News
Undecided Voters Tell Us About Their Biggest Worries
We asked voters who have not yet made up their minds — 830 of them across five battleground states and Ohio — to name their biggest worries with both candidates.
Here is what they said.
Concern about Trump
“He’s made people comfortable with being racist and set the country back 50 years with racism.”
Concern about Harris “She’s a liar and it feels like she hasn’t done anything she said she was going to do.”
Black woman, 50s, Arizona
Concern about Trump
“Don’t like his rhetoric, how he speaks to people.”
Concern about Harris
“Incompetent, no experience in foreign policy or running the government; also has no opinions except on abortion.” White woman, 70s, Wisconsin
Concern about Trump
“Too extreme.”
Concern about Harris
“I don’t know much about her, but I’m unsure about how prepared she is to be president.”
Hispanic man, 30s, Arizona Concern about Trump
“Having the right to control my own body.”
Concern about Harris
“Immigration and inflation.”
Black woman, 20s, Georgia
Concern about Trump
“Arrogance.” Concern about Harris
“She’s a woman and not sure if a woman should be running.”
White woman, 50s, Arizona
Concern about Trump
“Has felonies on his record.”
Concern about Harris “Don’t know much about her policy.”
Black man, 50s, Georgia
Concern about Trump
“I don’t trust him.”
Concern about Harris
“I don’t trust her.” Black woman, 60s, Georgia
Donald J. Trump and Kamala Harris are starkly different presidential candidates. So why are so many voters — roughly 1 in 6 — still unsure of their choice?
Until President Joe Biden dropped his bid for re-election, a large share of voters were unhappy with their choices for president.
Today, the electorate as a whole is happier, but the uncommitted voters are still not, according to recent polling by The New York Times and Siena College in Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, North Carolina, Ohio and Wisconsin.
They trust neither former President Donald J. Trump nor Vice President Kamala Harris. They question the candidates’ honesty and ethics.
Based on New York Times/Siena College polls of 4,132 likely voters conducted in September, including 830 undecided or not fully decided voters in Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, North Carolina, Ohio and Wisconsin.
Respondents who said they didn’t know or who declined to say are not included.
These voters are younger than the electorate overall, less educated and have a lower income. They are much more likely than voters overall to be Black or Latino, and a little more likely to be men.
Some of these voters may just stay home, but a meaningful portion of them will probably vote. And in a close election, they could be the deciding factor.
In trying to understand what is holding them back from committing, we asked voters to tell us in their own words about their worries. Their phrases were telling: “being a bully,” “she’s an idiot.”
In many ways, their words suggest that voters know, and perhaps have become inured to, Donald Trump’s slash-and-burn campaign style and personality.
But with Kamala Harris, who was plunged into the race only in July, their fears are wider ranging — encompassing both character and the issues, like the economy. And for some voters, the historic nature of her candidacy presents not progress but a drawback.
Voters are concerned about one thing when it comes to Trump: his character.
They said he is arrogant or erratic and talks too much. They talked about his age or criminal trials. The words boiled down to concerns about the former president’s personality and honesty.
Even voters who said they were leaning toward Trump mentioned concerns about chaos and dysfunction.
A small but notable share were also concerned, specifically, about his ability to carry out and complete the tasks of president, mentioning his age and mental capacity.
Concern about Trump
“Angered easily.”
White man, 40s, Michigan Concern about Trump
“Being a bully towards other nations.”
White man, 60s, Georgia
Concern about Trump
“He is erratic, not very well-spoken and lies.”
White man, 40s, North Carolina
Concern about Trump
“Him staying off the internet.”
White man, 30s, Arizona
Concern about Trump
“Being presidential, sense of decorum, way he communicates.” Man, 60s, Michigan
Concern about Trump
“Does not know when to shut up.”
White man, 20s, North Carolina Concern about Trump
“His age.”
White woman, 20s, Wisconsin
At the same time, even though Trump has crossed all kinds of red lines during his campaign, voters used comparatively mild language in describing their doubts about him. Words like “a bit” and “a little” crept in frequently.
Concern about Trump
“Little power hungry.” White woman, 30s, Arizona
Concern about Trump
“His authoritative tendencies.”
White man, 30s, North Carolina Concern about Trump
“Probably his rhetoric, maybe, and how he presents himself. And the debate was kind of rough.”
Woman, 40s, Michigan
Concern about Trump
“Bit decisive at times. He doesn’t always say the right things.”
White man, 20s, Georgia
Concern about Trump
“I wish he could be a little more presidential.”
White woman, 70s, Arizona
Concern about Trump
“He might become too emotional when making decisions.” Nonwhite man, 30s, North Carolina
Concerns about Harris are more varied.
For Kamala Harris, voters’ anxieties were broader and more complicated. Although qualms about her personality came up less often than with Trump, trustworthiness and honesty were still big question marks for many voters.
So was her ability to handle the economy. Voters specifically mentioned costs and inflation, a persistent concern among undecided and not fully decided voters over the last few months.
-
Concern about Harris
“She will make the economy worse than it is.”
Black man, 20s, Georgia
-
Concern about Harris
“That she’s like every other politician, that she is not going to actually do anything to help us.”
Black woman, 30s, Ohio
-
Concern about Harris
“Bring down the price of groceries and housing.”
Black woman, 60s, Georgia
-
Concern about Harris
“How she would handle the economy.”
Hispanic woman, 20s, Georgia
-
Concern about Harris
“Too liberal.”
Black woman, 50s, Michigan
-
Concern about Harris
“Not following through.”
White woman, 30s, Wisconsin
-
Concern about Harris
“The people didn’t vote for her; she was appointed. That is not democracy.”
White man, 60s, Wisconsin
-
Concern about Harris
“Democrats take the African American vote for granted. Not sure her policies are going to benefit African Americans.”
Black man, 30s, North Carolina
They also questioned her abilities and wondered if she was ready for the job. Some voters described her with caustic language, which echoes Trump’s, who called her “mentally disabled” and “mentally impaired.”
Harris has not leaned into the historical nature of her candidacy — she would be the first woman of color to be president. For some of these voters, her background may be a challenge. Some voters used language that was outright sexist.
Concern about Harris
“That she’s not intelligent enough to be president. I think she is an idiot.”
White man, 70s, Arizona Concern about Harris
“I don’t think she’s got it all together.”
White woman, 70s, Arizona
Concern about Harris
“Overall untrustworthy.”
Black man, 40s, North Carolina
Concern about Harris
“I don’t know much about her, but I’m unsure about how prepared she is to be president.” Hispanic man, 30s, Arizona
Concern about Harris
“She’s a woman. I’m not sure she can get the job done. People probably won’t listen to her.”
White woman, 50s, Ohio
Concern about Harris
“She’s a lady.”
Black woman, 60s, Wisconsin Sources and methodology
Selected responses from New York Times/Siena College polls of 4,132 likely voters conducted in September, including 830 undecided or not fully decided voters in Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, North Carolina, Ohio and Wisconsin.
Undecided and persuadable voters were voters in the survey who either did not pick a presidential candidate after being asked multiple questions about their vote choice or voters who ultimately did pick a candidate but said they were only “probably” but not “definitely” going to support that candidate.
Open-ended responses to the “biggest concern” question were coded into categories using a trained coder and validated with a second reviewer. The primary coder reviewed a sampling of responses and then created an initial coding schema. Categories were adjusted based on size and coherence throughout the process. Where there was disagreement between coders, proposed codes were reviewed, discussed and compared with similar examples in other surveys. To help ensure consistency, responses that exactly matched previous responses in prior surveys were automatically coded to the same category, but were still reviewed for accuracy.
People participate in a protest and noise demonstration calling for an end to federal immigration enforcement operations in the city, Friday, Jan. 9, 2026, in Minneapolis.
John Locher/AP
hide caption
toggle caption
John Locher/AP
MINNEAPOLIS — A Minnesota prosecutor on Friday called on the public to share with investigators any recordings and evidence connected to the fatal shooting of Renee Good as a new video emerged showing the final moments of her encounter with an immigration officer.
The Minneapolis killing and a separate shooting in Portland, Oregon, a day later by the Border Patrol have set off protests in multiple cities and denunciations of immigration enforcement tactics by the U.S. government. The Trump administration has defended the officer who shot Good in her car, saying he was protecting himself and fellow agents.
The reaction to the shooting has largely been focused on witness cellphone video of the encounter. A new, 47-second video that was published online by a Minnesota-based conservative news site, Alpha News, and later reposted on social media by the Department of Homeland Security shows the shooting from the perspective of ICE officer Jonathan Ross, who fired the shots.
This image from video made by Immigration and Customs Enforcement officer Jonathan Ross via Alpha News shows Renee Good in her vehicle in Minneapolis on Wednesday, Jan. 7, 2026.
Jonathan Ross/AP/ICE
hide caption
toggle caption
Jonathan Ross/AP/ICE
Sirens blaring in the background, he approaches and circles Good’s vehicle in the middle of the road while apparently filming on his cellphone. At the same time, Good’s wife also was recording the encounter and can be seen walking around the vehicle and approaching the officer. A series of exchanges occurred:
“That’s fine, I’m not mad at you,” Good says as the officer passes by her door. She has one hand on the steering wheel and the other outside the open driver side window.
“U.S. citizen, former f—ing veteran,” says her wife, standing outside the passenger side of the SUV holding up her phone. “You wanna come at us, you wanna come at us, I say go get yourself some lunch big boy.”
Other officers are approaching the driver’s side of the car at about the same time and one says: “Get out of the car, get out of the f—ing car.” Ross is now at the front driver side of the vehicle. Good reverses briefly, then turns the steering wheel toward the passenger side as she drives ahead and Ross opens fire.
The camera becomes unsteady and points toward the sky and then returns to the street view showing Good’s SUV careening away.
“F—ing b—,” someone at the scene says.
A crashing sound is heard as Good’s vehicle smashes into others parked on the street.
Federal agencies have encouraged officers to document encounters in which people may attempt to interfere with enforcement actions, but policing experts have cautioned that recording on a handheld device can complicate already volatile situations by occupying an officer’s hands and narrowing focus at moments when rapid decision-making is required.
Under an ICE policy directive, officers and agents are expected to activate body-worn cameras at the start of enforcement activities and to record throughout interactions, and footage must be kept for review in serious incidents such as deaths or use-of-force cases. The Department of Homeland Security has not responded to questions about whether the officer who opened fire or any of the others who were on the scene were wearing body cameras.
Homeland Security says video shows self-defense
Vice President JD Vance and Homeland Security spokesperson Tricia McLaughlin said in posts on X that the new video backs their contention that the officer fired in self-defense.
“Many of you have been told this law enforcement officer wasn’t hit by a car, wasn’t being harassed, and murdered an innocent woman,” Vance said. “The reality is that his life was endangered and he fired in self defense.”
Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey has said any self-defense argument is “garbage.”
Policing experts said the video didn’t change their thoughts on the use-of-force but did raise additional questions about the officer’s training.
“Now that we can see he’s holding a gun in one hand and a cellphone in the other filming, I want to see the officer training that permits that,” said Geoff Alpert, a criminology professor at the University of South Carolina.
The video demonstrates that the officers didn’t perceive Good to be a threat, said John P. Gross, a professor at the University of Wisconsin Law School who has written extensively about officers shooting at moving vehicles.
“If you are an officer who views this woman as a threat, you don’t have one hand on a cellphone. You don’t walk around this supposed weapon, casually filming,” Gross said.
Ross, 43, is an Iraq War veteran who has served in the Border Patrol and ICE for nearly two decades. He was injured last year when he was dragged by a driver fleeing an immigration arrest.
Attempts to reach Ross at phone numbers and email addresses associated with him were not successful.
Prosecutor asks for video and evidence
Meanwhile, Hennepin County Attorney Mary Moriarty said that although her office has collaborated effectively with the FBI in past cases, she is concerned by the Trump administration’s decision to bar state and local agencies from playing any role in the investigation into Good’s killing.
She also said the officer who shot Good in the head does not have complete legal immunity, as Vance declared.
“We do have jurisdiction to make this decision with what happened in this case,” Moriarty said at a news conference. “It does not matter that it was a federal law enforcement agent.”
Moriarty said her office would post a link for the public to submit footage of the shooting, even though she acknowledged that she wasn’t sure what legal outcome submissions might produce.
Good’s wife, Becca Good, released a statement to Minnesota Public Radio on Friday saying, “kindness radiated out of her.”
“On Wednesday, January 7th, we stopped to support our neighbors. We had whistles. They had guns,” Becca Good said.
“I am now left to raise our son and to continue teaching him, as Renee believed, that there are people building a better world for him,” she wrote.
Protesters confront law enforcement outside the Bishop Henry Whipple Federal Building in Minneapolis, Friday, Jan. 9, 2026.
Adam Bettcher/AP
hide caption
toggle caption
Adam Bettcher/AP
The reaction to Good’s shooting was immediate in the city where police killed George Floyd in 2020, with hundreds of protesters converging on the shooting scene and the school district canceling classes for the rest of the week as a precaution and offering an online option through Feb. 12.
On Friday, protesters were outside a federal facility serving as a hub for the immigration crackdown that began Tuesday in Minneapolis and St. Paul. That evening, hundreds protested and marched outside two hotels in downtown Minneapolis where immigration enforcement agents were supposed to be staying. Some people were seen breaking or spray painting windows and state law enforcement officers wearing helmets and holding batons ordered the remaining group of fewer than 100 people to leave late Friday.
Shooting in Portland
The Portland shooting happened outside a hospital Thursday. A federal border officer shot and wounded a man and woman in a vehicle, identified by the Department of Homeland Security as Venezuela nationals Luis David Nico Moncada and Yorlenys Betzabeth Zambrano-Contreras. Police said they were in stable condition Friday after surgery, with DHS saying Nico Moncada was taken into FBI custody
DHS defended the actions of its officers in Portland, saying the shooting occurred after the driver with alleged gang ties tried to “weaponize” his vehicle to hit them. It said no officers were injured.
Portland Police Chief Bob Day confirmed that the two people shot had “some nexus” to Tren de Aragua, a Venezuelan gang. Day said they came to the attention of police during an investigation of a July shooting believed to have been carried out by gang members, but they were not identified as suspects.
The chief said any gang affiliation did not necessarily justify the shooting by U.S. Border Patrol. The Oregon Department of Justice said it would investigate.
On Friday evening, hundreds of protesters marched to the ICE building in Portland.
The biggest crackdown yet
The Minneapolis shooting happened on the second day of the immigration crackdown in the Twin Cities, which Homeland Security said is the biggest immigration enforcement operation ever. More than 2,000 officers are taking part and Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem said they have made more than 1,500 arrests.
The government is also shifting immigration officers to Minneapolis from sweeps in Louisiana, according to documents obtained by The Associated Press. This represents a pivot, as the Louisiana crackdown that began in December had been expected to last into February.
Good’s death — at least the fifth tied to immigration sweeps since President Donald Trump took office — has resonated far beyond Minneapolis. More protests are planned for this weekend, according to Indivisible, a group formed to resist the Trump administration.
A federal judge ruled Friday that President Donald Trump’s administration cannot block federal money for child care subsidies and other programs aimed at supporting needy children and their families from flowing to five Democratic-led states for now.
The states of California, Colorado, Illinois, Minnesota and New York argued that a policy announced Tuesday to freeze funds for three grant programs is having an immediate impact on them and creating “operational chaos.” In court filings and a hearing earlier Friday, the states contended that the government did not have a legal reason for holding back the money from those states.
The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services said it was pausing the funding because it had “reason to believe” the states were granting benefits to people in the country illegally, though it did not provide evidence or explain why it was targeting those states and not others.
The programs are the Child Care and Development Fund, which subsidizes child care for children from low-income families; the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families program, which provides cash assistance and job training; and the Social Services Block Grant, a smaller fund that provides money for a variety of programs.
The five states say they receive a total of more than $10 billion a year from the programs.
U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, who was nominated to the bench by former President Joe Biden, did not rule on the legality of the funding freeze, but he said the five states had met a legal threshold “to protect the status quo” for at least 14 days while arguments are made in court.
The government had requested reams of data from the five states, including the names and Social Security numbers of everyone who received benefits from some of the programs since 2022.
The states argue that the effort is unconstitutional and is intended to go after Trump’s political adversaries rather than to stamp out fraud in government programs — something the states say they already do.
Jessica Ranucci, a lawyer in the New York Attorney General’s office, said in the Friday hearing, which was conducted by telephone, that at least four of the states had already had money delayed after requesting it. She said that if the states can’t get child care funds, there will be immediate uncertainty for providers and families who rely on the programs.
A lawyer for the federal government, Kamika Shaw, said it was her understanding that the money had not stopped flowing to states.
The Interior Department’s new “America the Beautiful” annual pass for U.S. national parks.
Department of Interior
hide caption
toggle caption
Department of Interior
The National Park Service has updated its policy to discourage visitors from defacing a picture of President Trump on this year’s pass.
The use of an image of Trump on the 2026 pass — rather than the usual picture of nature — has sparked a backlash, sticker protests, and a lawsuit from a conservation group.
The $80 annual America the Beautiful pass gives visitors access to more than 2,000 federal recreation sites. Since 2004, the pass has typically showcased sweeping landscapes or iconic wildlife, selected through a public photo contest. Past winners have featured places like Arches National Park in Utah and images of bison roaming the plains.
Instead, of a picture of nature, this year’s design shows side-by-side portraits of Presidents George Washington and Trump. The new design has drawn criticism from parkgoers and ignited a wave of “do-it-yourself” resistance.
Photos circulating online show that many national park cardholders have covered the image of Trump’s face with stickers of wildlife, landscapes, and yellow smiley faces, while some have completely blocked out the whole card. The backlash has also inspired a growing sticker campaign.
Jenny McCarty, a longtime park volunteer and graphic designer, began selling custom stickers meant to fit directly over Trump’s face — with 100% of proceeds going to conservation nonprofits. “We made our first donation of $16,000 in December,” McCarty said. “The power of community is incredible.”
McCarty says the sticker movement is less about politics and more about preserving the neutrality of public lands. “The Interior’s new guidance only shows they continue to disregard how strongly people feel about keeping politics out of national parks,” she said.
The National Park Service card policy was updated this week to say that passes may no longer be valid if they’ve been “defaced or altered.” The change, which was revealed in an internal email to National Park Service staff obtained by SFGATE, comes just as the sticker movement has gained traction across social media.
In a statement to NPR, the Interior Department said there was no new policy. Interagency passes have always been void if altered, as stated on the card itself. The agency said the recent update was meant to clarify that rule and help staff deal with confusion from visitors.
The Park Service has long said passes can be voided if the signature strip is altered, but the updated guidance now explicitly includes stickers or markings on the front of the card.
It will be left to the discretion of park service officials to determine whether a pass has been “defaced” or not. The update means park officials now have the leeway to reject a pass if a sticker leaves behind residue, even if the image underneath is intact.
In December, conservation group the Center for Biological Diversity filed a lawsuit in Washington, D.C., opposing the new pass design.
The group argues that the image violates a federal requirement that the annual America the Beautiful pass display a winning photograph from a national parks photo contest. The 2026 winning image was a picture of Glacier National Park.
“This is part of a larger pattern of Trump branding government materials with his name and image,” Kierán Suckling, the executive director of the Center for Biological Diversity, told NPR. “But this kind of cartoonish authoritarianism won’t fly in the United States.”
The lawsuit asks a federal court to pull the current pass design and replace it with the original contest winner — the Glacier National Park image. It also seeks to block the government from featuring a president’s face on future passes.
The America the Beautiful National Parks Annual Pass for 2025, showing one of the natural images which used to adorn the pass. Its picture, of a Roseate Spoonbill taken at Everglades National Park, was taken by Michael Zheng.
Department of Interior
hide caption
toggle caption
Department of Interior
Not everyone sees a problem with the new design. Vince Vanata, the GOP chairman of Park County, Wyoming, told the Cowboy State Daily that Trump detractors should “suck it up” and accept the park passes, saying they are a fitting tribute to America’s 250th birthday this July 4.
“The 250th anniversary of our country only comes once. This pass is showing the first president of the United States and the current president of the United States,” Vanata said.
But for many longtime visitors, the backlash goes beyond design.
Erin Quinn Gery, who buys an annual pass each year, compared the image to “a mug shot slapped onto natural beauty.”
She also likened the decision to self-glorification: “It’s akin to throwing yourself a parade or putting yourself on currency,” she said. “Let someone else tell you you’re great — or worth celebrating and commemorating.”
When asked if she plans to remove her protest sticker, Gery replied: “I’ll take the sticker off my pass after Trump takes his name off the Kennedy Center.”
Greenland leaders push back on Trump’s calls for US control of the island: ‘We don’t want to be Americans’
Trump signs order to protect Venezuela oil revenue held in US accounts
Doctor reveals what 30 days without alcohol does to the brain and body amid Dry January
Falcons hire franchise legend Matt Ryan to major front office role
CES 2026 showstoppers: 10 gadgets you have to see
Florida High School Football Rankings: Top 25 teams – Oct. 21
Cleary's 21 help Le Moyne down Central Connecticut State 69-64 in OT
How old is Bo Nix? What to know about Oregon quarterback ahead of 2024 NFL Draft
99th annual Pony Swim held in Virginia
Video: ‘It Didn’t Have to Happen This Way:’ U.Va. Faculty Call for Review of Police Response to Protests
Trump signs order to protect Venezuela oil revenue held in US accounts
What Canada, accustomed to extreme winters, can teach Europe
New video shows fatal Minnesota ICE shooting from officer’s perspective
Federal judge blocks Trump from cutting childcare funds to Democratic states over fraud concerns
Russia-Ukraine war: List of key events, day 1,416
-
Detroit, MI7 days ago2 hospitalized after shooting on Lodge Freeway in Detroit
-
Technology4 days agoPower bank feature creep is out of control
-
Dallas, TX5 days agoDefensive coordinator candidates who could improve Cowboys’ brutal secondary in 2026
-
Iowa4 days agoPat McAfee praises Audi Crooks, plays hype song for Iowa State star
-
Dallas, TX2 days agoAnti-ICE protest outside Dallas City Hall follows deadly shooting in Minneapolis
-
Health6 days agoViral New Year reset routine is helping people adopt healthier habits
-
Nebraska3 days agoOregon State LB transfer Dexter Foster commits to Nebraska
-
Delaware1 day agoMERR responds to dead humpback whale washed up near Bethany Beach