(DCNF)—CNN senior data reporter Harry Enten expressed surprise Monday at the degree to which “young black men” are abandoning the Democratic Party

Former President Barack Obama on Thursday urged black men to support Vice President Kamala Harris while speaking at a Pittsburgh-area campaign office, asserting he believes a reason for their reluctance to back her is that they “aren’t feeling the idea of having a woman as president.” Enten, on “CNN News Central,” said Obama was likely mistaken in his criticism as “young black men” have increasingly been leaving the Democratic Party over multiple elections against former President Donald Trump.

WATCH:

“I look at the polls all the time and sometimes there’s a trend line, now, I never noticed before and make me go, ‘Woah.’ This is one of them. Alright, this is the Democratic margin among black men under the age of 45 in presidential elections. You go back to November of 2012, what do you see? You see Obama by 81, [former Secretary of State] Hillary Clinton only won ’em by 63,” Enten said. “Then we’re all the way down to [President Joe] Biden last time around by 53. A tremendous drop already. And then you take a look at the average of the most recent polls and Kamala Harris is up by only 41 points.”

“That is about half the margin that Obama won them by back in November of 2012. And this I think is, you know, when Barack Obama goes and last week when he was in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania to essentially talking to young black men, he made it seem like it was a Kamala Harris-specific problem,” he added. “Uh-uh. This is part of a longstanding trend of young black men moving away from the Democratic Party. And Kamala Harris is just the latest to face that magnitude of black, younger black men going towards Republicans.”

Black voters have shifted away from Democrats from 2016 to 2024, according to a Saturday New York Times/Siena College poll. During the 2016 election, only 7% of black voters favored Republicans, a number now at 15%.

While Trump is gaining traction with “working class voters,” including nonwhite Americans without college degrees and union members, Enten previously noted that Harris could offset his gains with her “ridiculously” strong support among college graduates, particularly “white college grads.”

All content created by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent and nonpartisan newswire service, is available without charge to any legitimate news publisher that can provide a large audience. All republished articles must include our logo, our reporter’s byline and their DCNF affiliation. For any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

Is President Biden so embittered by the forced end of his re-election bid that he’s actively undermining Kamala Harris’ campaign? This question isn’t just rhetorical; a growing chorus of political commentators suggests it’s a reality.

Since being pushed out of the race in July amid concerns over his cognitive fitness, Biden’s support for Harris has been lackluster at best. His endorsement seems to be the extent of his commitment, as he largely remains absent from his vice president’s campaign events.

Biden has repeatedly overshadowed Harris, even going so far as to address the nation about Hurricane Helene just after Harris abruptly canceled a Las Vegas campaign appearance to return to D.C. for the same issue.

The actions of this lame-duck president have provided ample fodder for Trump supporters, who are reveling in his cringe-inducing missteps. From donning a “Trump 2024” cap during a 9/11 commemoration to praising Florida Governor Ron DeSantis amid Harris’ complaints about his unwillingness to take her call, Biden’s choices can only be seen as provocative.

“Biden is intentionally enacting revenge on Kamala for knifing him in the back,” claims Jason Meister, a Republican political strategist who serves on the advisory board for Trump’s campaign.

“He never liked her. The happiest he’s looked in four years was when he put a red [Trump 2024] hat on after speaking with Shanksville, [Pa.] firefighters [last month] on 9/11. He should just come out and endorse Trump.”

The implications of Biden’s actions have not escaped the notice of political insiders. Hank Sheinkopf, a Democratic strategist, notes, “It would be absolutely ridiculous to assume that he has no resentment over how he was treated or how, frankly, he was forced out in what some would describe as a coup.

“Why hasn’t he appeared in places where he could do some good, like parts of Pennsylvania and states that the president has buoyed during his term? Nobody wants to give up being president of the United States – it’s the one job you don’t want to leave.”

Former Republican presidential candidate Vivek Ramaswamy took aim at Biden’s apparent disloyalty, stating, “Somewhere deep down inside, in a place that he doesn’t want to admit, I think maybe Joe Biden is actually rooting for it.

“I think it’s clear that Joe is still bruised by what happened.”

In a further commentary on Biden’s mindset, Ramaswamy said, “I don’t think he would have won [a second term], but in his views, and those of his family, they probably think that they were robbed of it.”

Meanwhile, Trump campaign spokesperson Caroline Sunshine weighed in on the subject. “Harris doesn’t need help sabotaging her campaign because she does that herself every time she speaks without a teleprompter, [but] it’s important to remember there is absolutely no daylight between President Biden and Kamala Harris on policy.

“Kamala Harris has said herself she wouldn’t do a single thing differently these last four years, and our campaign will be reminding voters of this fact every day between now and Nov. 5.”

In response to the mounting criticism, White House spokesman Andrew Bates insisted that critics “seem to have missed” Biden’s commitment to Harris, asserting that he “made clear he was all-in for” her “out of the gate when he left the campaign.

“He believes fiercely in an agenda that will move us into the future, away from unhinged divisiveness and extreme policies the country can’t afford to go back to, like MAGAnomics and a national abortion ban.”

It’s clear that the dynamics of this administration are fraught with tension and possible ulterior motives. As the 2024 election approaches, one cannot help but wonder: Is this the end for Harris, or just the beginning of a deeper rift within the Democratic Party?

Article generated from corporate media reports.

(DCNF)—CNN panelist and Axios senior contributor Margaret Talev said Friday that Republican nominee Donald Trump’s 5-point lead in Nevada is “worrisome for Democrats.”

A Wall Street Journal poll released Friday measuring the presidential candidates’ polling in seven swing states found Trump leading Vice President Kamala Harris 47% to 42% in Nevada. Talev said Trump’s lead is likely a result of the voters in Nevada prioritizing the economy and immigration as their top issues.

“It’s pretty worrisome if you’re a Democrat and you’re looking at Nevada,” Talev said. “I do think the economy and the way economic issues and inflation have played are very important in Nevada. I also think, like, both President Biden and Vice President Harris have not been able to regain that really solid lead that Democrats have held in years past with the Latino community, and Latino voters, overall as a bloc, clearly prefer the Democratic candidate to the Republican candidate. But there’s been some slide.”

WATCH:

The former president holds a 54% to 38% advantage over Harris on the economy and leads 56% to 31% on immigration in Nevada, according to the poll.

The race is essentially tied in six of the swing states, with Harris leading by 1 or 2 points in Georgia, Arizona, Michigan and Wisconsin, according to the poll. Trump is leading by 1 point in Pennsylvania and North Carolina.

Trump leads Harris 46% to 45% across all of the seven swing states, according to the poll. Across all of the swing states, the former president holds a 10-point lead against Harris on the economy, 50% to 40%, and secures a 52% to 36% lead on immigration.

The poll surveyed 600 registered voters in each swing state between Sept. 28 and Oct. 8 with a 5% margin of error.

The panel then aired a survey conducted by the Pew Research Center, which found Harris leading among Latino voters 54% to 39%. The panel said these results are “bad for Democrats” as Harris is lagging with Latino voters in comparison to past elections.

“It’s bad for Democrats. The interesting thing to me is the way the immigration issue plays into this,” CNN senior political analyst Giorgia Borger said. “There’s a lot of Latino voters who say, ‘look, I don’t like Donald Trump because he’s anti-immigrant’ and then there’s a bloc of Latino voters who oppose illegal immigration because they came in and got their citizenship and they don’t want to make it easier for anybody else, they think that would be unfair.”

All content created by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent and nonpartisan newswire service, is available without charge to any legitimate news publisher that can provide a large audience. All republished articles must include our logo, our reporter’s byline and their DCNF affiliation. For any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

One survey, known as the 2024 Asian American Voter Survey, included 409 registered Korean American voters. The poll found that only 38 percent of respondents identified themselves being Democrats. This marks a substantial decrease from the same survey conducted in 2020, which found that 51 percent of this demographic identified with the Democratic Party. (Related: Poll finds Democrats’ advantage among Hispanic voters continues to SHRINK.)

This shift highlights a growing sentiment among Korean Americans that inflation and economic issues are paramount to historical loyalties to the Democrats.

In fact, 57 percent of respondents labeled jobs and the economy as “extremely important” in casting their vote, with another 33 percent describing these issues as “very important” and nine percent as “somewhat important.” Meanwhile, 58 percent consider inflation as a major concern, with 32 percent describing it as a “very important” issue and eight percent as “somewhat important.”

Housing costs also weigh heavily, with 51 percent deeming the issue “extremely important” to their voting decision, with 35 percent labeling it as “very important,” 10 percent as “somewhat important” and three percent as “not that important.”

These results support the claims of Catherine Kim, an assistant editor at POLITICO Magazine, that “the economy has always been a top priority for Korean Americans,” especially in Gwinnett County, a suburb where inflation severely impacted the Korean American community. This community, according to Kim, poorly evaluated the performance of the current administration.

Support for Trump increasing among Korean Americans

The surveys also reveal increasing support for former President Donald Trump as Korean Americans turn away from the Democratic Party.

One survey conducted from April to May found that only 27 percent of Korean Americans support Trump. However, another survey conducted in early September found that 35 percent of Korean Americans are now supporting Trump due to their belief that he is more capable of dealing with inflation and other economic issues.

Lee Sung Yong, a traditional KBBQ and noodle restaurant owner in Georgia, pointed to the rising costs as a critical factor influencing his vote.

“The price of ingredients has just risen so much — almost 80 percent for certain items,” Lee said in an interview with Kim, confirming he will vote for Trump.

“The yearly costs of my operation have been so different under the two administrations. Eating out has become such a financial burden these days,” he said. “That first and foremost needs to be fixed for us to survive.”

For Lee, a return of the Trump administration represents a potential return to better times for his restaurant.

“I was disappointed with the economy under Biden,” he said. He admitted that the economic policies of Harris as a presidential candidate remains unclear to him, so he is worried that these might as well just continue to exacerbate rising prices and higher taxes. “I don’t know Harris’ economic policies, but won’t the same pattern of rising prices and higher taxes repeat under her, since she was the vice president?”

Visit KamalaHarris.news for related stories about the vice president’s campaign. Watch this video about the mainstream media’s failed attempt to memory-hole any mention of Vice President Kamala Harris being the border czar.

This video is from the Justin Barclay channel on Brighteon.com.

More related stories:

• More Americans identify as Republicans than Democrats for the first time in three decades.
• NOT SENSIBLE: Obama-era economist slams Harris’ grocery price control plan.
• Elon Musk says nobody will bother to try to assassinate Kamala Harris because she’s just another “puppet” of the “machine.”
• POLL: American voters trust Donald Trump more than Kamala Harris on firearms issues.
• Poll: Taylor Swift’s endorsement of Harris-Walz ticket only sways more voters AWAY from Democrats.

Sources include:

• Breitbart.com
• Politico.com
• Brighteon.com

The vast majority of the Democrats in the House (162 of 212) signed the letter, led by Reps. Sara Jacobs, D-Calif.; Pramila Jayapal, D-Wash.; and Mark Pocan, D-Wis. The letter urges the House of Representatives not to include “provisions that actively target LGBTQ+ service members and LGBTQ+ dependents and threaten the recruitment, retention, and readiness of our Armed Forces” in the National Defense Authorization Act, the bill to fund the military.

The NDAA allocates money to the Department of Defense and it is considered one of the must-pass bills in Congress each year. Two of the letter’s signatories, Reps. Colin Allred, D-Texas, and Ruben Gallego, D-Ariz., are running for U.S. Senate in their respective states.

The letter flags provisions House Republicans added to the NDAA that would restrict what the Democrats call “medically necessary care for transgender service members or their family members.” In addition to defunding transgender medical interventions, the provisions would prevent military leaders from approving ideological flags like the LGBTQ “Pride” flag. They would also remove pornographic books and books pushing gender ideology from Department of Defense K-12 school libraries, which the Democrats call a “transgender book ban.” They would also ban any of the NDAA funds from going to “a drag show, drag queen story hour, or similar event.”

The 162 Democrats who signed the letter claim that these provisions would exacerbate the U.S. military’s recruitment and retention crisis and that people who identify as transgender are more likely to serve in the military than those who do not so identify.

“As our nation faces recruitment and retention challenges, attacking transgender people—who are more likely to serve in the U.S. military than cisgender people—is a grave mistake,” the Democrats wrote. “If service members are concerned for their health care, their right to exist, or the well-being of their children and loved ones, they cannot focus on their jobs, thereby weakening military readiness and retention rates.”

“The U.S. government should not prohibit our service members from accessing medically necessary care, especially care that is safe, effective, and supported by every major medical association in the U.S., representing more than 1.3 million doctors,” the letter adds. “The care transgender service members receive is essential for them to be their authentic selves and focus on their mission. Denying this access to health care would deter transgender people from joining the Armed Forces, damage retention efforts, and hurt our military readiness.”

Are these claims true?

‘Gender-Affirming Care’

Many states have passed laws banning experimental “transgender” medical interventions for minors, such as so-called puberty blockers, cross-sex hormones, and surgeries that remove healthy breasts or sex organs. There is no conclusive evidence that these interventions, euphemistically referred to as “gender-affirming care,” make life better for people struggling with gender dysphoria (the persistent and emotionally painful condition of identifying with the gender opposite one’s sex).

Internal documents from the World Professional Association for Transgender Health, or WPATH, a pro-transgender activist group, revealed that the organization’s leaders knew about various side effects of “gender-affirming care,” including cancer in teens and reduced sexual function, as well as the lack of informed consent for procedures with lifelong impacts. These medical professionals endorse the experimental treatments anyway.

Some doctors have gone on record opposing such treatments. Back in 2023 in Florida, many doctors testified in favor of a rule that would prevent Medicaid dollars from funding “gender-affirming care.” The doctors—including psychiatrists, endocrinologists, neurologists, and a former WPATH leader—testified that these interventions are experimental and may do more harm than good.

“The claim that ‘gender affirming’ drugs and surgery are safe, effective, and medically necessary is a triple lie,” Jay Richards, director of the Richard and Helen DeVos Center for Life, Religion, and Family at The Heritage Foundation, told The Daily Signal.

“The complications—some that persist for a lifetime—from these experimental procedures are notorious,” he said. “And while some individuals may report relief from symptoms of gender dysphoria in the short term, there’s no evidence that, on balance, medicalizing a therapy for a mental disorder is beneficial. And by definition, these procedures are not medically necessary—since they attempt to treat a psychological disorder with drugs and surgery that does not directly address the psychological disorder.”

“At best, sex trait motivation drugs and surgery are experimental interventions of doubtful benefit and obvious harms,” Richards added. “Subjecting service members to these experiments makes no sense either for the individuals involved or for military readiness.”

Polls have consistently found that more Americans oppose “gender-affirming care” for minors, even when framed in terms most likely to get a favorable response.

An RMG Research poll in March found that only 22% of respondents supported giving minors access to “gender-affirming care,” while 64% said they opposed it.

A 2022 Pew Research Center survey asked respondents whether they would “make it illegal for health care professionals to help someone <18 [under 18] with medical care for gender transition.” Even with this arguably deceptive framing, nearly half of respondents (46%) said they would support such a ban.

Similarly, more Americans (44%) told Pew they would oppose requiring “health insurance companies to cover medical care for gender transitions” than would support it (27%).

From these responses, it seems likely that taxpayer funding for experimental transgender interventions would prove rather controversial.

As for the idea that transgender people are “more likely to serve in the U.S. military than cisgender people,” the claim appears to trace back to an analysis of the 2015 U.S. Transgender Survey. That survey, conducted by the National Center for Transgender Equality, found that “respondents served in the military at nearly twice the rate as the people in the U.S. population overall.” Since the proportion of the general population who identify as transgender is minuscule, this does not mean that a large proportion of veterans or service members is transgender or that the military would be handicapped without transgender recruits.

Two Senate Candidates

Two of the 162 House Democrats who signed the letter are running for U.S. Senate.

Allred is challenging Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, in the Lone Star State, which former President Donald Trump carried in 2016 and 2020. Cruz leads Allred by 5 points in the RealClearPolitics polling average.

“Day after day, Colin Allred shows Texas who he really is,” a spokesman for the Cruz campaign told The Daily Signal in a statement on the letter. “He is a radical who will destroy Texas and America. His record on transgender issues puts our children and families at risk.”

Gallego is running against Republican Kari Lake in Arizona, which is considered a key swing state. Gallego leads Lake by 7 points in the RealClearPolitics average.

“The fact that Ruben Gallego would try to hold up the National Defense Authorization Act to DEMAND that taxpayer money goes to sexual reassignment surgeries is a testament to how radical he truly is,” a spokesperson for Lake’s campaign told The Daily Signal in a statement Tuesday. “Gallego’s radicalism does tremendous harm to our military preparedness and puts our national security at risk.”

18 Swing-District Democrats

Eighteen House Democrats in races the Cook Political Report rates as “competitive” also signed the letter.

Reps. Yadira Caraveo, D-Colo., and Emilia Sykes, D-Ohio, are running in races Cook rates as “toss-ups.”

Eight Democrats in races Cook rates as “lean Democrat” also signed the letter: Reps. Jahana Hayes, D-Ct.; Eric Sorensen, D-Ill.; Frank Mrvan, D-Ind.; Angie Craig, D-Minn.; Susie Lee, D-Nev.; Pat Ryan, D-N.Y.; Andrea Salinas, D-Ore.; and Chris Deluzio, D-Pa.

Eight more Democrats in “likely Democrat” races also signed the letter: Reps. Mike Levin, D-Calif.; Darren Soto, D-Fla.; Sharice Davids, D-Kan.; Hillary Scholten, D-Mich.; Chris Pappas, D-N.H.; Dina Titus, D-Nev.; Steven Horsford, D-Nev.; and Greg Landsman, D-Ohio.

None of these Democrats responded to The Daily Signal’s request for comment by press time.

Take Gabriel Lopez, a 27-year-old who once championed Hillary Clinton in 2016. Now, he’s switched his registration to Republican and is vocally supporting Trump.

“Democrats keep saying [Trump] is going to bring down the economy, but he was already president for four years, and taxes were lower,” Lopez stated. “We’re tired of the same politics. We got a different type of guy, and the people actually love him.”

What does this say about the Democratic Party’s grip on its voters? It’s clear that working-class Pennsylvanians are feeling the pinch of rising prices, and many are pointing fingers at the policies of the Democrats.

As the Inquirer points out, Lopez is emblematic of the Democrats’ growing crisis in Pennsylvania. This once-reliable voting bloc has drifted towards the Republicans, and the economic hardship faced by these voters has only accelerated this shift.

Retired truck driver Jim Kohn also weighed in, lamenting the soaring costs under the current administration.

“When Trump was president, everything was cheaper,” Kohn said. “Now, everything is so sky-high.”

These sentiments are echoed by others in the area, who grapple with the reality of their economic struggles. While some Democrats still hold out hope for Vice President Kamala Harris, others are beginning to recognize the allure of Trump’s message.

“Many of us have people in our families who have gone to jail, or gone to schools that have failed us. We’re not trustful of the government,” stated Álvarez Febo, a Democrat intending to vote for Harris. “Then you have someone like Trump, who is a liar, and for some people, it’s like, ‘you know something? He’s an honest representation of what we feel.’”

But what does that say about Harris’ campaign? The lofty claims that “Kamala is going to save our democracy” ring hollow to those struggling to make ends meet.

“They’re saying Kamala is going to save our democracy,” Febo pointed out. “That means very little for people who can’t keep the lights on.”

The Republican party is buzzing with optimism, sensing a shift in the political landscape. Charlie O’Connor, the 45th Ward GOP Leader, notes a historic change in voter alignment.

“When I first started in politics in 1978, the managerial class was Republican — no one votes the way their bosses vote,” he remarked. “Now, most people in the managerial class vote Democratic and no one is voting the way their boss is. So it’s been a flip. Most of the bosses are Democrats and the Democratic Party has become the party of the upper middle class.”

With Pennsylvania being a critical battleground for the upcoming presidential election, current polling shows Harris and Trump locked in a tight race at 49% each among likely voters. As the 2024 election looms, the growing support for Trump among Philadelphia Democrats could very well reshape the political narrative. It’s time to pay attention.

Article generated from corporate media reports.

An exaggeration, you say?

Just listen to what high-profile leftists have been openly saying about denying you your right to information on both sides of the political equation.

Former presidential candidate and Obama Secretary of State John Kerry has gotten the most attention recently, mainly because of how bluntly he railed against our most fundamental freedom. But former Clinton Secretary of Labor Robert Reich has been just as repressive—and more detailed. And Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., has been her usual self as she demands censorship without much specificity.

Kerry made his comments at a World Economic Forum panel on green energy on Sept. 25. A conservative comedian trying to satirize the views of the haughty ruling class could not have come up with better material.

As Kerry put it, “The dislike of and anger over social media is just growing and growing and growing, and it’s part of our problem, particularly in democracies, in terms of building consensus around any issue,” Kerry lamented, apparently referring to abhorrence of freedom by members of his ilk.

“It’s really hard to govern today!” The problem, he said, was that the internet and social media have liberated people to choose from different sources of information, adding competition. Little over two decades ago, the country was held hostage to the views of the journalists working at three networks and a handful of national newspapers.

Kerry pines for those days. “The referees we used to have to determine what’s a fact, and what isn’t a fact, have been eviscerated to a certain degree, and people self-select, where they go for their news, or for their information, and you get into a vicious cycle,” said the man who came within 19 Electoral College votes of becoming president in 2004. “So, it’s really, really hard, much harder, to build consensus today than at any time in the 40 to 50 years I’ve been involved in this.”

He continued, “There is a lot of discussion now about how you curb those entities, if people go to only one source, and the source they go to is sick and has an agenda and it’s putting out disinformation, our First Amendment stands as a major block to the ability to hammer it out of existence.”

Kerry’s solution?

What we need is to win the ground, win the right to govern by hopefully winning enough votes that you’re free to be able to implement change. … Democracies are very challenged right now, and have not proven that they can move fast enough, or big enough, to deal with the challenges that we are facing, and to me, this is part of what this race, this election is all about—will we break the fever in the United States?

Reich also discussed his desire to hammer persnickety sources of information out of existence with a global audience. Writing in the leading newspaper of the British Left, The Guardian, he engaged in a bit of disinformation himself by mischaracterizing the actions of the man he’d like hammered out, X owner Elon Musk.

Musk and former President Donald Trump “have both floated the idea of governing together if Trump wins a second term,” wrote Reich, whereas, in fact, as Reich admitted himself, all Musk has done is recommend that Trump have in a second term a “government efficiency commission” in which Musk “would be happy to help out.” But apparently unaware that he was committing the same crime he accused Musk to be guilty of, Reich went on with his recommendation for how officials around the world should “rein in Musk.”

The first one was for people to boycott Musk’s electric vehicle, Tesla, and his social media company, X. But Reich wants much more. “Regulators around the world should threaten Musk with arrest if he doesn’t stop disseminating lies and hate on X,” he wrote. As for the U.S. government, it “should terminate its contracts with him, starting with Musk’s SpaceX,” wrote Reich, who published his screed weeks before the U.S. government had to come to SpaceX, hat in hand, asking it to retrieve two astronauts stranded by NASA.

Ocasio-Cortez has been far less trenchant and specific. The young representative, who’s been repeatedly dinged by left-leaning PolitiFact for spreading falsehoods, also wants to “rein in” media she considers guilty of spreading misinformation.

“We’re going to have to figure out how we rein in our media environment so that you can’t just spew disinformation and misinformation,” she posted on social media. “It’s one thing to have different opinions, but it’s another thing entirely to just say things that are false, so that is something that we’re looking into.”

Unfortunately, these unhinged comments by American politicians don’t come in a vacuum.

There is a sustained attack on freedom of information from Brazil to our ally the United Kingdom to next door in Canada. Of course, that makes it all the more important that we speak up for freedom.

Image via Flickr, CC BY-ND 2.0.