Massive voter registration dump in Arizona may lead to Election Day headaches



At the last minute, third-party groups submitted nearly 100,000 voter registration forms in Arizona's most populous county, creating headaches for both election workers and voters alike, a report from AZ Central says.

On the final day to register to vote in Arizona — which this year would have been October 7 — these groups dumped as many as 90,000 forms on the Maricopa County Recorder's Office, an "unprecedented" number, according to spokesperson Taylor Kinnerup.

'Places where there are more questions around eligibility — those places could potentially have longer lines because we know there will be more questions there.'

What's more, a sizeable portion of these forms — some 30,000 or 40,000 of them — were heavily damaged and could not be processed. Still others were registered under names such as "Donald Duck" and "Mickey Mouse."

Of the 50,000 that could be processed, many still had defects. Some had missing information, AZ Central reported. Others were dated weeks earlier, and Arizona law requires third parties to submit voter registration forms within five days of collecting them, Kinnerup claimed.

Registrants whose addresses could be ascertained were issued a notice to cure their registration information before the deadline of 7 p.m. on Election Day. Those who followed through and fixed the missing information should be able to vote normally on Tuesday.

"All of the preliminary work has been done in terms of processing these forms," Kinnerup added. "Anything left to do is on the onus of the voter."

Those with a valid ID whose registration form is still missing some information will likely be able to complete the registration at the polling station and cast a provisional ballot that will be counted if and when officials determine that they were eligible to vote.

Others whose forms were too badly damaged will also likely be able to cast a provisional ballot, but that ballot will not be counted unless they previously registered to vote and that registration remains active, AZ Central reported. The outlet did not clarify why such individuals would re-register to vote or require a provisional ballot if they have an active voter registration.

As of Friday, elections workers have already processed 4,800 provisional ballots, well above average, Elections Department spokesperson Jennifer Liewer claimed.

"It's certainly a much higher number than we've seen previously since moving to a vote center model."

Officials are also concerned that these problems and uncertainties will increase wait times at the polls even more on Tuesday. They had already warned Election Day voters to expect to wait at least an hour before casting a ballot.

"Places where there are higher provisionals, places where there are more questions around eligibility — those places could potentially have longer lines because we know there will be more questions there," Tammy Patrick, a former Maricopa County elections official who now works at the Election Center, told the outlet.

Despite going into great detail about potential fallout from tens of thousands of faulty voter registrations submitted at the 11th hour, AZ Central called out what it described as "election denialism," implying that voters who distrust the system are the problem rather than the system itself.

The outlet did not identify the third-party groups that had submitted the registrations.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Leftist Group Threatens Michigan Voters: ‘We Will Be Reviewing’ Your Voting Record

The left-wing Voter Participation Center sent Michigan residents, including a reporter for The Federalist, letters with threatening language.

Counting on chaos: How census miscounts could decide 2024



What if Donald Trump narrowly loses the election due to an unnoticed form of election fraud, later confirmed by U.S. Census data? What if Republicans saw this fraud coming but took no action and haven’t even held hearings to address it?

With Ohio and Florida solidly Republican this generation, Democrats have based their electoral strategy on the “blue wall” of Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin. Signs show that migration trends and demographic shifts may have bolstered Republican positions in Sun Belt swing states like Arizona, Nevada, Georgia, and North Carolina.

In a closely divided nation, acts of misconduct — and the GOP’s lack of a long-term strategy to counter them — will shape the course of history.

If Democrats retain the blue wall, Trump would still have 268 electoral votes — just one short of a potential win through a congressional vote. This outcome remains a real possibility. However, what if the states that Trump would likely win, based on clear population data, should actually yield more than 270 votes, even without a single Rust Belt swing state?

The Constitution mandates a census every 10 years to determine each state’s congressional representation. Article II, Section 1, Clause 2, then ties the Electoral College to that state’s congressional delegation based on census reapportionment. But if the census inflated blue state numbers and deflated red state numbers in a closely divided country, it could change the balance of power in Congress and potentially determine the next president.

Based on the census report used for reapportionment, which estimated the population as of April 1, 2020, Texas gained two congressional seats, while Colorado, Florida, Montana, North Carolina, and Oregon each gained one. Meanwhile, California, Illinois, Michigan, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and West Virginia each lost a congressional seat, reducing their electoral votes for president. Although this shift benefited Republicans overall, many believed it still didn’t capture the massive migration from blue states to red states, especially in the Sun Belt.

In a bombshell 2022 report that should have sparked a fierce congressional debate, the Census Bureau admitted to overcounting in eight states and undercounting in six by unprecedented error margins. Five of the six undercounted states were red, and six of the eight overcounted states were blue, with the largest errors affecting red states on both sides. Here are the error rates:

  • Undercounted states
    Arkansas (-5.04%), Florida (-3.48%), Illinois (-1.97%), Mississippi (-4.11%), Tennessee (-4.78%), Texas (-1.92%)
  • Overcounted states
    Delaware (+5.45%), Hawaii (+6.79%), Massachusetts (+2.24%), Minnesota (+3.84%), New York (+3.44%), Ohio (+1.49%), Rhode Island (+5.05%), Utah (+2.59%)

In raw population terms, the largest errors disadvantaged red states and favored blue states:

  1. Florida (-761,094)
  2. Texas (-560,319)
  3. Tennessee (-330,628)

What was the result of these errors? As Hans von Spakovsky from the Heritage Foundation noted, “Due to these errors, Florida did not receive two additional congressional seats, Texas lost out on one seat, while Minnesota and Rhode Island each retained a seat they should have lost, and Colorado gained an undeserved new seat.”

It’s hard to predict how an accurate count would have affected congressional district boundaries, making it difficult to assess the partisan control of Congress. However, in the Electoral College, if Trump wins the Sun Belt swing states and Harris carries the Rust Belt swing states, instead of Trump losing 270-268, he would win 271-267. The data shows Trump could win with just the Sun Belt. And House control could hinge on a few districts that may have been distorted by Biden’s erroneous census certification.

Why didn’t Republicans hold hearings to investigate this error? In the previous census, there was an overcount of only 36,000 people nationwide, a negligible 0.01% that didn’t affect any state’s reapportionment. Doesn’t anyone want to understand the cause of such a significant error, especially one so favorable to Democrats?

While options for redress in 2022 were limited, Republicans had two years before the next presidential election to challenge the Biden administration’s decision. The apportionment clause grants Congress the authority to direct the census “in such manner as they shall by law direct.”

With control of Congress in 2023, House Republicans could have held hearings to clarify the correct apportionment and added legislation to budget bills mandating a compromise between the original numbers and the revised count starting in 2024.

Though a legal battle would likely follow, the Supreme Court ruled in Utah v. Evans (2002) that the census clause doesn’t forbid using statistical methods to enhance accuracy beyond a direct count.

This error isn’t the only factor giving Democrats an artificial advantage. Even before the recent surge in illegal immigration, estimates suggested California held an extra five seats in the House due to its population of illegal aliens. When Trump tried to exclude undocumented immigrants from the census count, the courts blocked his efforts. But when Biden’s inaccurate count favored blue states, officials claimed there was no legal recourse.

It’s disheartening and ironic to reflect on our founding and see how the framers believed the census would be one of the least politicized issues. In Federalist No. 36, Alexander Hamilton wrote, “An actual census or enumeration of the people must furnish the rule, a circumstance which effectually shuts the door to partiality or oppression.”

Today, self-evident truths are often distorted, making it easy for the government to manipulate data with bias and unfairness. In a closely divided nation, these acts of misconduct — and the GOP’s lack of a long-term strategy to counter them — will shape the course of history.

Supreme Court deals Biden-Harris DOJ crushing blow regarding noncitizen voter push: 'Victory for election integrity'



The Biden-Harris Department of Justice sued Virginia earlier this month in hopes of killing an initiative aimed at removing thousands of suspected noncitizens from the commonwealth's voter rolls.

The Youngkin administration fought back and won.

Virginia Attorney General Jason Miyares noted, "I am pleased to announce that the US Supreme Court granted Virginia's emergency stay to keep noncitizens off our voter rolls."

In a 6-3 ruling Wednesday, the U.S. Supreme Court temporarily overruled Democrat-appointed 4th Circuit judges and halted a Biden-appointed judge's order, thereby allowing Virginia to resume the work of making sure that only American citizens can vote in next week's election.

Liberal Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, and Ketanji Brown Jackson dissented.

The stay means that Virginia — where the latest Quantus Insights poll indicates Kamala Harris and President Donald Trump are virtually tied — will not have to put over 1,500 suspected noncitizens back onto its voter rolls before Election Day.

'Kamala's Administration sued Virginia and is now arguing to the US Supreme Court that non-citizens must remain on the voter rolls.'

Republican Gov. Glenn Youngkin said in a statement, "We are pleased by the Supreme Court's order today. This is a victory for commonsense and election fairness. I am grateful for the work of Attorney General Jason Miyares on this critical fight to protect the fundamental rights of U.S. citizens."

"Clean voter rolls are one important part of a comprehensive approach we are taking to ensure the fairness of our elections," continued Youngkin. "Virginians can cast their ballots on Election Day knowing that Virginia's elections are fair, secure, and free from politically motivated interference."

Dozens of red states backed Virginia's defense along with the Republican National Committee.

Louisiana Attorney General Liz Murrill tweeted, "Huge victory for election integrity! SCOTUS grants Virginia's emergency stay to keep noncitizens off its voter roles. Proud to have joined my fellow AGs in support of the American people and our most sacred right."

Murrill was among the 27 state attorneys general who filed an amicus brief asking the high court to allow Virginia to resume the work of ensuring the integrity of the election.

The amicus brief noted, "Non-citizens are not eligible voters. They were not eligible voters before Congress passed the National Voter Registration Act, they were not eligible when Congress passed the NVRA, and they are not eligible today."

Ahead of the ruling, RNC chairman Michael Whatley stated, "With only one week to our country's most important election, Democrats are now taking extraordinary measures to keep non-citizens on voter rolls. Kamala's Administration sued Virginia and is now arguing to the U.S. Supreme Court that non-citizens must remain on the voter rolls."

Blaze News previously reported that the DOJ sued the state over Youngkin's Aug. 7 executive order, which requires both the commissioner of the Virginia Department of Elections to routinely update voter lists to remove individuals identified as noncitizens and that the state Department of Motor Vehicles must expedite the interagency data-sharing with the DOE with regard to noncitizen transactions.

According to the DOJ, the election integrity initiative violated Section 8(c)(2) of the National Voter Registration Act, which requires states to complete programs intended to systematically remove the names of ineligible voters from registration lists by no later than 90 days prior to a primary election or general election for federal office.

Judge Patricia Tolliver Giles of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia agreed with the DOJ, claiming the removals of suspected noncitizens amounted to a "clear violation" of the NVRA. Giles ordered Virginia to reinstate those individuals whose registrations were canceled under the program, including suspected noncitizens.

Virginia asked the 4th Circuit to put a hold on Giles' order, but two Obama-appointed judges and another Biden appointee denied their request Sunday, prompting the state to file for an emergency stay of the injunction hours later.

The commonwealth's emergency application stated that the injunction sought by the Biden-Harris DOJ will "irreparably injure Virginia's sovereignty, confuse her voters, overload her election machinery and administrators, and likely lead noncitizens to think they are permitted to vote, a criminal offense that will cancel the franchise of eligible voters."

According to Virginia, the program did not violate the NVRA as it was an individualized removal process. Further, the state stressed that Giles' injunction was based on a provision of the NVRA that "does not even apply to the removal of noncitizens and other voter registrations that are void ab initio."

The state told the high court that of the over 1,600 suspected noncitizens whom Giles ordered back onto the voter rolls:

About 600 of these individuals personally informed Virginia's Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) that they are not citizens, and about 1,000 presented noncitizen residency documents to DMV and were then positively identified as noncitizens through the United States' own Systematic Alerian Verification for Entitlements (SAVE) database.

The Supreme Court did not indicate which of the state's arguments ultimately prompted its decision.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Gross new porn ad from PAC is Dems' most desperate attempt yet to get out the vote



Progress Action Fund, a leftist political action committee backed by LinkedIn co-founder and Microsoft board member Reid Hoffman, joined the Democratic group Defend the Vote in pushing another attack ad in swing states last week. While the ad seeks to vilify Republican lawmakers, it ostensibly does a better job of undermining Democrats, insinuating that theirs is the party for porn-addicted onanists.

The PAF's 30-second ad, titled "Republicans Rubbing You The Wrong Way," shows a man pleasuring himself while unblinkingly watching pornography on his phone. A character wearing a suit and red tie, identified as a Republican congressman, interrupts the solitary engagement and notifies the masturbator, "Now that we're in charge, we're banning porn nationwide."

"You can't tell me what to do!" says the masturbator. "Get out of my bedroom, you creep!"

"I won the last election, so it's my decision. I'm just going to watch and make sure you don't finish illegally," the Republican character adds, referring to self-gratification.

The PAF indicated that the ad is part of a $2.5 million ad buy and will run on TVs, streaming services, and online platforms in all seven swing states. The PAC notes on its site that it is running ads "in states Vice President Harris must win that also have competitive House & Senate races."

The Hill reported that the ad is targeted toward young men who are abandoning the Democratic Party in droves and increasingly signaling support for President Donald Trump. The apparent hope is that it would reinforce the efforts of the Harris campaign, which is presently trying to drum up support among the disenchanted demographic with ads on sports-betting platforms and on gaming sites, as well as with the promise of nationally legalized marijuana.

'"Incels for Kamala" isn't a campaign strategy I saw coming.'

Nick Knudsen, executive director of the Democrat-aligned activist outfit DemCast USA, noted on X, "Just found out this ad when tested moves under-30-men 3.5 points away from Donald Trump. That's MASSIVE! Please share widely."

Knudsen noted further, "They're running it with a massive ad buy in PA."

Joe Jacobson, founder of PAF, said in a statement, "As a 30-year-old guy myself, the GOP's insistence on legislating our personal lives and decisions is disturbing and unacceptable. That is why we're working to ensure everyone knows that the G.O.P really stands for 'Grand Old Perverts.'"

The threat of a nationwide porn ban contained within Jacobson's ad is pure fantasy, reliant upon a politically expedient distortion of Republican child-protection initiatives across the country.

Arkansas, Indiana, Kentucky, Louisiana, Nebraska, North Carolina, Mississippi, Montana, North Carolina, Oklahoma, Texas, Utah, and Virginia are among the states that have passed laws requiring that porn websites verify users' ages in an effort to protect children from pornography — especially from the violent varieties on foreign-based sites such as Pornhub, whose parent company was recently accused of profiting from child sex abuse and admitted last year to receiving proceeds from sex trafficking.

Lawmakers have argued that it's in the interest of public health to implement such protections for American children.

A 2023 Israeli study published in the scientific journal Body Image indicated a link between pornography consumption and negative body image as well as with increased severity of eating disorder symptoms.

A February 2022 study published in the journal Psychological Medicine found that porn is "associated with the erosion of the quality of men's sex lives" and "associated with lower levels of sexual self-competence, impaired sexual functioning, and decreased partner-reported sexual satisfaction," as Blaze News previously reported.

The Australian government found that pornography consumption by young people has served to "normalise sexual violence and contribute to unrealistic understandings of sex and sexuality."

A 2014 study indicated that watching porn actually could shrink a part of the brain linked to pleasure.

Pornhub, not Republican lawmakers, decided to block access to its content in various states rather than protect children from these devastating consequences. PAF appears keen to gloss over the difference in hopes of helping Democrats in states like Pennsylvania and Wisconsin.

Conservative commentator Todd Starnes tweeted, "Democrats are running ads in swing states promoting pornography. Their closing argument to voters is that Kamala Harris and Democrats are pro-abortion, pro-porn and Trump is Hitler."

One user noted, "'Incels for Kamala!' isn't a campaign strategy I saw coming, but I guess nothing surprises me anymore."

Libby Emmons, the Post Millennial's editor in chief, noted, "Young men deserve more."

All-American swim star Riley Gaines tweeted, "Do you need more proof these people are sick and deranged?"

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Kamala Harris Keeps Reminding Voters She’s ‘Joe Biden 2.0’

CNN hosted a town hall with Kamala Harris Wednesday night, and it went about as poorly as you’d expect. When she wasn’t avoiding questions prospective voters asked her, the Democrat presidential nominee was delivering nonsensical answers when host Anderson Cooper confronted her over her radical left-wing positions. Needless to say, it was like watching a […]

Democrats are melting down because men don't like Kamala Harris. Their solution: Accuse them of misogyny.



Democrats are panicking over recent indications that American men don't particularly like Kamala Harris and are increasingly gravitating toward President Donald Trump. Rather than do some soul-searching or find a way to engage with this disaffected demographic, Harris boosters are instead dusting off a failed strategy that didn't exactly help Hillary Clinton in 2016: Accuse them all of misogyny.

The Democratic meltdown was fueled further by the telling results of a recent nationwide New York Times/Siena College poll. When asked who they would vote for if the election were held today, 51% of likely male voters said they would cast a ballot for Trump. Only 40% of men said they would vote for Harris.

This is more or less an inversion of the results among likely female voters, 53% of whom said they would vote for Harris and 38% of whom said they would vote for Trump.

Harris' relative unpopularity among male voters, particularly Hispanics, might come to bite her in swing states such Arizona and Nevada, where a recent Suffolk University/USA TODAY survey revealed that men under 50 are choosing Trump over the vice president.

Among Hispanic men ages 18-34 in Arizona, 51% said they planned to vote for Trump. Only 39% said they would bother voting for Harris. 57% of Hispanic men ages 35-49 said they would vote for Trump. 37% in that cohort said they would vote for Harris.

Among Hispanic men ages 18-34 in Nevada, 53% said they would vote for Trump, and 40% said they would vote for Harris. These numbers held among Hispanic male respondents ages 35-49, where 53% said they would vote for Trump and 39% said they would vote for Harris.

'The message is too feminine: "Everything you're doing is destroying the planet."'

A Democratic donor told The Hill, "Men are gone, at least for this cycle."

"I don't think people understand what a big problem we have on our hands with men," said a prominent Democratic strategist. "Black men, Hispanic men, men in general."

Democratic strategist James Carville understands full well the diminished appeal of the Democratic Party among red-blooded American men and has been sounding the alarm for several months. When discussing President Joe Biden's unpopularity earlier this year, Carville told the New York Times' Maureen Dowd, "A suspicion of mine is that there are too many preachy females" dominating the culture of the Democratic Party.

"'Don't drink beer. Don't watch football. Don't eat hamburgers. This is not good for you,'" said Carville. "The message is too feminine: 'Everything you're doing is destroying the planet. You've got to eat your peas.'"

"If you listen to Democratic elites — NPR is my go-to place for that — the whole talk is about how women, and women of color, are going to decide this election," added Carville. "I'm like: 'Well, 48% of the people that vote are males. Do you mind if they have some consideration?'"

Carville stressed that "feminine" browbeating coupled with the left's "faculty lounge" attitudes and "woke stuff" is ballot-box poison.

Rather than address this underlying issue, Democrats have ostensibly worked harder to alienate men since replacing Biden with Harris on the ticket.

CNN host Dana Bash suggested around the time of the Democratic National Convention in August that to the extent Harris' party has attempted to appeal to men, it is specifically those with testosterone deficits and an aversion to the kind of machismo displays that helped make America great.

"There's the gender gap. Then there's the idea that for the last month, the Democratic Party has been rallying around a woman at the top of the ticket," said Bash. "Which is — the only other time they did it, which is in 2016. And it has been noteworthy to see how they are learning about what to do and how to confront Donald Trump as the opponent to a woman. 2016 and now — very different campaigns, very different female candidates."

'The not-subtle message of Trump's campaign is, "If you're a 'real' man, you're for me."'

"They are doing so in trying to put forward male figures, Tim Walz being one of them, Doug Emhoff last night, who can speak to men out there who might not be the sort of testosterone-laden, you know, gun-toting kind of guy who wants to listen to Hulk Hogan and the kind of players that came out at the RNC or might want to listen to that," said Bash. "But also, in addition, understand that it's okay in 2024 to be a man comfortable in his own skin who supports a woman."

Democratic strategist Christy Setzer signaled to The Hill that Harris' disfavor with men will be spun as a byproduct of misogyny.

"She has a problem with men for the same reason Hillary Clinton did: because misogyny exists, as do outdated ideas about who should hold the presidency," said Setzer. "Meanwhile, Trump has doubled down on this 'strong man' machismo and dictators act, playing 'It's a Man's World' at his rallies."

It's unclear whether Setzer thinks that getting up covered in one's own blood, then confidently yelling "fight" after surviving an assassination attempt qualifies as an "act."

"The not-subtle message of Trump's campaign is, 'If you're a "real" man, you're for me,'" continued Setzer. "That 1950s mindset is still appealing to some, unfortunately."

Jim Manley, another Democratic strategist, apparently got the memo, telling The Hill, "It's ridiculous to have to say this in 2024, but not everyone is ready to vote for a qualified woman to be president of the United States."

The misogyny narrative is currently making the rounds on networks ostensibly happy to overlook Doug Emhoff's history of alleged abuse.

'You just aren't feeling the idea of having a woman as president.'

"[Harris] has got such a big problem with men," MSNBC talking head Andrea Mitchell recently complained. "I think think there's an under-count of the Trump vote. I think there's misogynation in all of this. Black and white men: big problem. But also, the business world, they don't think she is serious."

The Guardian indicated that former President Barack Obama has been unable to contain his desperation, telling "the brothers" in Pennsylvania to fall in line.

"We have not yet seen the same kinds of energy and turnout in all quarters of our neighborhoods and communities as we saw when I was running. Now, I also want to say that that seems to be more pronounced with the brothers," said Obama. "You're coming up with all kinds of reasons and excuses. I've got a problem with that."

"Part of it makes me think that, well, you just aren't feeling the idea of having a woman as president, and you're coming up with other alternatives and reasons for that," added Obama.

The Lincoln Project — an anti-Trump group best known for staging a fake white supremacist rally in 2021 to smear then-candidate Glenn Youngkin ahead of the Virginia gubernatorial election, whose co-founder John Weaver reportedly had a habit of sexually harassing young men online — recently ran a pro-Harris ad, stating, "It's time to be a man and vote for a woman."

Time will tell whether American men will oblige Democratic strategists, Obama, and the false flag outfit and do as they are told.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Kamala Harris Is Too Stupid To Be President

[rebelmouse-proxy-image https://thefederalist.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/10/Screenshot-2024-10-09-at-3.15.10 PM-1200x675.png crop_info="%7B%22image%22%3A%20%22https%3A//thefederalist.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/10/Screenshot-2024-10-09-at-3.15.10%5Cu202fPM-1200x675.png%22%7D" expand=1]Democrats have fallen in line behind geriatric and mentally impaired candidates before. They'll gladly fall in line behind a stupid one now.

Teamsters boss goes scorched-earth on Democratic Party: 'They have f***ed us over for the last 40 years'



Sean O'Brien, the general president of the International Brotherhood of Teamsters, is a self-identified Democrat who has in recent years made no secret of his antipathy to elements of the GOP.

However, O'Brien — like the overwhelming majority of Teamsters — has recognized that the Democratic Party deserves even more of his ire.

Speaking to comedian Theo Von on the Monday episode of "This Past Weekend," O'Brien said, "I'll be honest with you, I'm a Democrat, but they have f***ed us over for the last 40 years."

"And for once, and not all of them, but for once, we're standing up as a union, probably the only one right now, saying, 'What the f*** have you done for us?'" continued O'Brien.

The Teamsters union, which has over 1.3 million members, announced in September that it would not endorse any candidate for president for the first time since 1988.

Straw polls conducted between April and July indicated that President Joe Biden had the support of the Teamsters. Following Biden's ouster, a majority of voting members twice selected Trump in polls for a possible Teamsters endorsement over Harris.

An electronic member poll conducted between July 24 and Sept. 25 showed that 59.6% of Teamsters supported Trump. Only 34% signaled support for Harris. A research phone poll conducted Sept. 9-15 similarly had Trump up by double digits, 58% to Harris' 31%.

"I'm getting attacked from the left, and we've given — since I've been in office, two and a half years — we've given the Democratic machine $15.7 million," continued O'Brien. "We've given Republicans about $340,000, truth be told. So it's like, you know, people say the Democratic Party is the party of the working people. They're bought and paid for by Big Tech."

'The f***ing system's broken.'

Extra to Trump's personal outreach to the unions, Blaze News previously noted that his selection of Sen. JD Vance (R-Ohio) as his running mate helped curry favor with unions on account of Vance's support for tariffs and protectionist economic policies.

"For the short time we've worked together, he's been great on Teamster issues," O'Brien said of Vance on Fox News. "He's been right there on all our issues."

"If 60% of our members aren't supporting [the Democrats], the f***ing system's broken," O'Brien told Von. "You need to fix it. Stop pointing fingers at Sean O'Brien. Stop pointing fingers at the Teamsters union. Look in the mirror."

"Before, you always had Democrats fighting for working people, and, you know, Republicans, now we kind of see a switch where working people feel like, number one, they've been left behind by the Democratic Party. Two, you know, the Republicans say they want to be working-class [and] represent the working class. They have an opportunity to do it."

In August, Robert F. Kennedy Jr. similarly suggested that a political realignment was under way.

"I think there's been a bunch of realignments, of political realignments — about four or five throughout American history," Kennedy told Tucker Carlson. "I think we're going through one right now."

Kennedy emphasized that the Democratic Party of yesteryear is gone and that what remains, with the Harris "apparatus" at the helm, is an anti-democratic force synonymous with corporatism, military adventurism, and censorship.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

New national poll signals Trump's ascendance and that Kamala Harris' 'joy' isn't cutting it



A new nationwide poll indicated Sunday that Vice President Kamala Harris has lost her edge and may soon lose a great deal more.

The latest New York Times/Siena College poll asked nearly 1,700 registered voters between Sept. 3 and 6 whom they would vote for if the election were held today: 48% said they'd vote for President Donald Trump; 47% said Harris.

With minor candidates included, Trump has a two-point lead (48%-46%) over Harris.

The Times suggested the result was surprising because it is "the first lead for Mr. Trump in a major nonpartisan national survey in about a month."

Statistician and FiveThirtyEight founder Nate Silver suggested over the weekend that these poll numbers "are just a bit worse for Harris than the previous NYT/Siena national survey in July and considerably worse for her than a series of battleground state polls the Times conducted in early August."

"The honeymoon is officially over," Trump spokesman Jason Miller told Politico, "and Kamala Harris has been exposed as a radical left individual who owns the destruction of our economy and our border."

It's clear that over the next few weeks, Harris will have to do more than campaign on "joy" and anti-Trump attacks.

Whereas only 12% of respondents said they needed to learn more about Trump, 31% said the same about Harris. 63% of respondents specified that they would like to know about her policies and plans.

While voters appear keen to know more about Harris' agenda, prominent Democrats have suggested in recent weeks that their candidate should continue to ignore the "nitty gritty" and focus instead on "vibes."

'None of this will matter if she has a good night.'

Rep. Annie Kuster (R-N.H.), the chairwoman of the New Democrat Coalition, told CNN, "I don't think there's a real strong reason for her to try and weed out any points of view right now."

Secrecy may not, however, constitute a winning strategy.

"I don't know what Kamala's plans are," Dawn Conley, a small business owner from Tennessee, told the Times. "It's kind of hard to make a decision when you don't know what the other party's platform is going to be."

The presidential debate Tuesday will afford Harris an opportunity to retire her platitudes and provide Americans with a basic idea of how she might run the free world.

Nate Silver suggested that "none of this will matter if she has a good night" at the debate.

However, the debate will also provide Trump with a chance to very publicly hammer Harris over three of the top four issues cited by respondents in the poll as deciding factors when voting in November: the economy, immigration, and inflation and the cost of living.

When asked which candidate they figured would do a better job of handling their top issue, 50% of respondents said Trump; 43% said Harris.

On the economy, 56% said Trump would do a better job; 40% said Harris. On immigration, 53% said Trump would do a better job; 42% said Harris.

Harris was, however, greatly favored to do a better job on the issue of abortion.

There appears to be a couple of issues in which Harris is on the wrong side where the majority of voters are concerned. For instance, 65% of respondents signaled support for increased domestic production of fossil fuels, and the majority (51%) oppose a federal law establishing price controls on food and groceries.

Price controls, climate-alarmist curbs on American energy, and other proposals advanced by Harris appear to have a plurality of Americans figuring her for a radical.

'Voters want a return to pro-America policies that actually work, not the weak, failed, and dangerously liberal policies of Comrade Kamala.'

While only 32% of respondents suggested Trump is too conservative, 47% of likely voters indicated Harris is too liberal/progressive. Whereas 40% of women said Harris leaned too far left, 56% of male respondents said so.

Harris' tether to Biden may also serve to trip her up in November. It appears that a great many respondents (63%) want the next president to "represent a major change from Joe Biden."

When it comes to assigning blame for the Biden-Harris administration's failures, 55% of respondents said Harris should receive some or a lot of blame for rising prices; 63% said she should receive some or a lot of blame for problems at the border; and 49% said she should receive some or a lot of blame for the botched U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan she boasted about signing off on.

Harris may be unable to shake off her responsibility for recent failures, but she has proven able to shed points in critical swing states.

The Times' swing-state polling averages suggested the two candidates are now tied in Arizona, Georgia, Nevada, and North Carolina. Harris supposedly has a three-point edge in Wisconsin, a two-point edge in Michigan, and a one-point lead in Pennsylvania.

Last week's YouGov/CBS News poll indicated that Harris and Trump were tied in Pennsylvania and that the Democrat had a two- and one-point lead in Wisconsin and Michigan, respectively.

The Times/Siena poll also acknowledged that Trump is more popular now than polling data suggested he was previously ahead of both the 2016 and 2020 elections. Overall, 46% of likely voters said they had a somewhat or very favorable view of Trump. By way of comparison, 45% of likely voters said the same of Harris.

Trump campaign spokesman Steven Cheung told Newsweek in a statement, "Polling shows President Trump is dominating both nationally and in the battleground states because voters want a return to pro-America policies that actually work, not the weak, failed, and dangerously liberal policies of Comrade Kamala."

The Trump campaign noted, "We continue to see a sustained pattern of President Trump overperforming with black voters (17-74 among registered voters; Trump +5 compared to 2020 exits and Harris running 13 points behind Biden) and Hispanic voters (42-51 among registered voters; Trump +10 compared to 2020 exits and Harris running 14 points behind Biden)."

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!