Connect with us

Politics

A Pennsylvania County and the Political Tensions in America

Published

on

A Pennsylvania County and the Political Tensions in America

Luzerne County is one of many counties in Pennsylvania — and across the country — that shifted to the right this year.

We spent two weeks there before and after the election to understand what’s driving these changes.

By Philip Montgomery and Michael Sokolove

Nov. 15, 2024

On the Sunday before the election, the state chapter of Bikers for Trump organized a ride of 100 motorcycles in Luzerne County.

Advertisement

They planned to travel from just outside Wilkes-Barre to Scranton, President Biden’s hometown, in neighboring Lackawanna County.

This northeast corner of Pennsylvania used to be called coal country.

Today the largest private employers are warehouses, including facilities for Amazon, T.J. Maxx and the pet-supplies retailer Chewy.

Advertisement

The politics of the area have also shifted.

For two decades its voters reliably leaned Democratic, but Donald Trump won the county in 2016 and again four years later, both times by solid margins.

Dwayne McDavitt, a retired prison guard and a Bikers for Trump leader, is one of the more visible local backers of the former president.

Advertisement

Before the rally in Scranton, he explained that he doubted the result of the 2020 election because he simply did not believe Trump could have lost fairly: “Tell me how Joe Biden could get 81 million votes.”

But Democrats hoped they could move the county back in their direction and made an intensive effort to do so.

In the weeks ahead of the election, busloads of Democratic canvassers fanned out across Luzerne County.

Advertisement

Kevin Kraynak, a Luzerne County native, traveled from his home in California to try to get out the vote.

He hit his 100th mile of canvassing in Forty Fort, outside Wilkes-Barre. “I’m going to walk until my legs fall off,” he said.

County officials were vigilant leading up to Election Day. Luzerne County became a hotbed of election denialism in 2020, and Pennsylvania is an open-carry state. Some people feared voters might bring guns to the polls. Election workers were told they could bring their own guns.

Advertisement

The night before the election, a group of campaign volunteers organized by Jennifer Ziemba, the wife of the Luzerne County Republican Party chairman, gathered at Ziemba’s home in Harveys Lake, a prosperous community outside Wilkes-Barre.

They were calling Republican voters whose mail-in ballots had flaws like a missing date to tell them they had to cast provisional ballots in person.

“We’re not really MAGA-looking,” one of the women said. But they were staunch Trump supporters.

Philip Montgomery for The New York Times

Advertisement

“The women voting solely on abortion make me crazy,” Ziemba said. “I’d gladly give up my abortion rights and my daughter’s for my son not to have to go to war. We’ll have peace with Trump.”

Advertisement

Another woman, Lee Ann McDermott, who owns a real estate appraisal business with her husband, John, thinks the economy will improve under Trump. “With the interest rates high, no one was refinancing.”

On Election Day, most of the state’s counties shifted further to the right, tilting Pennsylvania and its 19 Electoral College votes to Trump by about 130,000 voters.

Just over 152,000 total ballots were cast in Luzerne County — about the same as in 2020.

Advertisement

But Trump increased his margin to 20 points from 14. In only one other Pennsylvania county were Trump’s gains greater.

For Democrats, it was a devastating result.

“This is scary to me,” Constance Wynn said. She had downloaded Project 2025. “I need to understand what he’s planning to do.”

She was sitting in the front parlor of her Wilkes-Barre home, built by her great-great grandfather.

Wynn’s ancestors escaped slavery by fleeing to Pennsylvania before the Civil War.

Advertisement

The morning after the election, some of the Bikers for Trump gathered to celebrate at D’s Diner, in the Wilkes-Barre suburb of Plains Township.

A man they did not know, a retired financial planner named Kim Pace, approached their table. He began by saying that his wife did not think it was a good idea to talk to them. He had voted for Harris.

“Congratulations, guys,” he said. “I hope it all works out.” His tone suggested that he was doubtful.

Advertisement

Philip Montgomery for The New York Times

Dave Ragan, a U.S. Army veteran who had arrived on his motorcycle, stood up to respond. “We changed the world!” he said. “I don’t have to worry about my stepdaughter having a boy in the locker room.”

Advertisement

“Let me tell you something,” Pace said. “That stuff is overblown.” He wished them well and left.

Away from the table, he said, “If Harris had won, there was going to be trouble.”

In the days after the election, political tensions lingered in the community.

Advertisement

On Thursday evening, John McDermott, a retired lieutenant colonel in the Army Reserve, sat at home with his wife, Lee Ann, drinking a vodka and tonic after a round of golf. McDermott voted for Hillary Clinton in 2016 and Trump in 2020.

This year, he voted for Harris. “I couldn’t bring myself to vote for him,” he said. “He’s a convicted felon. He believes in conspiracy theories.”

Lee Ann, a county council member, saw matters differently: She was one of the women making calls at Jennifer Ziemba’s house on the eve of the election. Now she was on her way to meet some of them at a restaurant to toast Trump’s win.

Advertisement

The mood was festive when McDermott arrived. “We’re getting Trumpy!” one of the women exclaimed, as they raised their cosmopolitans and glasses of wine.

Philip Montgomery for The New York Times

Among the revelers was Shelley Meuser, the wife of Representative Dan Meuser, whose district includes a part of Luzerne County.

“We got our country back!” shouted Terry Eckert, who is a real estate agent.

Advertisement

Philip Montgomery for The New York Times

Thirty miles down the road from Wilkes-Barre is Luzerne County’s other city, Hazleton. Its population of 30,000 is 63 percent Latino, an estimated 90 percent of whom are from the Dominican Republic.

Advertisement

Trump won the city decisively, increasing his share of its vote from 2020 by 7 points — substantially more than the 1.9 points he gained statewide.

The community is generally low-income, churchgoing and conservative.

Adaíris Casado, who was at Ada’s Collection, the local store she owns, said that her religion — and a conviction that Trump shares her values — led her to vote for him. “I’m worried about gay marriage,” she said, “and transgender.”

Fredelina Paredes, a paraprofessional at the nearby high school, was at home the weekend after the election with her three children and husband, who works in a plastics factory.

Advertisement

She has voted for Democrats in the past, including Hillary Clinton, before voting for Trump twice. One of her brothers, a first-time voter, also voted for Trump. Paredes said the Democrats no longer represent her values, especially on the issue of abortion.

She was upset about the economy, saying she just spent $9.99 for a package of grapes. “For grapes. Can you imagine that?”

Like others in Hazleton, she supported Trump’s immigration policies, including deportation plans. “I feel bad for the ones I’ve known,” she said, “friends who have been here 15 or 20 years. But you were here all that time, why didn’t you try to get your papers?”

There are at least six Catholic churches and many Pentecostal congregations in the community. One of them is the Iglesia Cristiana Agua de Vida Hazleton, where Elizabeth Torrez is the pastor.

Advertisement

Torrez voted for Trump and made every effort to persuade her parishioners to do the same. It wasn’t difficult, she said.

“He is always talking about God and the Bible,” she said through an interpreter. “He only has God in his mouth.”

She also supported Trump’s immigration policies. There are church members who are undocumented, she said, but she was convinced they would be deported only if they commit crimes.

One of those undocumented members of the congregation is Wadan Fernandez, who has relatives in Hazleton and said he came to the United States about two years ago to start a new life. He has overstayed his tourist visa and has been working in construction and other jobs.

Advertisement

“I love Mr. Trump,” Fernandez said. “Of course he could send me back at any moment, but if he did, I would still love him.”

Philip Montgomery for The New York Times

Philip Montgomery is a photographer whose work examines the fractured state of America. Michael Sokolove, a contributing writer for the magazine since 2002, has written extensively on Pennsylvania and its politics.

Videos by Tre Cassetta.

Advertisement

Politics

Video: Trump Says ‘Only Time Will Tell’ How Long U.S. Controls Venezuela

Published

on

Video: Trump Says ‘Only Time Will Tell’ How Long U.S. Controls Venezuela

new video loaded: Trump Says ‘Only Time Will Tell’ How Long U.S. Controls Venezuela

transcript

transcript

Trump Says ‘Only Time Will Tell’ How Long U.S. Controls Venezuela

President Trump did not say exactly how long the the United states would control Venezuela, but said that it could last years.

“How Long do you think you’ll be running Venezuela?” “Only time will tell. Like three months. six months, a year, longer?” “I would say much longer than that.” “Much longer, and, and —” “We have to rebuild. You have to rebuild the country, and we will rebuild it in a very profitable way. We’re going to be using oil, and we’re going to be taking oil. We’re getting oil prices down, and we’re going to be giving money to Venezuela, which they desperately need. I would love to go, yeah. I think at some point, it will be safe.” “What would trigger a decision to send ground troops into Venezuela?” “I wouldn’t want to tell you that because I can’t, I can’t give up information like that to a reporter. As good as you may be, I just can’t talk about that.” “Would you do it if you couldn’t get at the oil? Would you do it —” “If they’re treating us with great respect. As you know, we’re getting along very well with the administration that is there right now.” “Have you spoken to Delcy Rodríguez?” “I don’t want to comment on that, but Marco speaks to her all the time.”

Advertisement
President Trump did not say exactly how long the the United states would control Venezuela, but said that it could last years.

January 8, 2026

Continue Reading

Politics

Trump calls for $1.5T defense budget to build ‘dream military’

Published

on

Trump calls for .5T defense budget to build ‘dream military’

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

President Donald Trump called for defense spending to be raised to $1.5 trillion, a 50% increase over this year’s budget. 

“After long and difficult negotiations with Senators, Congressmen, Secretaries, and other Political Representatives, I have determined that, for the Good of our Country, especially in these very troubled and dangerous times, our Military Budget for the year 2027 should not be $1 Trillion Dollars, but rather $1.5 Trillion Dollars,” Trump wrote on Truth Social on Thursday evening. 

“This will allow us to build the “Dream Military” that we have long been entitled to and, more importantly, that will keep us SAFE and SECURE, regardless of foe.” 

The president said he came up with the number after tariff revenues created a surplus of cash. He claimed the levies were bringing in enough money to pay for both a major boost to the defense budget “easily,” pay down the national debt, which is over $38 trillion, and offer “a substantial dividend to moderate income patriots.”

Advertisement

SENATE SENDS $901B DEFENSE BILL TO TRUMP AFTER CLASHES OVER BOAT STRIKE, DC AIRSPACE

President Donald Trump called for defense spending to be raised to $1.5 trillion, a 50% increase over this year’s record budget.  (AP Photo/Evan Vucci)

The boost likely reflects efforts to fund Trump’s ambitious military plans, from the Golden Dome homeland missile defense shield to a new ‘Trump class’ of battleships.

The Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget found that the increased budget would cost about $5 trillion from 2027 to 2035, or $5.7 trillion with interest. Tariff revenues, the group found, would cover about half the cost – $2.5 trillion or $3 trillion with interest. 

The Supreme Court is expected to rule in a major case Friday that will determine the legality of Trump’s sweeping tariff strategy.

Advertisement

CONGRESS UNVEILS $900B DEFENSE BILL TARGETING CHINA WITH TECH BANS, INVESTMENT CRACKDOWN, US TROOP PAY RAISE

This year the defense budget is expected to breach $1 trillion for the first time thanks to a $150 billion reconciliation bill Congress passed to boost the expected $900 billion defense spending legislation for fiscal year 2026. Congress has yet to pass a full-year defense budget for 2026.

Some Republicans have long called for a major increase to defense spending to bring the topline total to 5% of GDP, as the $1.5 trillion budget would do, up from the current 3.5%.

The boost likely reflects efforts to fund Trump’s ambitious military plans, from the Golden Dome homeland missile defense shield to a new ‘Trump class’ of battleships. (Lockheed Martin via Reuters)

Trump has ramped up pressure on Europe to increase its national security spending to 5% of GDP – 3.5% on core military requirements and 1.5% on defense-related areas like cybersecurity and critical infrastructure.

Advertisement

Trump’s budget announcement came hours after defense stocks took a dip when he condemned the performance rates of major defense contractors. In a separate Truth Social post he announced he would not allow defense firms to buy back their own stocks, offer large salaries to executives or issue dividends to shareholders. 

“Executive Pay Packages in the Defense Industry are exorbitant and unjustifiable given how slowly these Companies are delivering vital Equipment to our Military, and our Allies,” he said. 

“​Defense Companies are not producing our Great Military Equipment rapidly enough and, once produced, not maintaining it properly or quickly.”

U.S. Army soldiers stand near an armored military vehicle on the outskirts of Rumaylan in Syria’s northeastern Hasakeh province, bordering Turkey, on March 27, 2023.  (Delil Souleiman/AFP via Getty Images)

He said that executives would not be allowed to make above $5 million until they build new production plants.

Advertisement

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Stock buybacks, dividends and executive compensation are generally governed by securities law, state corporate law and private contracts, and cannot be broadly restricted without congressional action.

An executive order the White House released Wednesday frames the restrictions as conditions on future defense contracts, rather than a blanket prohibition. The order directs the secretary of war to ensure that new contracts include provisions barring stock buybacks and corporate distributions during periods of underperformance, non-compliance or inadequate production, as determined by the Pentagon.

Continue Reading

Politics

Newsom moves to reshape who runs California’s schools under budget plan

Published

on

Newsom moves to reshape who runs California’s schools under budget plan

Gov. Gavin Newsom on Thursday unveiled a sweeping proposal to overhaul how California’s education system is governed, calling for structural changes that he said would shift oversight of the Department of Education and redefine the role of the state’s elected schools chief.

The proposal, which is part of Newsom’s state budget plan that will be released Friday, would unify the policymaking State Board of Education with the department, which is responsible for carrying out those policies. The governor said the change would better align education efforts from early childhood through college.

“California can no longer postpone reforms that have been recommended regularly for a century,” Newsom said in a statement. “These critical reforms will bring greater accountability, clarity, and coherence to how we serve our students and schools.”

Few details were provided about how the role of the state superintendent of public instruction would change, beyond a greater focus on fostering coordination and aligning education policy.

The changes would require approval from state lawmakers, who will be in the state Capitol on Thursday for Newsom’s last State of the State speech in his final year as governor.

Advertisement

The proposal would implement recommendations from a 2002 report by the state Legislature, titled “California’s Master Plan for Education,” which described the state’s K-12 governance as fragmented and “with overlapping roles that sometimes operate in conflict with one another, to the detriment of the educational services offered to students.” Newsom’s office said similar concerns have been raised repeatedly since 1920 and were echoed again in a December 2025 report by research center Policy Analysis for California Education.

“The sobering reality of California’s education system is that too few schools can now provide the conditions in which the State can fairly ask students to learn to the highest standards, let alone prepare themselves to meet their future learning needs,” the Legislature’s 2002 report stated. Those most harmed are often low-income students and students of color, the report added.

“California’s education governance system is complex and too often creates challenges for school leaders,” Edgar Zazueta, executive director of the Assn. of California School Administrators, said in a statement provided by Newsom’s office. “As responsibilities and demands on schools continue to increase, educators need governance systems that are designed to better support positive student outcomes.”

The current budget allocated $137.6 billion for education from transitional kindergarten through the 12th grade — the highest per-pupil funding level in state history — and Newsom’s office said his proposal is intended to ensure those investments translate into more consistent support and improved outcomes statewide.

“For decades the fragmented and inefficient structure overseeing our public education system has hindered our students’ ability to succeed and thrive,” Ted Lempert, president of advocacy group Children Now, said in a statement provided by the governor’s office. “Major reform is essential, and we’re thrilled that the Governor is tackling this issue to improve our kids’ education.”

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Trending