Pennsylvania

Subterms

    Latest story

    238 Shares76 Views

    Democratic candidates can win Rust Belt voters by … attacking the Democratic party | Jared Abbott and Bhaskar Sunkara

    by

    If anyone could have broken through as a progressive in red America, it was Sherrod Brown. For decades, the Ohio senator railed against corporations for shipping good-paying jobs overseas and pleaded with Democrats to take the struggles of deindustrialized communities seriously. Yet in 2024, even Brown, a model economic populist, fell to a Republican challenger.Does that prove, as writers such as Jonathan Chait have argued, that the idea of winning back the working class with progressive economic policies has been tried and has failed?We wanted to know why Democrats keep losing working-class support in the Rust belt, and what could turn things around. So, with colleagues at the Center for Working-Class Politics, the Labor Institute and Rutgers University, we surveyed 3,000 voters across Pennsylvania, Michigan, Ohio and Wisconsin. The research suggests the story is more complicated – and that Democrats’ problems in the Rust belt are real, but solvable.We found a consistent pattern we call the “Democratic penalty”. In a randomized, controlled trial, respondents were shown hypothetical candidates with identical economic populist platforms. The only difference was that some were labeled Democrats, while others were labeled independents. Across the four states, the Democratic candidates fared eight points worse.In Ohio the gap was nearly 16 points; in Michigan, 13; in Wisconsin, 11. The voters most alienated by the party label were the very groups Democrats most need to win back: Latinos, working-class Americans, and others in rural and small-town communities.This pattern helps explain why figures like Brown can run as tough economic populists and still struggle, while independents like Dan Osborne in Nebraska dramatically overperformed expectations on nearly identical platforms. It’s the Democratic brand that’s unpopular, not the populism.What’s at the root of the mistrust? After the 2024 election, many commentators pointed to “wokeness” as the culprit. But our research tells a different story. When we asked voters to write a sentence about what first came to mind when they thought of Democrats, 70% offered negative views. Yet only a small minority mentioned “wokeness” or ideological extremism – 3% of Democrats, 11% of independents, 19% of Republicans. The dominant complaints weren’t about social liberalism but about competence, honesty and connection. Democrats were seen as out of touch, corrupt or simply ineffective: “falling behind on what’s important” and having not “represented their constituents in a long time”. While some of these critiques bled into broader claims that Democrats are focused on the wrong priorities, the responses suggest cultural issues are not voters’ dominant concern.This should be a wake-up call. Rust belt voters aren’t gullibly distracted by culture wars but, rather, are frustrated that Democrats haven’t delivered. What does resonate with them is a tougher, more credible economic message.Even if the Democratic label is a serious drag in red and purple states, our results show that full-throated economic populism that speaks directly to workers’ sense that the system is rigged can substantially boost candidates’ appeal, particularly in areas that have lost millions of high-quality jobs over the past 40 years. Standard “bread-and-butter” Democratic messaging performed over 11 points better when paired with strong anti-corporate rhetoric (condemning companies for cutting good jobs) than with a “populist-lite” frame that merely knocks a few price-gougers while acknowledging that most businesses play by the rules.When we forced respondents to choose tradeoffs among 25 economic policy proposals, the results were even clearer. Across partisan and class divides, voters consistently prioritized concrete measures framed in terms of fairness and accountability for elites: capping prescription drug prices, eliminating taxes on social security income, and raising taxes on the super-wealthy and large corporations. These policies polled far ahead of flashy ideas such as $1,000 monthly cash payments or trillion-dollar green industrial plans, and well ahead of traditional conservative staples such as corporate tax cuts and deregulation.Even on immigration, Rust belt voters proved more open than expected. Nearly two-thirds supported legalization for long-settled undocumented workers who had played by the rules. Despite years of rightwing fearmongering, a progressive position carried the day.So what’s the path forward? Not every candidate can reinvent themselves as an independent populist. In many districts, doing so would simply split the anti-Republican vote. But Democrats can blunt the “Democratic penalty” by speaking against their own party establishment and making a populist case that neither major party has delivered for working people. Candidates who take this approach appeal more effectively to the very voters Democrats have been losing.The electoral map itself makes the stakes plain. Without states such as Michigan, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania and Ohio, Democrats cannot hold national power. Sherrod Brown’s defeat underlined that even the most credible economic populists can only run so far ahead of the party’s damaged brand.If Democrats remain seen as out of touch with working-class concerns, more Browns will fall, and Republicans will keep gaining ground in once-reliable Democratic strongholds. But if Democrats take on corporate elites, level with voters about their own party’s failures, and fight for policies that put working families first, they might finally chart a path back to the working class – and to the future.

    Jared Abbott is the director of the Center for Working-Class Politics. Bhaskar Sunkara is the president of the Nation magazine and the founding editor of Jacobin More

    More stories

    • 225 Shares99 Views

      in US Politics

      A US haven for refugees was divided over Trump – now immigration crackdown has left a ‘community breaking’

      by

      It was 2022, and the Nepali flea market in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, buzzed with life –handmade hats and colorful flags hung outside the homes of families just yards from the market, who had built new lives after being expelled from Bhutan. Elderly men sat in circles, smoking cigars and playing folk songs, unwilling to let the past slip away.In the early 1990s, Bhutan expelled more than 100,000 Nepali-speaking Bhutanese people during a campaign of ethnic cleansing. Most fled to refugee camps in eastern Nepal, where many remained for nearly two decades. Beginning in 2007, about 85,000 were resettled across the US through a program coordinated by the UN refugee agency (UNHCR) and the US government. Today, central Pennsylvania is home to several thousand Bhutanese refugees, with Harrisburg and nearby towns hosting one of the largest clusters in the country. That concentration carries political weight: Pennsylvania is a swing state, and Trump won it in 2024 by a slight margin.When I returned in July 2025, it felt like another world. The flags were gone. The elders no longer gathered outside. Flea markets and restaurants sat quietly. The change wasn’t about ageing or assimilation – it reflected a community unsettled by politics, as families struggled to make sense of immigration policies that had suddenly put Bhutanese refugees back in the crosshairs. Across central Pennsylvania, old cases have been reopened, removal orders issued, over two dozen Bhutanese refugees have been deported back to Bhutan, and families that once felt secure are now bracing for knocks at the door.View image in fullscreenThe Harrisburg office of Asian Refugees United (ARU) looked more like a campsite than a non-profit hub – backpacks in the corners, water bottles scattered on the floor. Robin Gurung, the soft-spoken executive director, had just returned from a youth camp. I asked what had changed after the 2024 election.“Everything,” he said. “Before the Trump administration, ARU focused on rebuilding lives, teaching leadership, suicide prevention, and youth civic action. Now we’re in rapid-response mode, helping families make sense of deportations.”With larger institutions caving in to the administration’s demands, ARU has struggled to find allies. “A lot of our partners don’t want to engage any more, fearing retaliation,” Gurung told me. “We don’t even have attorneys to guide families. We rely on a few groups, but immigrant communities are being left on their own.”He paused before adding that the political climate had reopened old wounds. “We survived as refugees because of community. We always showed up for each other. But that sense of community is breaking. We’ve never seen this level of division and suspicion.”The turmoil Gurung described stood in sharp contrast to the early years of resettlement, when Bhutanese families in Pennsylvania were carving out new lives. Among them was Binay Luitel, who arrived as a teenager in July 2008 as an early cohort of Bhutanese refugees in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, and quickly came to see service as his way of giving back.After years in a refugee camp in Nepal, he entered the US through the refugee resettlement program during the Obama era, a time that seemed to embrace the promise of a multiracial America.View image in fullscreenAt just 23, Luitel enlisted in the US army and deployed to Afghanistan. “Growing up as a refugee, I always had a strong desire to serve in the military, but back home that opportunity didn’t exist for someone like me,” he said. “When the United States gave me not just a home but an identity, joining the military was an act of gratitude, a way to honor the gift of belonging.”After four years in uniform, he returned to Harrisburg, now a hub for Bhutanese refugees. Families were buying homes, opening businesses and preserving their culture. With friends and mentors, Luitel helped establish the Bhutanese Community in Harrisburg, a non-profit, community-based organization that aimed to help the Bhutanese refugee community integrate in Harrisburg and address mental health issues, eventually serving as its president.For Ashika Dhaurali, 20, those years of growth shaped her sense of home. A mental-health advocate who arrived at age six, she once canvassed for senator John Fetterman, a Democrat, convinced his progressive ideals matched her community’s hopes. Today, she feels betrayed.“I canvassed for Fetterman,” she said. “I believed in his ideals, but now he’s nothing but a disappointment.” She points to his silence on deportations, his endorsement of Ice enforcement on X, and his willingness to echo Trump’s rhetoric. Watching her neighbors targeted by Trump’s administration, and Democrats failing to defend them, has left her searching elsewhere. “I won’t be voting for Fetterman again. And if there’s a viable progressive candidate against him, a lot of us will be ready to canvass.”The fragile stability that Bhutanese refugees thought they had created has crumbled during Trump’s second administration, as Trump, in his first week of inauguration, banned all refugee entry and halted asylum cases. Ice raids have rattled households, deportations of many of their community members in Harrisburg, as well as across the US, have reopened old traumas, and what had felt like a safe enclave grew clouded with fear and suspicion.“There has been a degree of political division,” Binay admitted. “It has torn people apart.”For Ghanshyam, a small business owner, the split is moral as well. “Trump defies everything immigrants and refugees stand for,” he told me. “When you elect a president, it’s not just about economics, it’s about values. Do you really want to tell your kids you voted for a man who called immigrants rapists and murderers, who’s been found liable for sexual assault, and who’s declared bankruptcy seven times? That’s not a role model. Voting for him isn’t just bad policy, it’s a moral failure.”Others, like Aiman, 24, who asked not to use his last name for privacy, see it differently. He arrived during the Obama years and once voted Democrat, but by 2024, he had switched to supporting Trump. Inflation, border security, the wars abroad and what he viewed as relentless media persecution of then former president Trump shifted his loyalties.View image in fullscreen“When I saw our president constantly attacked and silenced, I started to see him as human – someone who persevered when everything was against him,” he said.For Aiman, America is less about belonging than duty. “We were given a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity. Citizenship means loyalty. Too many in our community never took that seriously.” Deportations, he admitted, were painful, but to him they were the consequence of broken laws. “Facts outweigh emotions,” he said, echoing rightwing commentators like Ben Shapiro.He even pointed to his own family. “Of course, I wish my brother could come here. But what good is that if, in the process, the whole country burns from the bottom up? I’d be happy to see him here, but not at the cost of destroying America.”Unlike older Bhutanese who hesitate to speak openly, Aiman doesn’t feel isolated. “A lot of my friends are Republicans now,” he said. “The only pushback I get is from college kids, who are too easily offended.” He’s part of a broader group of young men who, in recent years, have drifted toward conservative ideals.Dhaurali, the mental-health advocate, sees that shift as dangerous. “For our community, it has a lot to do with a false sense of patriotism. Because we’ve been deprived of it for so long, we want to embody it. To finally say: ‘I’m proud to be of this nation.’ But that’s why some have sided with Trump. Honestly, a lot of it comes from internalized hatred.”Hearing Aiman, I thought of my own uncle, who also voted for Trump but never admitted it publicly. In our community, politics isn’t just about policies; it’s about belonging. What appears to be a small division within the Bhutanese diaspora reflects a broader erosion of the sense of home that many immigrants and communities of color once felt.Dhaurali, though, doesn’t believe the story ends there. “What Trump’s administration is doing is testing our solidarity, our sense of belonging,” she said. “No, I don’t think I can ever stop believing. Especially with this community I’ve grown up in. I believe my generation is going to be the bridge between these old fears and the future we genuinely deserve.”Lok Darjee is a former Bhutanese refugee and freelance journalist covering politics, immigration, democracy and identity. More

    • 150 Shares159 Views

      in US Politics

      Pennsylvania official faces threats over post misconstrued as Charlie Kirk killing celebration

      by

      A member of a Pennsylvania school board says she is stepping back from her duties – and has been grappling with threats to her safety – after a “one down, hundreds to go” social media post about windblown milkweed seeds was misconstrued as celebrating the killing of far-right pundit Charlie Kirk.Homer-Center school district board member Misty Hunt uploaded the post in question on 10 September, the same day Kirk was shot to death by a sniper while speaking at Utah Valley University (UVU).Numerous people across the US have been fired from or otherwise disciplined at their jobs over commentary about Kirk’s murder, which authorities allege was carried out by a young man who viewed the Turning Point USA director’s political statements as “hatred”.And once it became apparent that people were accusing Hunt of extolling Kirk’s murder, the school board announced an investigation to “completely understand her intentions”.Subsequent social media posts from Hunt maintained that her “one down, hundreds to go” post was meant to accompany a video of wind blowing one of the milkweed seed pods that she customarily releases to nourish monarch butterflies.Poor cell phone reception near a former local power plant undermined her attempt to upload the video that was meant to be paired with the text, she said. She also said she did not learn of Kirk’s killing – or that video failed to upload – until later that night, having been too absorbed with the outdoors that day.“A tragedy occurred. And I was too busy enjoying nature to know what went down,” Hunt wrote. Calling gardening “my life” and offering condolences to Kirk’s family, she said her post was “only about butterflies and creating a space for them. The end.”Hunt later followed up with a separate social media post condemning all political violence, saying: “No cause, no ideology, no disagreement is worth a human life.”She also wrote: “In a world already torn by division, the killing of anyone – regardless of their political beliefs – is an unacceptable tragedy.”Nonetheless, the Homer-Center school board’s 18 September meeting drew about 60 people, much larger than the usual sparse crowds who typically attend the Indiana county-based panel’s gatherings. Authorities moved the meeting from a central district office board room to a school gymnasium to accommodate the bigger crowd. And law enforcement provided security for the meeting due to the interest Hunt’s posts had gotten online – as well as because of the “death threats” resulting from them, the news outlet PennLive.com reported.Three of seven community members who spoke at that meeting expressed support for Hunt, according to reporting from the Indiana Gazette. Three others assumed Hunt’s “one down hundreds, to go” was indeed about Kirk’s death despite her denial. And the Gazette noted that a fourth speaker simply said: “Every action has consequences, especially with being a public figure.”Hunt, for her part, reportedly apologized for causing “pain”, “misunderstanding”, and “division”.“Even though I did not celebrate anyone’s death, and I do not condone violence, the safety of myself and my children are now in jeopardy,” she said.The Gazette wrote that Hunt described people “threatening her place of work and pressuring her boss to terminate her employment”.“My children – we’re all afraid of going places right now, so it’s been really hard for the family,” she reportedly added. “That’s just where we’re at.”Hunt abstained from voting at the 18 September meeting, was removed from the school board’s negotiations committee and would step back from her role on the seven-member panel for the time being. The Gazette reported that she is running for re-election in November and would wait to see the outcome of the race before plotting her political future.“If the community chooses me again,” she said, “then I feel confident I will continue my good work.” More

    • 125 Shares159 Views

      in US Politics

      US must ‘universally condemn political violence’, Democratic governor Shapiro says

      by

      Pennsylvania governor Josh Shapiro has said Americans must “universally condemn political violence, no matter where it is” after the killing of rightwing youth organizer Charlie Kirk as well as a deadly shootout in Shapiro’s state that left three police officers dead and two others injured.Hours before Kirk’s funeral, Shapiro said that the nation stands at an “inflection point” and urged Americans to choose shared values over division, pointing to the solidarity shown by Pennsylvanians in the aftermath of the officers’ killings in York county last week.“I think we’re at an inflection point as a nation, and I think we can go in a number of different ways,” Shapiro told moderator Kristen Welker on NBC News’s Meet the Press. “I hope we go the direction of healing, of bringing people together, of trying to find our commonalities – not just focus on our differences.”Shapiro told Welker about his own recent experience with political violence: when his gubernatorial mansion was firebombed in April, an act that authorities suspect was carried out by a man unhappy with Shapiro’s support of Israel amid the Israeli war on Gaza.Shapiro also referenced the murder of Minnesota state house speaker Melissa Hortman and her husband, Mark, in June. Authorities charged a man described by friends as right-leaning – and who had previously registered as a Republican in another state – with the Hortmans’ killings.While Shapiro said he didn’t want to equate the gubernatorial’s mansion’s firebombing with the killing of Kirk and the Hortmans, he said, “Political violence leaves scars.”Addressing arguments that criticism of political opponents may fuel violence, Shapiro pointed to longstanding US supreme court rulings that distinguish protected political speech from illicit incitement to violence.He said most political speech – even if offensive, disliked or hateful – is legal and protected.“There is a big difference,” Shapiro said.The attack on the governor’s mansion took place in April, hours after Shapiro, his wife, their four children, two dogs and another family had celebrated Passover in one of the rooms that sustained damage in the blaze.During Sunday’s interview, the governor criticized Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s leadership and called for an end to the war in Gaza, saying “the suffering needs to stop” while adding that Hamas needed to be out of power as well.Welker also asked Shapiro to comment on criticism about in a new memoir by Kamala Harris on her unsuccessful run for the White House against Donald Trump in 2024. As Welker put it, the book – 107 Days – portrayed him as losing out on the chance to be Harris’s running mate because he was more “focused” on defining his role than helping her defeat Trump as her “number two”.“The only thing I was focused on was working my tail off to deny Donald Trump a second [presidency],” said Shapiro, who was mum about whether he would run for the White House in 2028, as many anticipate that he may.“At the end of the day, this was a choice voters had between Kamala Harris and Donald Trump. They made their choice.” More

    • 150 Shares189 Views

      in US Politics

      Pennsylvania’s Josh Shapiro says leaders need ‘moral clarity’ amid rising political violence

      by

      Pennsylvania governor Josh Shapiro said on Tuesday that the arson attack on his home earlier this year had “left emotional scars” while calling for leaders to recognize that political violence is not a one-sided problem.Shapiro talked about the arson attack and political violence at this week’s Eradicate Hate summit in Pittsburgh, designed to discuss tools and action that can prevent and confront violence.Shapiro ran through a list of acts of targeted violence in the past year, including the assassination attempt of Donald Trump, the killing of United Healthcare’s CEO, the gunman who killed Melissa Hortman and her husband, and the assassination of Charlie Kirk. The one common thread, he said, was “people using violence to settle political differences”.“Leaders have a responsibility to speak and act with moral clarity – and as I have made clear time and time again, this type of violence has no place in our society, regardless of what motivates it, who pulls the trigger, who throws the molotov cocktail, or who wields the weapon,” he said.People have a responsibility to be “clear and unequivocal” in condemning all forms of political violence. He chided those who have celebrated political violence against their opponents and those who have called for revenge in the wake of it.“Unfortunately, some the dark corners of the Internet all the way to the Oval Office want to cherry pick which instances of political violence they want to condemn,” he said. “Doing that only further divides us and it makes it harder to heal. There are some who will hear that selective condemnation and take it as a permission slip to commit more violence, so long as it suits their narrative or only targets the other side.”In the wake of Charlie Kirk’s murder, the Trump administration has said it will go after left-leaning organizations, declaring without evidence that they were somehow tied to the shooting.Shapiro said these acts of vengeance will deepen the divide and that using the government to censor people and “silence people, silence businesses and nonprofits and restrict their right to free speech” will only deepen mistrust.The governor also detailed his own first-hand experience with political violence. In April, on Passover, a man set fire to the Pennsylvania governor’s mansion while Shapiro, his wife and kids were inside. Shapiro said that he woke up to a bang on the door – a state trooper telling him to evacuate because there was a fire. He and his wife grabbed their kids, dogs and other family members who had gathered at the home for seder hours earlier in the room the arsonist set ablaze with molotov cocktails. The man had a metal hammer that he later said he had planned to use to kill Shapiro if he found him, Shapiro said.Cody Balmer was charged by police for terrorism, attempted murder and other charges associated with the attack. Police say Balmer was allegedly motivated by “perceived injustices toward the people of Palestine”. Shapiro is Jewish.Shapiro said he thanks God every day that his family was able to evacuate safely and no one was injured or killed.“That doesn’t mean that the attack hasn’t left emotional scars,” Shapiro said. “I can attest to that, especially as a father, a father to four children, knowing that my life choices put them at risk.”He called the rise in political violence dangerous because it not only seeks to injure or kill opponents but to intimidate people into silence.“I’m here today to tell you that I will not be deterred in my work on behalf of the good people of Pennsylvania and I sure as heck will not be silenced,” he said. More

    • 138 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      Ice secretly deported Pennsylvania grandfather, 82, after he lost green card

      by

      An 82-year-old man in Pennsylvania was secretly deported to Guatemala after visiting an immigration office last month to replace his lost green card, according to his family, who have not heard from him since and were initially told he was dead.According to Morning Call, which first reported the story, long-time Allentown resident Luis Leon – who was granted political asylum in the US in 1987 after being tortured under the regime of the Chilean dictator Augusto Pinochet – lost his wallet containing the physical card that confirmed his legal residency. So he and wife booked an appointment to get it replaced.When he arrived at the office on 20 June, however, he was handcuffed by two Immigration and Customs Enforcement (Ice) officers, who led him away from his wife without explanation, she said. She herself was kept in the building for 10 hours until relatives picked her up.The family said they made efforts to find any information on his whereabouts but learned nothing.Then, sometime after Leon was detained, a woman purporting to be an immigration lawyer called the family, claiming she could help – but did not disclose how she knew about the case, or where Leon was.On 9 July, according to Leon’s granddaughter, the same woman called them again, claiming Leon had died.A week later, however, they discovered from a relative in Chile that Leon was alive after all – but now in a hospital in Guatemala, a country to which he has no connection.According to Morning Call, the relative said Leon had first been sent to an immigration detention center in Minnesota before being deported to Guatemala – despite not appearing on any Ice detention deportation lists.A recent supreme court decision ruled the Trump administration could deport immigrants to other countries beside their country of origin.In his nearly 40 years living in the US, Leon spent his career working in a leather manufacturing plant, and raised a family. He had since retired.His condition at the hospital in Guatemala is unknown. He suffers from diabetes, high blood pressure and a heart condition, according to his family, who said they are planning to fly to Guatemala to see him.An Ice official told the Morning Call it was investigating the matter. More

    • 138 Shares159 Views

      in Elections

      ‘Morally Offensive and Fiscally Reckless’: 3 Writers on Trump’s Big Gamble

      by

      Frank Bruni, a contributing Opinion writer, hosted a written online conversation with Nate Silver, the author of “On the Edge: The Art of Risking Everything” and the newsletter Silver Bulletin, and Lis Smith, a Democratic communications strategist and author of the memoir “Any Given Tuesday: A Political Love Story,” to discuss the aftermath of the passage of President Trump’s One Big, Beautiful Bill.Frank Bruni: Let’s start with that megabill, the bigness of which made the consequences of its enactment hard to digest quickly. Now that we’ve had time to, er, chew it over, I’m wondering if you think Democrats are right to say — to hope — that it gives them a whole new traction in next year’s midterms.I mean, the most significant Medicaid cuts kick in after that point. Could Trump and other Republicans avoid paying a price for them in 2026? Or did they get much too cute in constructing the legislation and building in that delay and create the possibility of disaster for themselves in both 2026 and 2028, when the bill’s effect on Medicaid, as well as on other parts of the safety net, will have taken hold?Lis Smith: If history is any guide, Republicans will pay a price for these cuts in the midterms. In 2010, Democrats got destroyed for passing Obamacare, even though it would be years until it was fully implemented. In 2018, Republicans were punished just for trying to gut it. Voters don’t like politicians messing with their health care. They have been pretty consistent in sending that message.I’d argue that Democrats have an even more potent message in 2026 — it’s not just that Republicans are messing with health care, it’s that they are cutting it to fund tax cuts for the richest Americans.Nate Silver: What I wonder about is Democrats’ ability to sustain focus on any given issue. At the risk of overextrapolating from my home turf in New York, Zohran Mamdani just won a massive upset in the Democratic mayoral primary by focusing on affordability. And a message on the Big, Beautiful Bill could play into that. But the Democratic base is often more engaged by culture war issues, or by messages that are about Trump specifically — and Trump isn’t on the ballot in 2026 — rather than Republicans broadly. The polls suggest that the Big, Beautiful Bill is extremely unpopular, but a lot of those negative views are 1) among people who are extremely politically engaged and already a core Democratic constituency, or 2) snap opinions among the disengaged that are subject to change. Democrats will need to ensure that voters are still thinking about the bill next November, and tying it to actual or potential changes that affect them directly and adversely.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 163 Shares169 Views

      in Elections

      Vance Tries to Sell the Benefits of Trump’s Megabill but Ignores the Costs

      by

      In a visit to Pennsylvania, Vice President JD Vance stressed tax cuts and savings accounts for newborns, with no mention of trims to Medicaid and nutritional assistance programs many Trump voters rely on.Vice President JD Vance traveled to a crucial swing state on Wednesday to sell the Trump administration’s signature domestic policy legislation as a victory for working American families, despite concerns even among some Republicans over its cuts to the safety net in service of benefiting the rich.In what amounted to an attempted brand relaunch of legislation that Democrats have framed as an attack on the middle class, Mr. Vance traveled to a machine shop in eastern Pennsylvania to spotlight provisions in the package that would cut taxes, preserve overtime pay and create $1,000 savings accounts for newborns. Left unmentioned by Mr. Vance were the cuts to Medicaid and the nutritional assistance programs that many of Mr. Trump’s own supporters rely on.“I think this will be transformational for the American people,” Mr. Vance said in front of signs that read “No tax on tips” and “America is back.” The vice president appealed to those in attendance to help the administration sell the package ahead of next year’s midterm elections, arguing that it would benefit Americans like those working in the manufacturing facility serving as his backdrop.“We’re going to invest in American workers and American families every single day,” Mr. Vance added. “That’s my solemn promise to every single person in this room.”Selling the bill is likely to be an uphill climb, particularly after Republicans provided Democrats a series of sound bites expressing concern over how Medicaid cuts would hurt their constituents. While polls show the bill is broadly unpopular, it is difficult to say how much it will influence voters in future elections. Still, six out of 10 Americans find the package unpopular, according to a recent CNN poll. Roughly 58 percent of Americans said Mr. Trump had gone too far in cutting federal programs.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 63 Shares189 Views

      in Elections

      JD Vance’s Big, Beautiful Task

      by

      The vice president is selling Trump’s domestic policy bill amid signs Democratic attacks are breaking through.Vice presidents always have hard jobs.They have little practical authority. They are the face of decisions they are not empowered to make. They get assignments that are hard to ace (like Vice President Kamala Harris’s deployment to address the “root causes” of migration).This morning, I headed to a machine shop in West Pittston, Pa., where Vice President JD Vance was stepping up to shoulder what is becoming a delicate task: selling President Trump’s “One Big Beautiful Bill.”Stumping for your boss’s signature legislation might not ordinarily be an arduous assignment. But at least at this early point, the law, for which Vance cast a tiebreaking vote, is simply not very popular. Some Republicans have warned that it will cost their party seats; one is already trying to roll back the bill’s cuts to Medicaid.Making matters worse for Vance, hints of distrust were in the air, given the furor over the administration’s decision not to release more information about the investigation into the convicted sex offender and disgraced financier Jeffrey Epstein.The machine shop began filling up with devoted Trump and Vance fans, who arrived in Trump 2028 hats or T-shirts showing the moment the president survived an assassination attempt last summer. But even here, there were questions about the new law, and signs that Democrats’ efforts to highlight it as regressive and call it a giveaway for the wealthy were breaking through.“The Democrats are saying that, I forget the number, but, like, millions of people are going to lose their health care and that kind of thing. And I just want to know if that’s true,” said Jane Mizerak, 68, a Republican from the nearby town of West Wyoming, who said she had voted for Trump each time he had run for president.Republicans Rebound in Support for ImmigrationPercent saying immigration is a good thing for this country today

      Source: Gallup surveys of U.S. adults from 2001 to 2025. By The New York TimesWe are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More