points, 42 percent support to 48 percent. She fared only slightly worse than Biden, who at the time trailed Trump in that survey by 4 percentage points, 44 percent to 48 percent.

The same poll found 38 percent of likely voters had a favorable view of Harris, compared to 54 percent who had an unfavorable view of her.

Republicans have used Biden’s age to attack the prospect of a Harris presidency. Nikki Haley made it central to her failed presidential bid, suggesting a vote for Biden in 2024 was actually a vote for Harris.

The Trump campaign ran an ad during Thursday night’s debate that highlighted footage of Biden tripping on the stairs of Air Force One and looking lost on stage before a narrator said Harris was “waiting behind him.”

Thursday’s debate supercharged speculation from Republicans that Harris may ultimately end up in the Oval Office.

Rep. Chip Roy (R-Texas) said Friday he planned to put forth a resolution urging Harris to convene the Cabinet and declare Biden unable to carry out the duties of the Oval Office.

Philadelphia Inquirer Urges Trump’s Withdrawal from 2024 Race, Citing Lies and Chaos

The editorial board of The Philadelphia Inquirer recently penned an opinion piece urging a specific presidential candidate to withdraw from the 2024 race. The board made it clear that they were not referring to President Biden, stating, “The only person who should withdraw from the race is Trump.” They emphasized their stance by noting, “Supporters say they like Trump because he says whatever he thinks. But he mainly spews raw sewage.”

The editorial board further criticized Trump’s approach, highlighting that he “constantly tears the country down” in his efforts to build himself up. They lamented the absence of a “shining city on the hill,” painting a grim picture of the current state of affairs in America.

The centerpiece of the board’s argument revolved around the staggering number of lies—over 30,000 during his time in office, with at least 30 falsehoods uttered during a single debate. The board described the debate as “a reminder of what another four years of Trump would look like. More lies, grievance, narcissism, and hate.”

The board proceeded to dissect Trump’s first term in office, highlighting his extensive Twitter use and frequent visits to his own properties, where he reportedly played over 200 games of golf. They also pointed out his unfulfilled promises, such as the border wall with Mexico.

In addition, the board criticized Trump’s judicial appointments, noting that he primarily selected extreme judges, many of whom were white males, with some being rated as unqualified by the American Bar Association. They also highlighted the record number of fired or resigned cabinet officials, the constant chaos and infighting in the West Wing, and other shortcomings of his administration.

Further, the board addressed various controversies during Trump’s tenure, including a lucrative deal struck by his son-in-law with Saudi Arabia’s government, his impeachments, and his handling of the COVID-19 pandemic. They also mentioned his recent conviction on 34 counts of fraud in New York and his involvement in three additional federal cases, including one related to an attempted overthrow of the government.

The board questioned the decision to allow Trump on the debate stage, given his track record. They acknowledged President Biden’s performance in the debate as less than stellar but emphasized his belief in the best of America and his efforts to rebuild international relationships. They unequivocally stated, “There was only one person at the debate who does not deserve to be running for president. The sooner Trump exits the stage, the better off the country will be.”

The Philadelphia Inquirer’s editorial board called for Trump to withdraw from the presidential race, citing a multitude of reasons, and expressed their belief that the country would be better off without his candidacy.

Replacing Biden as Democratic Nominee: Unlikely and Complicated Process Unless Voluntary Withdrawal Occurs

Replacing President Biden as the Democratic nominee is fraught with complications and is essentially unfeasible unless Biden decides to step down on his own accord. Both politically and procedurally, it is nearly impossible for the Democrats to prevent Biden from securing the nomination.

Currently, Biden is the only candidate available for a vote at the Democratic convention. He received 99 percent of his party’s delegates in the primaries, with these delegates pledged to support the winner of their state’s contest in the initial round of voting. According to Democratic National Committee (DNC) rules, delegates won by Biden are required to support his nomination unless he voluntarily withdraws and releases them to support another candidate.

Although the DNC could theoretically change the rules to block Biden before the convention starts on August 19, such a move would necessitate an extraordinary level of political backing, which is hard to envision. A factional clash at the convention to unseat him seems highly improbable.

However, Democratic sources told The Hill that there is a slight chance party leaders, including former Presidents Obama and Clinton, might be persuaded to talk to Biden about stepping down. Ultimately, Biden places the most trust in the advice from First Lady Jill Biden and his sister, Valerie, who are considered the only people capable of truly influencing his decision.

A unique situation in 2024 further compresses the timeline for deciding the nominee. Ohio state law mandates that its ballot be certified 90 days before the election, which this year falls on August 7, almost two weeks before the convention starts. Despite attempts by Ohio lawmakers to pass a bill to resolve this issue, they reached a deadlock, leading DNC leaders to plan for a virtual nomination of Biden ahead of the deadline and the convention. Any change in the nominee would thus need to occur before Ohio’s deadline to ensure the candidate appears on the state’s ballot, barring a legislative fix.

On Friday, party leaders were rallying around Biden, showing no indication of privately urging him to step aside. His campaign, the White House, and his supporters have strongly resisted the idea, though some mentioned that if polls reveal his performance is detrimental to down-ballot candidates, it could become a pressing topic.

If Biden were to step down, Vice President Harris would be the natural successor. Nevertheless, she would not automatically become the replacement. Although Biden won the primaries, his support garnered through those contests cannot be directly transferred to Harris. Instead, she would need to compete with other potential candidates, who might view themselves as stronger contenders against the presumptive GOP nominee, former President Trump.

According to its bylaws, the DNC holds general responsibility for the party’s affairs between national conventions, which includes filling vacancies in the nominations for president and vice president. Should Biden withdraw, a vacancy would be created, and Harris would logically be the successor. Politically, it would be difficult for someone to replace Harris if Biden wanted her to lead the ticket. However, prospective politicians like California Gov. Gavin Newsom or Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer might still attempt to vie for the position.

“This is the bigger pickle to replacing Biden. I don’t see the Democratic coalition surviving intact if Harris is not on the top of the ticket, and it’s hard to assure that would be the party consensus if they replace Biden,” a former DNC official said.

If multiple Democratic candidates aimed to replace a withdrawn Biden as the party’s nominee, they would likely need to contend with state delegations at the August convention in Chicago. This could result in a scenario not seen in American politics for decades: a contested convention that actually determines the party’s nominee.

Conservative groups have suggested they would file lawsuits across the country, potentially questioning the legality of the Democratic candidate’s name on the ballot under such circumstances. In an interview with the Associated Press, Elaine Kamarck, a senior fellow in governance studies at the Brookings Institution in Washington, noted that courts have consistently refrained from intervening in political primaries as long as the parties conducting them were not infringing upon other constitutional rights, such as voter suppression based on race.

Debate Struggles Highlight Age Concerns for Biden as Harris Faces Tough Poll Numbers Against Trump

Joe Biden faced challenges during his debate with Donald Trump on Thursday night, raising questions about how his vice president, Kamala Harris, would handle a debate against the former president.

The two leaders met in Atlanta for their first face-off in nearly four years, with Biden’s age being a significant concern. At 81, he is the oldest president in U.S. history. During the debate, Biden struggled, sounding hoarse and losing his train of thought at one point. These issues intensified discussions among Democrats about whether he should continue as the party’s nominee.

With four months until Election Day, there’s no definitive front-runner to replace Biden. However, Vice President Kamala Harris is a potential candidate. At 59, she is significantly younger than both Biden and Trump, who is three years younger than Biden. If Biden were to step down, Harris would automatically assume the presidency, making her a logical choice for a potential switch in the Biden-Harris campaign.

Polls suggest Harris faces a tougher challenge against Trump than Biden. According to RealClearPolling averages, Trump leads Harris by 6.6 percentage points, with 49.3 percent support compared to her 42.7 percent. In contrast, Trump is ahead of Biden by only 1.5 points, with 46.6 percent to Biden’s 45.1 percent.

A Politico and Morning Consult poll conducted earlier this month showed that only a third of voters believe Harris would win the election if she became the Democratic nominee. Additionally, only 60 percent of Democrats think she would succeed.

Harris has faced criticism for not having a more prominent role in the Biden administration. Less than a year into Biden’s term, the White House issued a statement to counter claims that Harris had not met expectations. In November 2021, White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre said, “For anyone who needs to hear it. @VP is not only a vital partner to @POTUS but a bold leader who has taken on key, important challenges facing the country—from voting rights to addressing root causes of migration to expanding broadband.”

Appointed by Biden to handle the border crisis, Harris has been criticized for the response to the influx of migrants since Biden took office. Immigration remains a top concern for voters, more than three years after Harris was named Biden’s border czar.

Harris’ reputation has struggled due to early missteps, and her approval rating reflects this. FiveThirtyEight’s polling averages indicate that less than 40 percent of Americans approve of her performance as vice president, with nearly half disapproving. Biden and Trump’s approval ratings are similarly low, with Biden’s approval around 38 percent and 56 percent disapproving. Trump has a 42 percent favorable opinion, while about 53 percent view him unfavorably.

Despite these challenges, Harris remains supportive of Biden’s candidacy. After the debate, she defended Biden in an interview with CNN’s Anderson Cooper, acknowledging his “slow start” but praising his “strong finish” in the 90-minute event. Harris emphasized, “What we saw tonight was the president making a very clear contrast with Donald Trump on all the issues that matter to the American people.”

When Cooper suggested that Biden’s debate performance was disappointing, Harris responded assertively, saying, “I’m not going to spend all night with you talking about the last 90 minutes when I’ve been watching the last three and a half years of performance.”

Calls Grow Louder For Biden To Dop Out Of Presidential Election, After His Disastrous Debate Performance

President Joe Biden was supposed to put the nation’s mind at ease over his physical and mental capacity with his debate with Donald Trump, the presumptive Republican nominee on Thursday night. They hoped that President Biden, 81, could convince the world that his age was nothing to worry about and that he could counter Donald Trump’s wild accusations and relentless falsehoods with confidence.

But from the onset of the debate, Biden struggled even to talk, mostly summoning a weak, raspy voice. Biden’s voice was hoarse and halting. His answers were often unclear, and he struggled to finish his thoughts. In the opening minutes, he repeatedly tripped over his words, misspoke and lost his train of thought.

Biden produced the weakest performance since John F. Kennedy and Richard Nixon started the tradition of televised debates in 1960 — then, as on Thursday, in a television studio with no audience.

Rather than dispel concerns about his age, his garbled debate performance reinforced his frailties and sent shudders of anxiety through Democrats who believe former President Trump is poised to benefit in November. Thursday’s presidential debate saw a raspy and sometimes halting President Joe Biden struggling to confront Donald Trump on the CNN stage, spurring panic from his party.

Biden’s faltering debate performance has worried Democrats openly discussing for the need to have the president step aside for a younger candidate while elated Republicans gloat over his stumbles. “He’s not equipped to be president,” Trump said during the debate.

If the debate was the president’s best chance to turn around a tight race with Trump, which has him in deep peril of losing reelection, it was a failure.

In a hoarse voice that gained volume as the 90 minutes wore on, Biden attempted to draw substantive contrasts with his challenger, but his meandering points and blank expressions handed Trump ammunition to reprise his campaign theme that Biden is a “disaster” who is “destroying” the country.

The president, in turn, attacked Trump’s policies, morals, veracity and motives. He referred to his predecessor as “this guy,” said “he’s lying,” called Trump “a loser” and “a sucker” and “a convicted felon.” Biden said Trump “slept with a porn star,” referring to Stormy Daniels, the woman at the center of the former president’s New York conviction for falsifying hush money payments