Tag: donald trump
Hannity's Campaign For New Jersey Republican Nominee Comes Up Way Short

Hannity's Campaign For New Jersey Republican Nominee Comes Up Way Short

It was a bad night for Sean Hannity.

By the time President Donald Trump’s chief on-air propagandist took over Fox News’ election coverage at 9 p.m. ET, it was already clear that Democrats were on pace to sweep races across the country. And in perhaps the ultimate indignity, it was left for him to announce that his network’s decision desk had called the New Jersey gubernatorial race for Democratic Rep. Mikie Sherrill over Jack Ciattarelli, a Trump-supporting Republican businessman whom Hannity had spent weeks trying to pull over the finish line.

Hannity revealed Fox’s projection for the race and noted that “the GOP had hoped that Ciattarelli could deliver an upset after a very close loss four years ago” before pivoting to what he termed the “math problem” for the party’s efforts to flip the state: According to Hannity, “nearly a quarter of a million people in New Jersey left that state” in recent years.

The Fox host repeatedly returned to that figure over the course of the broadcast, suggesting this posed an “overwhelming” hurdle for the GOP because “a great majority of those people are probably Republicans, probably seeking lower taxes, probably seeking law and order.” Per the Trump propagandist, Democrats should win such a “deep blue state” in a landslide, and “the fact that this is anywhere close in any way is fascinating to me.”

Hannity’s analysis has two fundamental problems.

First, New Jersey wasn’t “close in any way” — while the Republican pollsters Hannity hosted over the last month predicted a tight race, Sherrill ended up winning by a dominant 56 to 43 percent margin. By contrast, outgoing Gov. Philip Murphy beat Ciattarelli by only 51 to 48 percent in 2021. Indeed, Sherrill’s win was so large that even if all 250,000 people Hannity says left the state had remained, and voted as a block for Ciattarelli, he still would have lost — his deficit is currently more than 416,000 votes.

Second, Hannity had spent recent weeks urgently focusing the attention of his viewers on the New Jersey race; interviewing Ciattarelli several times to talk up his campaign; putting on a town hall for him last week that functioned as an on-air pep rally; and repeatedly hosting GOP pollsters who stressed that the race was very close and Republicans needed to get out and vote.

What a Trumpist zealot like Hannity cannot accept — and relate to his viewers — is the possibility that voters have soured on the president and are punishing Republicans up and down the ticket for his economic failures, corruption, malfeasance, and authoritarian conduct.

Hannity’s campaign to put Ciattarelli in the New Jersey statehouse

“New Jersey's gubernatorial race, it is heating up and heating up big time,” Hannity explained on his September 25 show. “Trump-endorsed Republican Jack Ciattarelli fights to turn New Jersey red. It looks like it is possible.”

Hyping an Emerson poll he said had the race in a “dead heat” and a new “bombshell” about Sherrill’s college days, Hannity told Ciattarelli that night that he planned to work to help him win his race.

“I told you the last time you were on, I'm not going to make the same mistake again,” the Fox host said. “I did not see how close it would be the last time you ran. You could have won if people paid more attention to it. I'm not making that mistake.”

“New Jersey is in play,” he concluded the interview. “We'll watch it closely. Thanks for being with us.”

Hannity again touted Ciattarelli’s chances while introducing him for an October 2 interview.

“The American public, they're fed up with the left and their antics and political stunts,” he explained. “And nowhere now is this more important than the great blue state of New Jersey. Democrats are in serious peril — this is real — of losing the gubernatorial race next month.”

“I just want to tell my friends in New Jersey, this is very real,” Hannity said at the end of the interview. “And I know other pollsters that are in the field that have you even up by one, but it's a very close race. It's a very blue state. The people of your state of New Jersey are fed up. This is a winnable race. It's going to be fun to watch.”

On October 16, Hannity brought on GOP pollsters Matt Towery of Insider Advantage and Trafalgar Group’s Robert Cahaly — credentialed by Hannity as “the guys I trust” — to discuss their new polls showing Ciattarelli trailing Sherrill by only one point and Democratic Rep. Abigail Spanberger leading Republican Lt. Gov. Winsome Earle-Sears by only two points in the Virginia gubernatorial race (Spanberger currently leads by 15 points with 95 percent of results in).

“In New Jersey, there's been a shift in politics in New Jersey,” Towery told Hannity’s audience. “The northern portion of New Jersey that used to be big-time Democrat is now more Republican. It's all — it's all flipped. … I happen to think New Jersey is exceptionally competitive. I think that race is closing very fast. ”

“I don't want to raise false hope in people but it seems — my interpretation of your polls, Matt Towery, is if people get out and vote in New Jersey, if they want change, they have a shot. In Virginia, they have a shot,” Hannity responded.

Towery and Cahaly returned to the program on October 30 as part of the full-hour town hall Hannity put on for Ciattarelli from the state. After declaring that “the enthusiasm is squarely behind Ciattarelli” and calling the race “tighter than ever,” Hannity touted them for having “nailed the 2016, 2020, and 2024 presidential election” and being “the first to pick up this race is way closer than anybody knows.” The pollsters, in turn, stressed that Ciattarelli’s victory was possible and that turnout would be crucial, as Fox’s chyron declared, “Polls Show Tight Race In New Jersey.”

The pair were back on Hannity’s show to give their final analysis on the eve of Election Day.

“New Jersey, there's a lot of energy up there,” Towery offered. “That's different than the rest of these races I'm looking at. There's a lot of energy and I think New Jersey could be a shocker tomorrow.”

If you had been getting your analysis of the race solely from Hannity and the Republican pollsters he offered up to his viewers, the results were, in fact, “a shocker.” But Ciattarelli’s crushing defeat doesn’t seem to have dissipated the Fox host’s confidence in Towery and Cahaly.

They were back on his show on Tuesday night to try to explain why a blue wave that they had apparently missed was cresting over the country, blaming the government shutdown and the need to figure out how to turn out Republican voters without Trump on the ballot. But while they found time to discuss Democratic wins in Virginia, New York City, and Georgia, New Jersey went curiously unmentioned.

At least they can take solace from the fact that the president was watching them tap-dance around his failures.

Reprinted with permission from Media Matters

When Will Trump Focus On Inflation? Aides Say Just Wait Till New​ Year

When Will Trump Focus On Inflation? Aides Say Just Wait Till New​ Year

President Donald Trump, who did not appear interested in changing his messaging when he spoke to Republican senators Wednesday morning after a big night at the polls for Democrats, is now expected to respond to the message voters sent Tuesday night, next year.

One of the White House’s “main takeaways from last night’s miserable performance for the Republican Party,” Politico reported, “is that President Donald Trump isn’t focused enough on the issues that matter most to the voters the party needs.”

The president, a White House advisor told Politico, will talk about the cost of living — one of the top issues he ran on last year — “as we turn … into the new year.”One of the White House’s “main takeaways from last night’s miserable performance for the Republican Party,” Politico reported, “is that President Donald Trump isn’t focused enough on the issues that matter most to the voters the party needs.”

“The President hasn’t talked about the cost of living in months,” another person close to the White House told Politico. “People are still hurting financially and they want to know the White House is paying attention and trying to fix the problem as quickly as possible.”

White House Deputy Chief of Staff James Blair, who served as Trump’s political director for the 2024 election, also weighed in.

“You’ll see the president talk a lot about cost of living as we turn … into the new year,” Blair told Politico. “The president is very keyed into what’s going on, and he recognizes, like anybody, that it takes time to do an economic turnaround, but all the fundamentals are there, and I think we’ll see him be very, very focused on prices and cost of life.”

“People don’t think he’s lived up to his promises,” a White House ally told Politico. “You won on lowering costs, putting more money back into people’s pockets. And people don’t feel that right now.”In a speech Wednesday afternoon at the America Business Forum in Miami, Trump told attendees, “After last night’s results the decision facing all Americans could not be more clear. We have a choice between communism and common sense. Does that make sense to you? Common sense. It’s common sense or communism. Look back 1,000 years. It hasn’t worked.”

In a speech Wednesday afternoon at the America Business Forum in Miami, Trump told attendees, “After last night’s results the decision facing all Americans could not be more clear. We have a choice between communism and common sense. Does that make sense to you? Common sense. It’s common sense or communism. Look back 1,000 years. It hasn’t worked.”

“Our opponents are offering an economic nightmare, we are delivering an economic miracle,” Trump declared. “The biggest investment of funds in a country in history by many times.”

Reprinted with permission from Alternet

Comparing Trump Family Wealth Accumulation To The Cost Of SNAP Benefits

Comparing Trump Family Wealth Accumulation To The Cost Of SNAP Benefits

I have harangued reporters for decades over their failure to express big numbers in a context that would make them meaningful to their audiences. For example, when they report that we will spend roughly $100 billion this year on SNAP, relatively few people know that this is around 1.4 percent of total spending. They just hear a REALLY BIG NUMBER; to most of them the number would probably mean the same thing if it would $50 billion or $200 billion.

It would be a very simple matter for reporters to make a habit of including four or five words of context so that these really big numbers would be meaningful to their audience. I considered it a big victory when I worked with several groups to persuade Margaret Sullivan, who was the New York Times public editor, to write a piece arguing exactly this point. She also got a strong endorsement for this view by then Washington editor David Leonhardt.

This seemed like a huge victory, since if the New York Times made a practice of presenting big budget numbers in a context that made them meaningful, it is likely most other publications would follow. This would have led to a far better-informed electorate who would know that they did not have a high tax bill because of the 0.008 percent of the budget that went to public broadcasting.

Unfortunately, nothing changed. Even though I have never heard and literally cannot imagine an argument on the other side (it takes 10 seconds to do the calculation on a spreadsheet), it is still standard practice for reporters to write numbers in the millions, billions, or trillions that they know are meaningless to almost their entire audience.

And informing the public would make a difference. Elon Musk probably would not have been so proud to shut down PEPFAR, the AIDS program for Africa started by George W. Bush, if he knew he was sentencing millions of people to death in order to reduce federal spending by 0.09 percent (nine cents on $100).

In the interest of putting numbers in context in terms of the current budget shutdown, we can think about how much money Donald Trump and his family have gained since he was elected compared to the cost of SNAP. According to Forbes, the Trump family has increased their wealth by roughly $5 billion since the election, effectively doubling their prior fortune.

By comparison, the average monthly SNAP benefit is a bit less than $190 a month, or roughly $2,250 a year. If we compare the Trump family’s post-election windfall to the average SNAP benefit, it comes to more than 2 million SNAP-person years.

Source: Forbes magazine and USDA

This comparison is useful since we can see that even while millions of people might be suffering from the loss of SNAP benefits due to the shutdown, at least Donald Trump and his family are doing well.

Dean Baker is a senior economist at the Center for Economic and Policy Research and the author of the 2016 book Rigged: How Globalization and the Rules of the Modern Economy Were Structured to Make the Rich Richer. Please consider subscribing to his Substack.

Reprinted with permission from Dean Baker.

Trump Fears Supreme Court Will Strike Down His Unilateral Imposition Of Tariffs

Trump Fears Supreme Court Will Strike Down His Unilateral Imposition Of Tariffs

On Wednesday, November 5, the U.S. Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in Learning Resources, Inc. v. Trump — a case that challenges President Donald Trump's right to unilaterally impose steep new tariffs using the Emergency Powers Act of 1977.

The plaintiff in the case argues that Trump, without Congress' input, is imposing a policy that is harmful to his business. Trump, however, argues that his tariffs are vital to the country's economic wellbeing.

Axios' Courtenay Brown reports in an article published on November 4, that Trump is claiming the tariffs are a "life or death" matter for the U.S.

"President Trump claimed on Tuesday that the U.S. would be 'virtually defenseless' against other nations if the Supreme Court strikes down a slew of tariffs," Brown reports. "Why it matters: Trump's comments come just one day before the highest court will hear oral arguments challenging the legality of a key part of his economic agenda. Trump officials have played down the effects of a potential loss, saying the administration would step in to reimpose any tariffs overturned by the Supreme Court using other trade authorities."

Brown adds, "Still, Trump for months has been warning that a loss would be economically devastating for the country — even though the U.S. had long survived without the highest tariffs in nearly a century."

On his Truth Social platform, Trump posted, "Tomorrow's United States Supreme Court case is, literally, LIFE OR DEATH for our Country. With a Victory, we have tremendous, but fair, Financial and National Security. Without it, we are virtually defenseless against other Countries who have, for years, taken advantage of us. Our Stock Market is consistently hitting Record Highs, and our Country has never been more respected than it is right now. A big part of this is the Economic Security created by Tariffs, and the Deals that we have negotiated because of them."

Brown notes that what the High Court ultimately decides "could curb Trump's powers — or open the door for Trump and future presidents to use the emergency powers to bypass Congress."

Reprinted with permission from Alternet

Shop our Store

Headlines

Editor's Blog

Corona Virus

Trending

World