Politics
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.
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.
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.
Trump on Tuesday said that he had inherited an “economic catastrophe and an inflation nightmare” from the previous Biden administration — something 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.
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.
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.’”
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
Trump signs order to protect Venezuela oil revenue held in US accounts
NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
President Donald Trump has signed an executive order blocking U.S. courts from seizing Venezuelan oil revenues held in American Treasury accounts.
The order states that court action against the funds would undermine U.S. national security and foreign policy objectives.
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
President Donald Trump is pictured signing two executive orders on Sept. 19, 2025, establishing the “Trump Gold Card” and introducing a $100,000 fee for H-1B visas. He signed another executive order recently protecting oil revenue. (Andrew Harnik/Getty Images)
Trump signed the order on Friday, the same day that he met with nearly two dozen top oil and gas executives at the White House.
The president said American energy companies will invest $100 billion to rebuild Venezuela’s “rotting” oil infrastructure and push production to record levels following the capture of Venezuelan dictator Nicolás Maduro.
The U.S. has moved aggressively to take control of Venezuela’s oil future following the collapse of the Maduro regime.
This is a developing story. Please check back for updates.
Politics
Column: Some leaders will do anything to cling to positions of power
One of the most important political stories in American history — one that is particularly germane to our current, tumultuous time — unfolded in Los Angeles some 65 years ago.
Sen. John F. Kennedy, a Catholic, had just received his party’s nomination for president and in turn he shunned the desires of his most liberal supporters by choosing a conservative out of Texas as his running mate. He did so in large part to address concerns that his faith would somehow usurp his oath to uphold the Constitution. The last time the Democrats nominated a Catholic — New York Gov. Al Smith in 1928 — he lost in a landslide, so folks were more than a little jittery about Kennedy’s chances.
“I am fully aware of the fact that the Democratic Party, by nominating someone of my faith, has taken on what many regard as a new and hazardous risk,” Kennedy told the crowd at the Memorial Coliseum. “But I look at it this way: The Democratic Party has once again placed its confidence in the American people, and in their ability to render a free, fair judgment.”
The most important part of the story is what happened before Kennedy gave that acceptance speech.
While his faith made party leaders nervous, they were downright afraid of the impact a civil rights protest during the Democratic National Convention could have on November’s election. This was 1960. The year began with Black college students challenging segregation with lunch counter sit-ins across the Deep South, and by spring the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee had formed. The Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. was not the organizer of the protest at the convention, but he planned to be there, guaranteeing media attention. To try to prevent this whole scene, the most powerful Black man in Congress was sent to stop him.
The Rev. Adam Clayton Powell Jr. was also a warrior for civil rights, but the House representative preferred the legislative approach, where backroom deals were quietly made and his power most concentrated. He and King wanted the same things for Black people. But Powell — who was first elected to Congress in 1944, the same year King enrolled at Morehouse College at the age of 15 — was threatened by the younger man’s growing influence. He was also concerned that his inability to stop the protest at the convention would harm his chance to become chairman of a House committee.
And so Powell — the son of a preacher, and himself a Baptist preacher in Harlem — told King that if he didn’t cancel, Powell would tell journalists a lie that King was having a homosexual affair with his mentor, Bayard Rustin. King stuck to his plan and led a protest — even though such a rumor would not only have harmed King, but also would have undermined the credibility of the entire civil rights movement. Remember, this was 1960. Before the March on Washington, before passage of the Voting Rights Act, before the dismantling of the very Jim Crow laws Powell had vowed to dismantle when first running for office.
That threat, my friends, is the most important part of the story.
It’s not that Powell didn’t want the best for the country. It’s just that he wanted to be seen as the one doing it and was willing to derail the good stemming from the civil rights movement to secure his own place in power. There have always been people willing to make such trade-offs. Sometimes they dress up their intentions with scriptures to make it more palatable; other times they play on our darkest fears. They do not care how many people get hurt in the process, even if it’s the same people they profess to care for.
That was true in Los Angeles in 1960.
That was true in Washington, D.C., on Jan. 6, 2021.
That is true in the streets of America today.
Whether we are talking about an older pastor who is threatened by the growing influence of a younger voice or a president clinging to office after losing an election: To remain king, some men are willing to burn the entire kingdom down.
YouTube: @LZGrandersonShow
Politics
Federal judge blocks Trump from cutting childcare funds to Democratic states over fraud concerns
NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
A federal judge Friday temporarily blocked the Trump administration from stopping subsidies on childcare programs in five states, including Minnesota, amid allegations of fraud.
U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, a Biden appointee, didn’t rule on the legality of the funding freeze, but said the states had met the legal threshold to maintain the “status quo” on funding for at least two weeks while arguments continue.
On Tuesday, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) said it would withhold funds for programs in five Democratic states over fraud concerns.
The programs include the Child Care and Development Fund, the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families program, and the Social Services Block Grant, all of which help needy families.
USDA IMMEDIATELY SUSPENDS ALL FEDERAL FUNDING TO MINNESOTA AMID FRAUD INVESTIGATION
On Tuesday, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services said it would withhold funds for programs in five Democratic states over fraud concerns. (AP Photo/Jose Luis Magana, File)
“Families who rely on childcare and family assistance programs deserve confidence that these resources are used lawfully and for their intended purpose,” HHS Deputy Secretary Jim O’Neill said in a statement on Tuesday.
The states, which include California, Colorado, Illinois, Minnesota and New York, argued in court filings that the federal government didn’t have the legal right to end the funds and that the new policy is creating “operational chaos” in the states.
U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian at his nomination hearing in 2022. (Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images)
In total, the states said they receive more than $10 billion in federal funding for the programs.
HHS said it had “reason to believe” that the programs were offering funds to people in the country illegally.
‘TIP OF THE ICEBERG’: SENATE REPUBLICANS PRESS GOV WALZ OVER MINNESOTA FRAUD SCANDAL
The table above shows the five states and their social safety net funding for various programs which are being withheld by the Trump administration over allegations of fraud. (AP Digital Embed)
New York Attorney General Letitia James, who is leading the lawsuit, called the ruling a “critical victory for families whose lives have been upended by this administration’s cruelty.”
New York Attorney General Letitia James, who is leading the lawsuit, called the ruling a “critical victory for families whose lives have been upended by this administration’s cruelty.” (Win McNamee/Getty Images)
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
Fox News Digital has reached out to HHS for comment.
-
Detroit, MI1 week ago2 hospitalized after shooting on Lodge Freeway in Detroit
-
Technology4 days agoPower bank feature creep is out of control
-
Dallas, TX6 days agoDefensive coordinator candidates who could improve Cowboys’ brutal secondary in 2026
-
Dallas, TX2 days agoAnti-ICE protest outside Dallas City Hall follows deadly shooting in Minneapolis
-
Delaware2 days agoMERR responds to dead humpback whale washed up near Bethany Beach
-
Iowa4 days agoPat McAfee praises Audi Crooks, plays hype song for Iowa State star
-
Health7 days agoViral New Year reset routine is helping people adopt healthier habits
-
Nebraska4 days agoOregon State LB transfer Dexter Foster commits to Nebraska