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.
News
Supreme Court blocks redrawing of New York congressional map, dealing a win for GOP
The Supreme Court
Win McNamee/Getty Images
hide caption
toggle caption
Win McNamee/Getty Images
The Supreme Court on Monday intervened in New York’s redistricting process, blocking a lower court decision that would likely have flipped a Republican congressional district into a Democratic district.
At issue is the midterm redrawing of New York’s 11th congressional district, including Staten Island and a small part of Brooklyn. The district is currently held by a Republican, but on Jan. 21, a state Supreme Court judge ruled that the current district dilutes the power of Black and Latino voters in violation of the state constitution.
GOP Rep. Nicole Malliotakis, who represents the district, and the Republican co-chair of the state Board of Elections promptly appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, asking the justices to block the redrawing as an unconstitutional “racial gerrymander.” New York’s congressional election cycle was set to officially begin Feb. 24, the opening day for candidates to seek placement on the ballot.
As in this year’s prior mid-decade redistricting fights — in Texas and California — the Trump administration backed the Republicans.
Voters and the State of New York contended it’s too soon for the Supreme Court to wade into this dispute. New York’s highest state court has not issued a final judgment, so the voters asserted that if the Supreme Court grants relief now “future stay applicants will see little purpose in waiting for state court rulings before coming to this Court” and “be rewarded for such gamesmanship.” The state argues this is an issue for “New York courts, not federal courts” to resolve, and there is sufficient time for the dispute to be resolved on the merits.
The court majority explained the decision to intervene in 101 words, which the three dissenting liberal justices summarized as “Rules for thee, but not for me.”
The unsigned majority order does not explain the Court’s rationale. It says only how long the stay will last, until the case moves through the New York State appeals courts. If, however, the losing party petitions and the court agrees to hear the challenge, the stay extends until the final opinion is announced.
Dissenting from the decision were Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, and Ketanji Brown Jackson. Writing for the three, Sotomayor said that if nonfinal decisions of a state trial court can be brought to highest court, “then every decision from any court is now fair game.” More immediately, she noted, “By granting these applications, the Court thrusts itself into the middle of every election-law dispute around the country, even as many States redraw their congressional maps ahead of the 2026 election.”
Monday’s Supreme Court action deviates from the court’s hands-off pattern in these mid-term redistricting fights this year. In two previous cases — from Texas and California — the court refused to intervene, allowing newly drawn maps to stay in effect.
Requests for Supreme Court intervention on redistricting issues has been a recurring theme this term, a trend that is likely to grow. Earlier last month the high court allowed California to use a voter-approved, Democratic-friendly map. California’s redistricting came in response to a GOP-friendly redistricting plan in Texas that the Supreme Court also permitted to move forward. These redistricting efforts are expected to offset one another.
But the high court itself has yet to rule on a challenge to Louisiana’s voting map, which was drawn by the state legislature after the decennial census in order to create a second majority-Black district. Since the drawing of that second majority-black district, the state has backed away from that map, hoping to return to a plan that provides for only one majority-minority district.
The Supreme Court’s consideration of the Louisiana case has stretched across two terms. The justices failed to resolve the case last term and chose to order a second round of arguments this term adding a new question: Does the state’s intentional creation of a second majority-minority district violate the constitution’s Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments’ guarantee of the right to vote and the authority of Congress to enforce that mandate?
Following the addition of the new question, the state of Louisiana flipped positions to oppose the map it had just drawn and defended in court. Whether the Supreme Court follows suit remains to be seen. But the tone of the October argument suggested that the court’s conservative supermajority is likely to continue undercutting the 1965 Voting Rights Act.
News
Map: Earthquake Shakes Central California
Note: Map shows the area with a shake intensity of 3 or greater, which U.S.G.S. defines as “weak,” though the earthquake may be felt outside the areas shown. The New York Times
A minor earthquake with a preliminary magnitude of 3.5 struck in Central California on Monday, according to the United States Geological Survey.
The temblor happened at 7:17 a.m. Pacific time about 6 miles northwest of Pinnacles, Calif., data from the agency shows.
As seismologists review available data, they may revise the earthquake’s reported magnitude. Additional information collected about the earthquake may also prompt U.S.G.S. scientists to update the shake-severity map.
Source: United States Geological Survey | Notes: Shaking categories are based on the Modified Mercalli Intensity scale. When aftershock data is available, the corresponding maps and charts include earthquakes within 100 miles and seven days of the initial quake. All times above are Pacific time. Shake data is as of Monday, March 2 at 10:20 a.m. Eastern. Aftershocks data is as of Monday, March 2 at 11:18 a.m. Eastern.
News
US says Kuwait accidentally shot down 3 American jets
The U.S. and Israel have been conducting strikes against targets in Iran since Saturday morning, with the aim of toppling Tehran’s clerical regime. Iran has fired back, with retaliatory assaults featuring missiles and drones targeting several Gulf countries and American bases in the Middle East.
“All six aircrew ejected safely, have been safely recovered, and are in stable condition. Kuwait has acknowledged this incident, and we are grateful for the efforts of the Kuwaiti defense forces and their support in this ongoing operation,” Central Command said.
“The cause of the incident is under investigation. Additional information will be released as it becomes available,” it added.
In a separate statement later Monday, Central Command said that American forces had been killed during combat since the strikes began.
“As of 7:30 am ET, March 2, four U.S. service members have been killed in action. The fourth service member, who was seriously wounded during Iran’s initial attacks, eventually succumbed to their injuries,” it said.
Major combat operations continue and our response effort is ongoing. The identities of the fallen are being withheld until 24 hours after next of kin notification,” Central Command added.
This story has been updated.
-
World5 days agoExclusive: DeepSeek withholds latest AI model from US chipmakers including Nvidia, sources say
-
Massachusetts5 days agoMother and daughter injured in Taunton house explosion
-
Denver, CO5 days ago10 acres charred, 5 injured in Thornton grass fire, evacuation orders lifted
-
Louisiana1 week agoWildfire near Gum Swamp Road in Livingston Parish now under control; more than 200 acres burned
-
Technology1 week agoYouTube TV billing scam emails are hitting inboxes
-
Politics1 week agoOpenAI didn’t contact police despite employees flagging mass shooter’s concerning chatbot interactions: REPORT
-
Technology1 week agoStellantis is in a crisis of its own making
-
News1 week agoWorld reacts as US top court limits Trump’s tariff powers