Connect with us

Politics

News Analysis: Trump gave himself high marks. Polls, markets, courts, allies paint a different picture

Published

on

News Analysis: Trump gave himself high marks. Polls, markets, courts, allies paint a different picture

President Trump gave his new administration high marks in a bullish speech to Congress on Tuesday, arguing he is making fast work of his promised agenda on immigration, the economy, international trade and global conflicts, and that the U.S. is stronger for it.

“We have accomplished more in 43 days than most administrations accomplish in four years or eight years — and we are just getting started,” Trump said during his speech, which resembled a State of the Union address.

Trump’s largely rosy assessment was backed by many Republicans, who applauded often throughout the speech, and there is evidence to support some of his claimed successes. At the southern border, for instance, illegal crossings have dwindled, just as Trump promised — though not to their lowest level ever, as Trump claimed Tuesday.

However, other indicators of success for a new president — including public polling, economic markets, court rulings and the remarks of foreign allies — paint a far more nuanced picture. In some cases, they support the opposing view of congressional Democrats and other critics that Trump’s policies have made the nation far weaker in a stunningly short period of time by disrupting core government services, rattling global financial markets, sparking trade battles, abandoning U.S. allies and providing little of the economic relief most desired by struggling Americans.

“America wants change, but there’s a responsible way to make change and a reckless way, and we can make that change without forgetting who we are as a country and as a democracy,” said Sen. Elissa Slotkin of Michigan in a rebuttal speech delivered on behalf of Democrats.

Advertisement

Since his election in November — which was narrow in terms of votes but relatively decisive on the electoral map — Trump has claimed a wide mandate to enact his “America first” vision, including through sweeping executive orders designed to bypass Congress. He has used that argument to dismiss criticisms, including from federal judges, that his administration is overreaching, moving too quickly and potentially violating the law.

On Tuesday, Trump said that his November win “was a mandate like has not been seen in many decades,” that “for the first time in modern history, more Americans believe that our country is headed in the right direction than the wrong direction,” and that “it has been stated by many” that the first month of his presidency has been “the most successful in the history of our nation.”

However, recent polling has suggested that Americans are heavily divided on Trump’s policies, and that more disapprove of him and some of his key initiatives than approve of them. Trump’s key advisor Elon Musk, the world’s richest man, and his so-called Department of Government Efficiency, which has targeted federal agencies for closure or dramatic reductions in staffing and funding, have even less support.

An NPR/PBS News/Marist poll conducted last week, for example, found 45% of Americans approved of the job Trump is doing, while 49% disapproved. That is a high approval rating for Trump, who had a 38% approval rating at the end of his first term, but historically low for a new president ahead of his first address to Congress, according to Gallup and other polling figures.

Among modern presidents, only Trump himself, at the start of his first term in 2017, has had a lower approval at this stage.

Advertisement

A separate CNN poll, also conducted last week, put Trump’s approval rating at 48%. Both polls were conducted before Friday, when Trump and Vice President JD Vance shocked the world by berating Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky in the Oval Office, undoing a planned security and mineral rights deal.

Americans also are not overly optimistic about the path the country is on. According to the Marist poll, 53% of Americans said the state of the union is not very strong or not strong at all, 54% said the country is moving in the wrong direction, and 56% said Trump was rushing to make changes without properly considering the impacts.

On the economy, 42% said Trump was changing things for the better, 46% for the worse. On immigration, 47% said Trump was changing things for the better, 43% for the worse. On foreign policy, 44% said Trump was changing things for the better, 49% for the worse. On each issue, skepticism was highest among Democrats but also strong among independent voters, while Republicans largely backed the president.

Half of respondents said they had an unfavorable view of Musk, while 39% said they had a favorable view of him; 44% had an unfavorable view of DOGE, while 39% had a favorable view.

A majority, 57%, expected grocery prices will increase over the next six months, while 17% said they believed prices would go down.

Advertisement

Trump on Tuesday said that he had inherited an “economic catastrophe and an inflation nightmare” from the previous Biden administrationsomething Democrats and many economists dispute — and that one of his “highest priorities is to rescue our economy and get dramatic and immediate relief to working families.”

To do that, he said, his administration is rolling back restrictive energy policies to “drill, baby, drill,” calling for “tax cuts for everybody,” and instituting tariffs on U.S. trading partners, the latter of which he said “will take in trillions and trillions of dollars and create jobs like we have never seen before.”

Republican leaders broadly praised Trump and his speech. Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, a staunch Trump ally from Georgia, wore a red hat to the address that read, “Trump was right about everything.”

Still, many others around the world looked on with concern.

Trump’s remarks followed his imposition of new tariffs on Canada, Mexico and China — the U.S.’ top trading partners — and promises of retaliatory measures from all three. Experts predicted American consumers would soon pay more for fresh vegetables, fruits and other perishable imports.

Advertisement

In announcing that Canada would immediately strike back with its own tariffs on many American goods, Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau accused the Trump administration Tuesday of instigating a “dumb” trade war that would harm average Americans.

“We don’t want this. We want to work with you as a friend and ally,” Trudeau told Americans. “And we don’t want to see you hurt either, but your government has chosen to do this to you.”

Trudeau’s remarks added to widespread anger among allies across Europe over Trump’s lashing out at Zelensky. On Monday, Trump doubled down by temporarily suspending all U.S. military aid to Ukraine until Zelensky falls in line with Trump’s vision for a cease-fire with Russia, a move many viewed as an ultimatum for a long-standing U.S. ally and a gift to Russian President Vladimir Putin.

U.S. and global financial markets were clearly rattled by the tariffs and escalating tensions between the U.S. and its partners. Stocks have tumbled in recent days, wiping out much of the gains seen since Trump was elected on a business-friendly platform.

Worries about a trade war and a slowdown in the global economy Tuesday led to the Standard & Poor’s 500 index falling 1.2%, the Dow Jones industrial average sliding 1.6% and the Nasdaq composite slipping 0.4%. European markets fell sharply, stocks in Asia more modestly.

Advertisement

The volatility was mirrored on the domestic front, where Trump and Musk have riled Democrats and some Republicans with sweeping cuts to the federal workforce and other policies targeting vulnerable communities and constitutional rights.

In many instances, the Trump administration has admitted the cuts were poorly tailored, rushing to reinstate fired federal employees who protect the nation’s nuclear stockpile and national parks, among other things. Many of the cuts — including to social safety net programs such as Medicaid and the monitoring of infectious diseases — have been criticized as dangerous and legally dubious, including by California and other blue states, and been walked back by federal judges.

Judges have repeatedly questioned Trump’s executive power to redirect funds already appropriated by Congress, and called other Trump orders, such as one to end birthright citizenship for U.S.-born children of immigrants, clearly unconstitutional.

How Trump’s aggressive approach will be received by the American public moving forward, and whether incidents such as his berating of Zelensky will affect his approval ratings, are unclear. Also unclear is whether he will respond to resistance other than by ignoring it or promising to crack down on it.

On Friday, California for the second time accused the Trump administration of ignoring a court order requiring it to release appropriated federal funding that it had unilaterally frozen, saying Federal Emergency Management Agency funds remain blocked. On Monday, Trump dismissed people criticizing his administration at recent Republican town halls as “paid ‘troublemakers.’”

Advertisement

Before his speech Tuesday, he said his administration will be withholding funds from colleges and universities that allow “illegal protests” on their campuses, then threatened Trudeau with even greater U.S. tariffs — calling him “Governor Trudeau,” a reference to Trump’s outlandish idea to annex Canada and make it the 51st U.S. state.

Politics

San Diego sues to stop border barrier construction

Published

on

San Diego sues to stop border barrier construction

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

The city of San Diego sued the federal government to stop the construction of razor wire fencing on city-owned land near the U.S.-Mexico border, accusing federal agencies of trespassing and causing environmental damage.

The city filed the complaint in the U.S. District Court for Southern California on Monday. The complaint named Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem and Secretary of War Pete Hegseth among the defendants.

The city accused the federal government of acting without legal authority when they entered city property in Marron Valley and began installing razor wire fencing.

“The City of San Diego will not allow federal agencies to disregard the law and damage City property,” said City Attorney Heather Ferbert in a news release. She said the lawsuit aims to protect sensitive habitats and ensure environmental commitments are upheld.

Advertisement

NEWSOM SUES TRUMP ADMINISTRATION OVER CALIFORNIA NATIONAL GUARD DEPLOYMENT ORDER TO OREGON

San Diego is suing the federal government to stop the construction of razor wire fencing on city property in Marron Valley. (Justin Hamel/Bloomberg via Getty Images, File)

According to the lawsuit, federal personnel including U.S. Marines accessed the land without the city’s consent, and damaged environmentally sensitive areas protected under long-standing conservation agreements.

DHS Secretary Kristi Noem and Secretary of War Pete Hegseth were among the federal officials named in San Diego’s lawsuit. (Reuters/Brian Snyder; AP Photo/Alex Brandon)

San Diego argues the fencing has blocked the city’s ability to manage and assess its own property and could jeopardize compliance with environmental obligations.

Advertisement

An American flag can be seen through the barbed wire surrounding the CoreCivic Otay Mesa Detention Center on October 4, 2025 in San Diego, California. (Kevin Carter/Getty Images)

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

The lawsuit also accuses the federal government of trespassing and beginning construction without proper authority or environmental review, and unconstitutionally taking the land in violation of the Fifth Amendment.

Fox News Digital reached out to DHS and the Pentagon for comment.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Politics

Commentary: Tim Walz isn’t the only governor plagued by fraud. Newsom may be targeted next

Published

on

Commentary: Tim Walz isn’t the only governor plagued by fraud. Newsom may be targeted next

Former vice presidential contender and current aw-shucks Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz announced this week that he won’t run for a third term, dogged by a scandal over child care funds that may or may not be going to fraudsters.

It’s a politically driven mess that not coincidentally focuses on a Black immigrant community, tying the real problem of scammers stealing government funds to the growing MAGA frenzy around an imaginary version of America that thrives on whiteness and Christianity.

Despite the ugliness of current racial politics in America, the fraud remains real, and not just in Minnesota. California has lost billions to cheats in the last few years, leaving our own governor, who also harbors D.C. dreams, vulnerable to the same sort of attack that has taken down Walz.

As we edge closer to the 2028 presidential election, Republicans and Democrats alike will probably come at Gavin Newsom with critiques of the state’s handling of COVID-19 funds, unemployment insurance and community college financial aid to name a few of the honeypots that have been successfully swiped by thieves during his tenure.

In fact, President Trump said as much on his social media barf-fest this week.

Advertisement

“California, under Governor Gavin Newscum, is more corrupt than Minnesota, if that’s possible??? The Fraud Investigation of California has begun,” he wrote.

Right-wing commentator Benny Johnson also said he’s conducting his own “investigation.” And Republican gubernatorial candidate Steve Hilton is claiming his fraud tip line has turned up “(c)orruption, fraud and abuse on an epic scale.”

Just to bring home that this vulnerability is serious and bipartisan, Rep. Ro Khanna, the Silicon Valley congressman rumored to have his own interest in the Oval Office, is also circling the fraud feast like a vulture eyeing his next meal.

“I want to hear from residents in my district and across the state about waste, mismanagement, inefficiencies, or fraud that we must tackle,” Khanna wrote on social media.

Newsom’s spokesman Izzy Gardon questioned the validity of many fraud claims.

Advertisement

“In the actual world where adults govern,” Gardon said, “Gavin Newsom has been cleaning house. Since taking office, he’s blocked over $125 BILLION in fraud, arrested criminal parasites leaching off of taxpayers, and protected taxpayers from the exact kind of scam artists Trump celebrates, excuses, and pardons.”

What exactly are we talking about here? Well, it’s a pick-your-scandal type of thing. Even before the federal government dumped billions in aid into the states during the pandemic, California’s unemployment system was plagued by inefficiencies and yes, scammers. But when the world shut down and folks needed that government cash to survive, malfeasance skyrocketed.

Every thief with a half-baked plan — including CEOs, prisoners behind bars and overseas organized crime rackets — came for California’s cash, and seemingly got it. The sad part is these weren’t criminal geniuses. More often than not, they were low-level swindlers looking at a system full of holes because it was trying to do too much too fast.

In a matter of months, billions had been siphoned away. A state audit in 2021 found that at least $10 billion had been paid out on suspicious unemployment claims — never mind small business loans or other types of aid. An investigation by CalMatters in 2023 suggested the final figure may be up to triple that amount for unemployment. In truth, no one knows exactly how much was stolen — in California, or across the country.

It hasn’t entirely stopped. California is still paying out fraudulent unemployment claims at too high a rate, totaling up to $1.5 billion over the last few years — more than $500 million in 2024 alone, according to the state auditor.

Advertisement

But that’s not all. Enterprising thieves looked elsewhere when COVID-19 money largely dried up. Recently, that has been our community colleges, where millions in federal student aid has been lost to grifters who use bots to sign up for classes, receive government money to help with school, then disappear. Another CalMatters investigation using data obtained from a public records request found that up to 34% of community college applications in 2024 may have been false — though that number represents fraudulent admissions that were flagged and blocked, Gardon points out.

Still, community college fraud will probably be a bigger issue for Newsom because it’s fresher, and can be tied (albeit disingenuously) to immigrants and progressive policies.

California allows undocumented residents to enroll in community colleges, and it made those classes free — two terrific policies that have been exploited by the unscrupulous. For a while, community colleges didn’t do enough to ensure that students were real people, because they didn’t require enough proof of identity. This was in part to accommodate vulnerable students such as foster kids, homeless people and undocumented folks who lacked papers.

With no up-front costs for attempting to enroll, phonies threw thousands of identities at the system’s 116 schools, which were technologically unprepared for the assaults. These “ghost” students were often accepted and given grants and loans.

My former colleague Kaitlyn Huamani reported that in 2024, scammers stole roughly $8.4 million in federal financial aid and more than $2.7 million in state aid from our community colleges. That‘s a pittance compared with the tens of billions that was handed out in state and federal financial aid, but more than enough for a political fiasco.

Advertisement

As Walz would probably explain if nuanced policy conversations were still a thing, it’s both a fair and unfair criticism to blame these robberies on a governor alone — state government should be careful of its cash and aggressive in protecting it, and the buck stops with the governor, but crises and technology have collided to create opportunities for swindlers that frankly few governmental leaders, from the feds on down, have handled with any skill or luck.

The crooks have simply been smarter and faster than the rest of us to capitalize first on the pandemic, then on evolving technology including AI that makes scamming easier and scalable to levels our institutions were unprepared to handle.

Since being so roundly fleeced during the pandemic, multiple state and federal agencies have taken steps in combating fraud — including community colleges using their own AI tools to stop fake students before they get in.

And the state is holding thieves accountable. Newsom hired a former Trump-appointed federal prosecutor, McGregor Scott, to go after scam artists on unemployment. And other county, state and federal prosecutors have also dedicated resources to clawing back some of the lost money.

With the slow pace of our courts (burdened by their own aging technology), many of those cases are still ongoing or just winding up. For example, 24 L.A. County employees were charged in recent months with allegedly stealing more than $740,000 in unemployment benefits, which really is chump change in this whole mess.

Advertisement

Another California man recently pleaded guilty to allegedly cheating his way into $15.9 million in federal loans through the Paycheck Protection Program and Economic Injury Disaster Loan programs.

And in one of the most colorful schemes, four Californians with nicknames including “Red boy” and “Scooby” allegedly ran a scam that boosted nearly $250 million in federal tax refunds before three of them attempted to murder the fourth to keep him from ratting them out to the feds.

There are literally hundreds of cases across the country of pandemic fraud. And these schemes are just the tip of the cash-berg. Fraudsters are also targeting fire relief funds, food benefits — really, any pot of public money is fair game to them. And the truth is, the majority of that stolen money is gone for good.

So it’s hard to hear the numbers and not be shocked and angry, especially as the Golden State is faced with a budget shortfall that may be as much as $18 billion.

Whether you blame Newsom personally or not for all this fraud, it’s hard to be forgiving of so much public money being handed to scoundrels when our schools are in need, our healthcare in jeopardy and our bills on an upward trajectory.

Advertisement

The failure is going to stick to somebody, and it doesn’t take a criminal mastermind to figure out who it’s going to be.

Continue Reading

Politics

Wyoming Supreme Court rules laws restricting abortion violate state constitution

Published

on

Wyoming Supreme Court rules laws restricting abortion violate state constitution

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

The Wyoming Supreme Court ruled on Tuesday that a pair of laws restricting abortion access violate the state constitution, including the country’s first explicit ban on abortion pills.

The court, in a 4-1 ruling, sided with the state’s only abortion clinic and others who had sued over the abortion bans passed since the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade in 2022, which returned the power to make laws on abortion back to the states.

Despite Wyoming being one of the most conservative states, the ruling handed down by justices who were all appointed by Republican governors upheld every previous lower court ruling that the abortion bans violated the state constitution.

Wellspring Health Access in Casper, the abortion access advocacy group Chelsea’s Fund and four women, including two obstetricians, argued that the laws violated a state constitutional amendment affirming that competent adults have the right to make their own health care decisions.

Advertisement

TRUMP URGES GOP TO BE ‘FLEXIBLE’ ON HYDE AMENDMENT, IGNITING BACKLASH FROM PRO-LIFE ALLIES

The Wyoming Supreme Court ruled that a pair of laws restricting abortion access violate the state constitution. (Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images)

Voters approved the constitutional amendment in 2012 in response to the federal Affordable Care Act, which is also known as Obamacare.

The justices in Wyoming found that the amendment was not written to apply to abortion but noted that it is not their job to “add words” to the state constitution.

“But lawmakers could ask Wyoming voters to consider a constitutional amendment that would more clearly address this issue,” the justices wrote.

Advertisement

Wellspring Health Access President Julie Burkhart said in a statement that the ruling upholds abortion as “essential health care” that should not be met with government interference.

“Our clinic will remain open and ready to provide compassionate reproductive health care, including abortions, and our patients in Wyoming will be able to obtain this care without having to travel out of state,” Burkhart said.

Wellspring Health Access opened as the only clinic in the state to offer surgical abortions in 2023, a year after a firebombing stopped construction and delayed its opening. A woman is serving a five-year prison sentence after she admitted to breaking in and lighting gasoline that she poured over the clinic floors.

Wellspring Health Access opened as the only clinic in the state to offer surgical abortions in 2023, a year after a firebombing stopped construction. (AP)

Attorneys representing the state had argued that abortion cannot violate the Wyoming constitution because it is not a form of health care.

Advertisement

Republican Gov. Mark Gordon expressed disappointment in the ruling and called on state lawmakers meeting later this winter to pass a constitutional amendment prohibiting abortion that residents could vote on this fall.

An amendment like that would require a two-thirds vote to be introduced as a nonbudget matter in the monthlong legislative session that will primarily address the state budget, although it would have significant support in the Republican-dominated legislature.

“This ruling may settle, for now, a legal question, but it does not settle the moral one, nor does it reflect where many Wyoming citizens stand, including myself. It is time for this issue to go before the people for a vote,” Gordon said in a statement.

APPEALS COURT SIDES WITH TRUMP ON BUDGET PROVISION CUTTING PLANNED PARENTHOOD FUNDS

Gov. Mark Gordon expressed disappointment in the ruling. (Getty Images)

Advertisement

One of the laws overturned by the state’s high court attempted to ban abortion, but with exceptions in cases where it is needed to protect a pregnant woman’s life or in cases of rape or incest. The other law would have made Wyoming the only state to explicitly ban abortion pills, although other states have implemented de facto bans on abortion medication by broadly restricting abortion.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Abortion has remained legal in the state since Teton County District Judge Melissa Owens blocked the bans while the lawsuit challenging the restrictions moved forward. Owens struck down the laws as unconstitutional in 2024.

Last year, Wyoming passed additional laws requiring abortion clinics to be licensed surgical centers and women to receive ultrasounds before having medication abortions. A judge in a separate lawsuit blocked those laws from taking effect while that case moves forward.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Advertisement

Continue Reading

Trending