Connect with us

Politics

Harris and Trump campaigns are targeting Black men, but many say they feel neglected

Published

on

Harris and Trump campaigns are targeting Black men, but many say they feel neglected

Three construction foremen taking a break in an alleyway on a recent Wednesday are among the most coveted voters in the country: middle-aged Black men and union members, living in Pennsylvania, the largest battleground state.

They don’t sound excited about it.

“Whatever president we’ve had in office for the past 42 years, they’ve never affected anything in my household,” said Desmond Chandler, who is 43 and lives in Philadelphia.

Vice President Kamala Harris must win big in large cities with large Black populations to overcome Donald Trump’s advantages with rural white voters. Above, Philadelphia’s Independence Hall in 2022.

Advertisement

(Ryan Collerd / Getty Images)

His friend Mike Gray was just as disillusioned. Vice President Kamala Harris is a “puppet for the white people,” but he would never vote for former President Trump, who manufactured his neckties in China, used nonunion labor for construction projects and carves up the electorate with terms like “Black jobs,” he said.

Interviews in recent weeks with more than two dozen Black men across two of the most critical battleground states — Pennsylvania and Georgia — offer a broader context for what polls have shown. Harris is likely to win a commanding majority of Black voters, despite extensive efforts by the Trump campaign to entice Black men in particular.

But Harris still has work to do in what is expected to be an exceedingly tight election. She needs to expand her majority among Black voters even more, to match President Biden’s winning formula from 2020. As importantly, she also has to motivate people like Chandler and Gray to show up and cast ballots.

Advertisement

A recent Howard University survey of Black voters in seven battleground states showed Harris leading Trump 82% to 12%. Other surveys found Harris with slightly smaller leads, including an August Pew poll showing a 77%-to-13% lead at the national level and a Suffolk University survey of Black voters in Pennsylvania conducted in August showing a 70%-to-9% lead.

No credible survey shows Trump within striking distance. But Biden won Black voters by an even larger margin in 2020 — 92% to 8% at the national level, according to a post-election analyis by Pew.

The biggest gap? Black men between the ages of 18 and 49 are Harris’ weakest link, according to the Howard survey, which found they supported her 75% to 16%.

The difference may seem small but could be decisive, given the close margins in the states that decided the 2016 and 2020 elections, and the need for Harris to win big in Philadelphia, Atlanta, Detroit and other big cities with large Black populations to overcome Trump’s advantages with rural white voters. Black voters have tended to make their choices closer to the election in prior elections, giving Harris room to grow.

Biden and Harris won in 2020 with focused efforts to drive up Black voter turnout in the final weeks, especially in Pennsylvania and Georgia, where the state also elected Raphael Warnock as its first African American senator. Black voters made up about a third of the eligible voters in Georgia and about a tenth in Pennsylvania.

Advertisement

In interviews, Harris’ supporters most often cited Trump’s character and the belief that Harris’ economic policies would be better for working-class people. Those who expressed doubts about Harris were most likely to bring up inflation and, in some cases, Harris’ career as a prosecutor or questions about her racial identity, which Trump has brought up in an attempt to divide her support.

Harris, whose father was from Jamaica and mother was born in India, has written that she was raised by her mother to identify as Black. She attended Howard, a historically Black university, and has emphasized her ties to the powerful Black sorority network.

Gray, the 49-year-old construction foreman, has voted for Democrats in prior elections, including Biden in 2020, but said he is not sure whether he will cast a vote this time. He is frustrated with inflation, especially child-care expenses.

Mike Gray wearing an orange work shirt, neon safety vest and goggles

Mike Gray, a 49-year-old labor foreman in Philadelphia, said he is uncertain whether he will vote for Harris but definitely won’t vote for Trump.

(Noah Bierman / Los Angeles Times)

Advertisement

Like most voters, he hears the news in snippets.

For example, he did not know about Biden’s and Harris’ failed efforts to cap childcare expenses at 7% of income as part of their signature 2021 spending bill. Harris is trying to get the word out, pledging in a rare interview with the National Assn. of Black Journalists in Philadelphia last week to revive the plan if she is elected.

Nor was Gray excited by the potential history of electing the first Black female president. “Man, we already had one Black president,” he said, referring to Barack Obama. “If we have another one, great.”

More than a fifth of Black Americans, especially younger people, are “rightfully cynical” — detached from politics because their experience makes them feel like government cannot improve their lives — and are the least likely group of Black Americans to vote, according to the 2024 Black Values Survey, which measured views on social trust, perceptions of power and racial solidarity.

“It’s like a big game,” said Brian Clark, a 32-year-old security guard in Philadelphia who said he prefers Trump but will not vote for either candidate.

Advertisement
Brian Clark seated on a shaded sidewalk in Philadelphia

Brian Clark, a 32-year-old security guard from Philadelphia, said he prefers Trump but likely won’t vote because it’s all “a big game.”

(Noah Bierman / Los Angeles Times)

“It’s just about one placebo or the other placebo,” said Cassius Martello, a 23-year-old social media consultant from Gwinnett County, who said he will vote for Harris.

Harris is on firmer footing with older and more educated Black voters, especially those who identify with the legacy of the civil rights era. Many are especially turned off by Trump’s character and rhetoric, and expressed excitement about the prospect of a Black woman leading the nation.

Robert Mitchell, a 65-year-old human resources director in Atlanta, finds it shocking that any Black man would consider Trump, who is running ”to keep himself out of jail,” or that any voter could say they are undecided at this point.

Advertisement
Robert Mitchell standing on a sidewalk outside a CVS pharmacy in Atlanta

Robert Mitchell, 65, a human resources director in Atlanta, is excited to vote for Kamala Harris.

(Jenny Jarvie / Los Angeles Times)

“I don’t know if it’s the thing where — being misogynistic — men just not seeing a woman in charge,” he said. “I do not get it. I’m looking so forward to a woman being president!”

He talked about abortion access for his daughter and granddaughter “if something ever happened to them” and about Trump’s own history of racial incitement, pointing to the full-page ad Trump took out in 1989 demanding the death penalty for five Black and Latino boys who were wrongfully convicted of raping a woman jogging in New York.

Ivan Turnipseed, a 55-year-old hospitality professor in Philadelphia, is less surprised at the resistance to Harris, despite his own enthusiastic support. He sees it in his own family in Mississippi.

Advertisement
Ivan Turnipseed speaking on a sidewalk in Philadelphia

Ivan Turnipseed, 55, a hospitality professor in Philadelphia, comes from a conservative family. He supports Harris but believes his father, a pastor in Mississippi, will likely vote for Trump.

(Noah Bierman / Los Angeles Times)

“I don’t know whether it’s just the whole idea of a man being head of the household from a religious perspective, again, from a father, who’s a minister,” who he expects will vote for Trump, he said.

He noted that Black men won the right to vote and served on the Supreme Court before women of either race had the chance.

“This is what we do as a country,” Turnipseed said. “We can get past like, ‘OK, well, maybe, you know, this Black guy will be OK,’ but it’s hard for us. We have whole institutions that don’t allow women to lead.”

Advertisement

Misogyny, however, doesn’t altogether explain Black men’s resistance to voting for Harris. Some Black men who expressed reservations about voting for Harris this year also held back from voting for Biden in 2020.

Polls show Trump is unlikely to capture a large swath of Black male support where it matters, in key battleground states. His comment questioning Harris’ racial identity appeared more geared toward depressing turnout than winning votes. But even a handful of Democratic defections could matter.

And the reasons Black voters are open to supporting Trump sound almost identical to those of other supporters.

Bobby Wilcox standing on a sidewalk in Atlanta

Bobby Wilcox, 47, a tax appraisal clerk in Atlanta, is voting for Trump.

(Jenny Jarvie / Los Angeles Times)

Advertisement

“American citizens, we did very well under the Trump administration,” said Bobby Wilcox, 47, a tax appraisal clerk in Atlanta. “Prices weren’t as high, and people could afford housing. Now people — particularly seniors — are struggling.”

“He’s for the people,” said Sam Williams, 37, a manager at a Chick-fil-A in downtown Atlanta who also works at Jersey Mike’s Subs. He took on a second job in the last year as he struggled to pay his $1,800 monthly rent.

He’s not interested in Harris, he said. “I just don’t feel her vibes.”

Bierman reported from Philadelphia, Jarvie from Atlanta.

Advertisement

Politics

Video: Senate Republicans Block Limits to Trump’s War Powers

Published

on

Video: Senate Republicans Block Limits to Trump’s War Powers

new video loaded: Senate Republicans Block Limits to Trump’s War Powers

transcript

transcript

Senate Republicans Block Limits to Trump’s War Powers

Senate Republicans voted against a Democratic bill that would have required President Trump to obtain congressional authorization to continue waging war against Iran.

“The yeas are 47. The nays are 53. The motion to discharge is not approved.” “President Trump decided to attack Iran. That decision was profound, deliberate and correct. The president understands the weight of war.” “Why is Donald Trump hellbent on making history repeat itself? Why is he plunging America headfirst into a war that Americans do not want, and which he cannot even explain? The American people deserve a say, and that is what our resolution is about.”

Advertisement
Senate Republicans voted against a Democratic bill that would have required President Trump to obtain congressional authorization to continue waging war against Iran.

By Shawn Paik

March 5, 2026

Continue Reading

Politics

DHS defends McLaughlin against allegations husband’s company profited millions from ad contracts: ‘Baseless’

Published

on

DHS defends McLaughlin against allegations husband’s company profited millions from ad contracts: ‘Baseless’

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

EXCLUSIVE: Newly obtained financial statements shed light on claims that former Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin’s husband’s company made millions from a DHS advertising campaign.

DHS Secretary Kristi Noem faced intense questioning during a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing Tuesday, and Sen. John Kennedy, R-La., specifically called out the agency for contracting a public relations firm headed by McLaughlin’s husband, Benjamin Yoho.

“I have personally reviewed the allegations against Ms. McLaughlin, and I find them to be baseless,” DHS General Counsel James Percival told Fox News Digital. “Nothing illegal or unethical occurred with respect to these contracts. Ms. McLaughlin was not involved in selecting any subcontractors.

“She is, however, a superstar in the public affairs world, so I am not surprised that she married a successful businessman whose services were attractive to these outside firms.”

Advertisement

Newly obtained financial statements address allegations that former Department of Homeland Security Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin’s husband’s firm improperly profited from a multimillion-dollar DHS ad campaign. Lawmakers pressed Secretary Kristi Noem over the contracts during a heated Senate hearing. (Jack Gruber/USA Today)

Kennedy alleged that Yoho’s firm, The Strategy Group, “got most of the money” out of what the Louisiana Republican senator says was $220 million in “television advertisements that feature [Noem] prominently.”

“I’m sorry,” Kennedy said. “Safe America Media was a company formed 11 days before you picked them. And that the Strategy Group got most of the money. And the head of that is married to your former spokesperson.”

“It’s just hard for me to believe knowing the president as I do, that you said, ‘Mr. President, here’s some ads I’ve cut, and I’m going to spend $220 million running them,’ that he would have agreed to that,” Kennedy explained. “I don’t think Russ Vought at OMB [Office of Management and Budget] would have agreed to that.”

‘YOU SHOULD BE ASHAMED!’: PROTESTER DRAGGED FROM KRISTI NOEM’S SENATE HEARING

Advertisement

Senate scrutiny intensified over a DHS advertising campaign after Sen. John Kennedy, R-La., questioned whether a firm linked to McLaughlin’s husband benefited unfairly. DHS officials and the company deny any wrongdoing or multimillion-dollar profits. (Andrew Harrer/Bloomberg via Getty Images)

The Strategy Group is a conservative advertising agency for which Yoho serves as CEO.

Figures obtained by Fox News Digital show a slightly lesser total advertising expenditure of approximately $185 million, with a total of roughly $146.5 million going to a campaign called “Save America.”

However, of the total that went to “Save America,” roughly $348,000 went to production costs, while the remaining $142 million went to “media buys.”

Sources at DHS say that media buys are the cost of actually buying the ads themselves, whether purchased from social media or for a TV ad.

Advertisement

Kennedy also alleged that the bidding process for the contracts never took place and that Safe America Media’s recent founding was a cause for concern and collusion between McLaughlin and her husband’s business. 

WATCH THE MOST VIRAL MOMENTS AS KRISTI NOEM’S HEARING GOES OFF THE RAILS

Debate over DHS’ “Save America” ad campaign intensified as senators challenged its costs and contractor ties, even as agency officials touted the initiative as a historic success in promoting self-deportation. (Graeme Sloan/Getty Images)

“Yes they did,” Noem responded during the hearing. “They went out to a competitive bid, and career officials at the department chose who would do those advertising commercials.”

The Strategy Group posted to X Tuesday that it never had a contract with the department. While it did receive several hundred thousand dollars for production costs associated with the advertising campaigns, The Strategy Group never made millions.

Advertisement

“The Strategy Group has never had a contract with DHS,” the post said. “We had a subcontract with Safe America [Media] for limited production services. Safe America paid us $226,137.17 total for 5 film shoots, 45 produced video advertisements and 6 produced radio advertisements.

DHS SPOKESWOMAN TRICIA MCLAUGHLIN TO LEAVE TRUMP ADMIN, SOURCE CONFIRMS

Critics raised concerns about potential conflicts of interest in a high-dollar DHS advertising effort, but department representatives say McLaughlin recused herself and that subcontracting decisions were made independently. (AP Photo/Jose Luis Magana, File)

“If you’re going to try to question our integrity, bring actual evidence — we did,” the post concluded.

Because these ads were purchased using public funds, all contract totals are publicly available. 

Advertisement

Lauren Bis, who took up the role of assistant secretary once McLaughlin left office, told Fox News Digital Tuesday that scrutiny from Republicans and Democrats over the advertising spending was unjustified because the campaigns resulted in “the most successful ad campaign in U.S. history.”

“Sanctuary politicians are attacking this ad campaign because it has been successful in CLOSING our borders and getting more than 2.2 million illegal aliens to LEAVE the U.S.,” Bis said. 

“The DHS domestic and international ad campaign was the most successful ad campaign in U.S. history. The results speak for themselves: 2.2 million illegal aliens self-deported, and we now have the most secure border in American history.”

KRISTI NOEM TO FACE SENATE GRILLING OVER MINNEAPOLIS SHOOTINGS AS DHS SHUTDOWN HITS WEEK 3

The Trump administration reaffirmed that all illegal immigrants are eligible for deportations as they focus on arresting violent criminals first.  (Raquel Natalicchio/Houston Chronicle via Getty Images)

Advertisement

Bis also compared the cost of arresting and deporting an illegal migrant to that of the minimal cost of an illegal migrant self-deporting. The department says the advertising campaign played a key role in marketing self-deportation.

A spokesperson at DHS also told Fox News Digital that contractors decide who they hire, fulfilling the terms of a contract, not the department itself. 

“By law, DHS cannot and does not determine, control or weigh in on who contractors hire or use to fulfill the terms of the contract,” a DHS spokesperson told Fox. “Those decisions are made by the contractor alone. We have only become aware of these companies because of this inquiry and did not hire those companies.”

The spokesperson also noted that McLaughlin “recused herself” from interactions with subcontractors to avoid “any perceived appearance of impropriety.”

“Upon hearing who the subcontractors were for production of the ad, Ms. McLaughlin recused herself from any interaction or engagement with any subcontractors to avoid any perceived appearance of impropriety,” the spokesperson continued. “DHS Office of Public Affairs is the program officer. Ms. McLaughlin oversees the DHS Office of Public Affairs, which is simply the vehicle for this contract.”

Advertisement

Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem takes her seat as she arrives to testify during a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing Tuesday on Capitol Hill in Washington, D.C. (Jim Watson/AFP via Getty Images)

McLaughlin told Fox News Digital the criticism of her and her family by senators at the hearing is a matter of public manipulation.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

“This is yet another example of politicians intentionally trying to dupe and manipulate the public to try to manufacture division and anger,” McLaughlin told Fox News Digital. “The ad spend and contracts are a matter of public record, and the process was done by the book.

“These politicians would rather smear private citizens and American small businesses than do any basic research.”

Advertisement

Fox News Digital’s Alexandra Koch contributed to this report.

Related Article

DHS defends ad blitz amid Senate scrutiny, says campaign drove 2.2M self-deportations and saved taxpayers $39B
Continue Reading

Politics

Senate rejects war powers measure to withdraw forces from Iran

Published

on

Senate rejects war powers measure to withdraw forces from Iran

Senate Republicans blocked a war powers resolution Wednesday designed to withdraw U.S. forces from hostilities in Iran, as the Trump administration accelerates its military campaign in a conflict that has killed hundreds, including at least six American service members.

The motion failed in a vote of 47-53.

In addition to pulling out military resources from the Middle East, the measure — introduced by Sens. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) and Tim Kaine (D-Va.) — would have required Congress’ explicit approval before future engagement with Iran, a power granted to the legislative branch in the Constitution.

The House, where Republicans also hold an advantage, is scheduled to weigh in on a similar measure Thursday. Even if both Democratic-led measures were to succeed, President Trump was widely expected to veto the legislation.

“We are doing very well on the war front, to put it mildly,” President Trump said at a White House event on Wednesday afternoon. The president, who has come under scrutiny for offering shifting explanations on the war’s endgame, said that if he was asked to scale the American military operation from one to 10, he would rate it a 15.

Advertisement

Democrats dispute that Trump possesses the authority to wage the ongoing operation in Iran without explicit congressional approval.

Acknowledging the measure was unlikely to succeed, they framed the vote as a strategy to force lawmakers to put their support for or opposition to the war on record.

“Today every senator — every single one — will pick a side,” Schumer said. “Do you stand with the American people who are exhausted with forever wars in the Middle East, or stand with Donald Trump and Pete Hegseth as they bumble us headfirst into another war?”

Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) and most of his Republican colleagues have maintained that the president carried out a “pre-emptive” and “defensive” strike in Iran, giving him full authority to continue unilateral military operations.

Republicans saw the vote as the “last roadblock” stopping Trump from carrying out his mission against the Islamic Republic.

Advertisement

“I think the president has the authority that he needs to conduct the activities and operations that are currently underway there. There are a lot of controversy and questions around the war powers act, but I think the president is acting in the best interest of the nation and our national security interests,” Thune said at a news conference.

Senators largely held to party loyalties, with the exception of Kentucky Republican Rand Paul, who broke ranks to support the measure, and Pennsylvania Democrat John Fetterman, who opposed it.

The vote comes as Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said Wednesday that the war against Iran is “accelerating,” with American and Israeli forces expanding air operations into Iranian territory. He pointed to evidence released by U.S. Central Command of a submarine strike on an Iranian warship, and also lauded other strikes throughout the region as civilian casualties in Iran surpassed 1,000 on the fourth day of the conflict, according to rights groups.

“We’re going to continue to do well,” Trump said Wednesday. “We have the greatest military in the world by far and that was a tremendous threat to us for many years. Forty-seven years they’ve been killing our people and killing people all over the world, and we have great support.”

Republicans blocked a similar war powers vote in January after the president ordered U.S. special forces to capture and extradite Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro in Caracas on drug trafficking charges.

Advertisement

GOP leaders argued that the outcome of that mission equated to a quick success in the Middle East, despite an uncertain timeline from the Department of Defense.

In the House, lawmakers will vote on a separate war powers effort Thursday. That bill is led by Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.) and Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.), the two lawmakers who authored the Epstein Files Transparency Act.

“Instead of sending billions overseas, we need to invest in jobs, healthcare, and education here,” Khanna said on X.

In addition to that proposal, moderate Democrats in the House have introduced a separate resolution that would give the administration a 30-day window to justify continued hostilities in the Middle East before requiring a formal declaration of war or authorization from Congress.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Trending