Connect with us
[the_ad id="89560"]

International

Political realignment in 2024 has changed American politics

Published

5 minute read

From The Center Square

By 

Vice President Kamala Harris and former President Donald Trump face off at the ballot box on Tuesday with control of the U.S. Senate and House up for grabs.

This election cycle has featured unusual alliances and demographic shifts not seen in recent elections.

Billionaire Elon Musk joined former Democratic Rep. Tulsi Gabbard and former Democrat Robert F. Kennedy Jr. to endorse Trump this time around.

Meanwhile, Harris has taken to the campaign trail with former Republican U.S. Rep. Liz Cheney, daughter of former Republican Vice President Dick Cheney, meaning the iconic Kennedy and Cheney brands are opposing one another yet again, but from the opposite sides this time around.

Those changes come alongside unusual demographic inroads for Trump while men shift more Republican and women favor Democrats, an apparently widening gap for the two sexes.

Union workers, Hispanic voters, and Black voters are traditionally Democratic-favoring demographics that Trump has managed to curry favor with this election.

“He’s changed the makeup of the Republican coalition, and some of them are formerly Democratic,” campaign veteran and former Mitt Romney spokesperson Ryan Williams told The Center Square. “And if you are in a tight race in a purple state, you want to appeal to those voters and try to get them to split their ticket.”

Polling shows that Harris has about 80% support among Black voters nationally. Former President Barack Obama, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, and President Joe Biden all managed to get between 90% and 95% support from Black voters.

Trump has marginally increased his support among Black voters and made even better strides among Hispanic voters.

As The Center Square previously reported, ​​Noble Predictive Insights published new polling Tuesday reporting that Harris leads Trump with Black voters 78% to 20% and with Hispanic voters 50% to 45%.

“He’s reminiscent of Bush 2004 numbers,” said Williams, now at Targeted Victory, referring to when former President George W. Bush got 40-44% of the Hispanic vote, depending on which survey or analysis you cite.

“Trump can reach out and connect to these voters in a way that my old boss, Mitt Romney, couldn’t,” Williams continued. “That’s not to say that Republicans are going to win these groups, but they are going to lessen the margin which is why I think that this race is so close at this point.

“You are essentially heading into a dead heat in so many states because Trump has managed to slice into traditionally Democratic constituencies and narrow the margins,” he added.

The demographic realignment has a big impact in down-ballot U.S. House and Senate races with 33 Senate seats in the balance. All 435 House seats are up for reelection every two years.

In the Senate, Democrats are defending about twice as many seats as Republicans, painting a tough picture for the party. Republicans are also considered slight favorites to take the U.S. House, according to betting markets.

Democrats have been working hard to resurrect their relationship with Black voters, with Harris rolling out new policies and even Obama chiding Black men about not voting for Harris.

Last month, Obama told a gathering of Black men to vote for Harris and suggested they would not support her because she was a woman, a comment that sparked pushback and criticism for Democrats.

“Respectfully, President Obama, what you said is not acceptable,” ESPN’s most famous host, Stephen A Smith, who is Black, said on one of his shows after the remarks. “Is it possible that the reason some Black folks may not be inclined to vote or may be a bit disenchanted or dare I say may go as far as voting for Trump, is it possible that it’s policy as opposed to misogyny?

“Inflation, the cost of living, the cost of gas, the cost of groceries, that don’t matter?” he continued. “Immigration and our borders and this belief that there’s an elevated level of sensitivity toward them as opposed to Black folks struggling if not starving in this country? Yes that plays a role too.”

Business

Will Paramount turn the tide of legacy media and entertainment?

Published on

 

From the Daily Caller News Foundation

By Bill Flaig And Tom Carter

The recent leadership changes at Paramount Skydance suggest that the company may finally be ready to correct course after years of ideological drift, cultural activism posing as programming, and a pattern of self-inflicted financial and reputational damage.

Nowhere was this problem more visible than at CBS News, which for years operated as one of the most partisan and combative news organizations. Let’s be honest, CBS was the worst of an already left biased industry that stopped at nothing to censor conservatives. The network seemed committed to the idea that its viewers needed to be guided, corrected, or morally shaped by its editorial decisions.

This culminated in the CBS and 60 Minutes segment with Kamala Harris that was so heavily manipulated and so structurally misleading that it triggered widespread backlash and ultimately forced Paramount to settle a $16 million dispute with Donald Trump. That was not merely a legal or contractual problem. It was an institutional failure that demonstrated the degree to which political advocacy had overtaken journalistic integrity.

Dear Readers:

As a nonprofit, we are dependent on the generosity of our readers.

Please consider making a small donation of any amount here.

Thank you!

For many longtime viewers across the political spectrum, that episode represented a clear breaking point. It became impossible to argue that CBS News was simply leaning left. It was operating with a mission orientation that prioritized shaping narratives rather than reporting truth. As a result, trust collapsed. Many of us who once had long-term professional, commercial, or intellectual ties to Paramount and CBS walked away.

David Ellison’s acquisition of Paramount marks the most consequential change to the studio’s identity in a generation. Ellison is not anchored to the old Hollywood ecosystem where cultural signaling and activist messaging were considered more important than story, audience appeal, or shareholder value.

His professional history in film and strategic business management suggests an approach grounded in commercial performance, audience trust, and brand rebuilding rather than ideological identity. That shift matters because Paramount has spent years creating content and news coverage that seemed designed to provoke or instruct viewers rather than entertain or inform them. It was an approach that drained goodwill, eroded market share, and drove entire segments of the viewing public elsewhere.

The appointment of Bari Weiss as the new chief editor of CBS News is so significant. Weiss has built her reputation on rejecting ideological conformity imposed from either side. She has consistently spoken out against antisemitism and the moral disorientation that emerges when institutions prioritize political messaging over honesty.

Her brand centers on the belief that journalism should clarify rather than obscure. During President Trump’s recent 60 Minutes interview, he praised Weiss as a “great person” and credited her with helping restore integrity and editorial seriousness inside CBS. That moment signaled something important. Paramount is no longer simply rearranging executives. It is rethinking identity.

The appointment of Makan Delrahim as Chief Legal Officer was an early indicator. Delrahim’s background at the Department of Justice, where he led antitrust enforcement, signals seriousness about governance, compliance, and restoring institutional discipline.

But the deeper and more meaningful shift is occurring at the ownership and editorial levels, where the most politically charged parts of Paramount’s portfolio may finally be shedding the habits that alienated millions of viewers.The transformation will not be immediate. Institutions develop habits, internal cultures, and incentive structures that resist correction. There will be internal opposition, particularly from staff and producers who benefited from the ideological culture that defined CBS News in recent years.

There will be critics in Hollywood who see any shift toward balance as a threat to their influence. And there will be outside voices who will insist that any move away from their preferred political posture is regression.

But genuine reform never begins with instant consensus. It begins with leadership willing to be clear about the mission.

Paramount has the opportunity to reclaim what once made it extraordinary. Not as a symbol. Not as a message distribution vehicle. But as a studio that understands that good storytelling and credible reporting are not partisan aims. They are universal aims. Entertainment succeeds when it connects with audiences rather than instructing them. Journalism succeeds when it pursues truth rather than victory.

In an era when audiences have more viewing choices than at any time in history, trust is an economic asset. Viewers are sophisticated. They recognize when they are being lectured rather than engaged. They know when editorial goals are political rather than informational. And they are willing to reward any institution that treats them with respect.

There is now reason to believe Paramount understands this. The leadership is changing. The tone is changing. The incentives are being reassessed.

It is not the final outcome. But it is a real beginning. As the great Winston Churchill once said; “Now this is not the end. It is not even the beginning of the end. But it is, perhaps, the end of the beginning”.

For the first time in a long time, the door to cultural realignment in legacy media is open. And Paramount is standing at the threshold and has the capability to become a market leader once again. If Paramount acts, the industry will follow.

Bill Flaig and Tom Carter are the Co-Founders of The American Conservatives Values ETF, Ticker Symbol ACVF traded on the New York Stock Exchange. Ticker Symbol ACVF

Learn more at www.InvestConservative.com

Continue Reading

Education

Johns Hopkins University Announces Free Tuition For Most Students

Published on

 

From the Daily Caller News Foundation

By Jaryn Crouson

Johns Hopkins University (JHU) announced on Thursday it is making tuition free for families earning less than $200,000 and will waive both tuition and living expenses for those making less than $100,000.

The university stated that “a majority of American families” will qualify for the fee exemption, allowing most students to attend without contributing a single dollar. The decision is meant to help recruit “the best and brightest students to Johns Hopkins irrespective of their financial wherewithal.”

“Trying to understand financial aid offers can be overwhelming,” David Phillips, vice provost for admissions and financial aid at JHU, said in the announcement. “A big goal here is to simplify the process. We especially want to reach students and families from disadvantaged backgrounds, rural locations, and small towns across America who may not know that a Hopkins degree is within reach.”

Dear Readers:

As a nonprofit, we are dependent on the generosity of our readers.

Please consider making a small donation of any amount here.

Thank you!

In 2018, Michael Bloomberg donated nearly $2 billion to the university, the largest ever single gift to a U.S. university. JHU said it used this money “to become permanently need blind and no-loan in financial aid.”

The university also receives the most federal funding of any university, raking in more than $3 billion from the government in fiscal year 2023 for research and development alone. This is more than double what the next highest recipient of federal funding that year, the University of Washington, received.

Despite this, JHU in June complained that federal funding cuts forced it to institute a hiring freeze and pause annual pay increases for employees. In its message to the community at the time, the university also mentioned its disagreement with “recent efforts to limit or withhold visas from the international students and scholars.”

Some universities admit mass numbers of foreign students in order to pad their pockets, as such students often pay full tuition and fee costs without financial assistance.

Continue Reading

Trending

X