Who is Stephen A. Smith? ESPN personality says he's 'open' to running for president
Just weeks after dismissing the idea, ESPN personality Stephen A. Smith has admitted considering running for president in 2028.
"Time to stop messing around. Life is great. Especially at ESPN/Disney," the 57-year-old "First Take" host said in an April 7 post on X. "Hate the thought of being a politician. But sick of this mess. So I'm officially leaving all doors open."
The sports journalist, who currently has a feud with NBA basketball player LeBron James, has been floated by many as a potential White House contender. The calls for Smith to run have come given the populist wave that returned Donald Trump to the office, and calls for a shakeup in the Democratic Party.
Smith told USA TODAY back in March he didn't "give a damn about the office" and preferred sparring with political leaders rather than being one.
But that hasn't stopped speculation, particularly after a Jan. 27 poll by McLaughlin & Associates, a popular Republican pollster, showed Smith within striking distance of well-known Democratic contenders.
The poll asked 414 voters if the Democratic primary for president were held today who would they prefer and had expected names at the top such as former Vice President Kamala Harris who raked in 33% but also former Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg and California Gov. Gavin Newsom, who pulled in 9% and 7% respectively.
Smith received 2% in the poll, which was in the single-digit neighborhood of other elected officials who've been touted as possible Democratic nominees, such as Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro, Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz (who was Harris' running mate) and New Jersey Sen. Cory Booker.
"Over the last few weeks, I've had no choice but to get more serious about it," Smith said Monday in an interview during the NAB Show in Las Vegas.
"I've been approached by people on Capitol Hill. I've been approached by people who are elected officials in office, whether it's governors or mayors or what have you. People have legitimately, seriously, asked me about it."
Smith reiterated his reluctance "be a politician," but that if after the 2026 mid-terms he thinks the country remains "an absolute mess" he won't rule out running.
While many may scoff at the idea, it's worth noting that Trump was once in the basement of many Republican primary surveys ahead of his 2016 win. In the summer before, the real estate mogul was at 2% in a Texas Politics Project poll below GOP stalwarts at the time such as Marco Rubio, Scott Walker and Jeb Bush.
ESPN personality Stephen A. Smith has accumulated a net worth of $85 million as of 2025, according to Finance Monthly.
— USA TODAY contributed to this report.
This article originally appeared on Austin American-Statesman: Stephen A. Smith reconsiders 2028 presidential bid: 'No choice'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
USA Today
34 minutes ago
- USA Today
President Trump set to attend UFC 316 in New Jersey this weekend
President Trump set to attend UFC 316 in New Jersey this weekend Show Caption Hide Caption Donald Trump attends UFC 309 at Madison Square Garden President-elect Donald Trump walked into Madison Square Garden alongside UFC CEO Dana White, Elon Musk and Kid Rock for UFC 309. As his feud with tech billionaire and former MAGA darling Elon Musk exploded into public view this week, the White House says President Donald Trump is planning to attend a UFC event in New Jersey this weekend. The event, UFC 316, is slated for Saturday, June 7 at the Prudential Center in Newark, New Jersey. The president is scheduled to depart the White House for his golf club in New Jersey Friday afternoon, according to his official schedule, and return to the White House Sunday night. Musk has been high-profile guest for some of Trump's previous visits to the octagon, but the pair had a public falling-out this week after Musk's departure from the Trump administration. 'Siri, play Bad Blood': Internet reacts to Elon Musk and Trump 'breakup' The Trump-Musk fight took off this week when Musk called for Republicans to kill the House-passed tax bill that is a signature part of the second-term president's legislative agenda, calling it a 'disgusting abomination.' Two days later, Trump told reporters at the Oval Office on June 5 that he was 'very disappointed' with Musk and suggested their 'great relationship' was over. In response, Musk took to social media shortly afterward to blast the president, saying Trump wouldn't have won a second term and Republicans would have fared worse in elections in both chambers of the U.S. Congress were it not for his efforts on the 2024 campaign trail, where he poured a quarter of a million dollars into Trump's campaign. The tussle escalated in a back-and-forth between the two men, with Trump suggested going after Musk's companies and their federal contracts, and Musk alleging that Trump's name was in the Justice Department's files related to the late financier and sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. The pair's most recent fight appearance was in April, when Trump and Musk sat ringside at UFC 314 in Miami. The president has long attended UFC events, as CEO Dana White was a prominent supporter of Trump during his 2024 presidential campaign. When is UFC 316? UFC 316, which is headlined by Sean O'Malley vs. Merab Dvalishvili, is set to take place at 10 p.m. ET/7 p.m. PT at the Prudential Center in Newark, New Jersey. The main card is available for pay-per-view on ESPN. More: Sean O'Malley vs. Merab Dvalishvili 2 predictions; full card, odds, picks for UFC 316 Contributing: Riley Beggin, Sudiksha Kochi and Cydney Henderson, USA TODAY. Kathryn Palmer is a national trending news reporter for USA TODAY. You can reach her at kapalmer@ and on X @KathrynPlmr.
Yahoo
35 minutes ago
- Yahoo
From banning X to funding Dems: All the ways Musk and Trump could hurt each other as they go nuclear
An alliance between the two most powerful men in the world seemed destined to blow up into a volatile feud yet somehow held ... until it didn't. Within a few hours on Thursday, the public spat between Donald Trump and Elon Musk exploded into debates over the president's impeachment, calls to launch primary challengers against Republican allies in Congress, and Musk's accusation that the president is implicated in a sexual abuse scandal. But how they choose to escalate from here could have far-reaching impacts — and not just for the fate of a massive bill that sparked their breakup. Trump and Musk command the world's attention, own competing social media platforms, and are each in a position to wield the power of the presidency and spend, and lose, billions of dollars against one another. Trump has already suggested yanking government contracts for Musk's companies Tesla and SpaceX, which are due to receive at least $3 billion in contracts from 17 agencies. 'The easiest way to save money in our Budget, Billions and Billions of Dollars, is to terminate Elon's Governmental Subsidies and Contracts,' Trump wrote on Truth Social. On his War Room podcast, Trump ally Steve Bannon urged Trump to retaliate against the world's wealthiest man by, among other things, using the Defense Production Act to take control of SpaceX. 'The U.S. government should seize it,' Bannon said Thursday. Musk ended his 130-day 'special government employee' term in the Trump administration last week after serving as an 'adviser' to the president for the so-called Department of Government Efficiency, which Musk unleashed across the federal government to make drastic cuts to spending and the workforce. But Trump left the door open for Musk to return. That 130-day term can be renewed next year. Trump could sever that arrangement at any time. Bannon also called on Trump to strip Musk's top-secret clearances, which he is granted in conjunction with his work on SpaceX and NASA. With more than 220 million followers on a social media platform under his control, Musk can use that audience and ability to shift media narratives against the president to advance his agenda. Trump, whose entire campaign was built on retribution, possesses executive authority to shut X down, according to experts. Trump could declare X a national security risk, 'which would permit him to ban the platform outright,' claims Devan Leos with AI platform Undetectable AI. The president could invoke the International Emergency Economic Powers Act on national security grounds to prevent X from operating, which would likely trigger a high-profile legal battle. 'Musk now faces a difficult choice. He can ban Trump from X in retaliation, but that would almost certainly trigger an executive response from the White House,' according to Leos. The president, meanwhile, owns more than 100 million shares, or roughly 53 per cent, of Trump Media & Technology Group, the parent company of social media platform Truth Social. His stake in the company is worth billions of dollars. Musk was born in South Africa before he emigrated to Canada and later the United States. Last year, The Washington Post reported that the billionaire worked in the country illegally before gaining citizenship. Bannon called on the president to deport him. 'Elon Musk is illegal. He's got to go too,' Bannon said on his War Room podcast. Trump also could wield the power of his office to initiate other investigations under a Department of Justice controlled by his fierce ally Attorney General Pam Bondi, including into allegations of his drug use at the campaign trail and within the administration. The world's wealthiest person spent tens of millions of dollars supporting Trump's 2024 campaign. On Thursday, he took credit for his victory. But this year, his multimillion-dollar effort to support a conservative Wisconsin Supreme Court candidate blew up in his face, with his DOGE efforts tanking his — and Tesla's — appeal. Still, Republican candidates fear being his target. Musk and his allies have threatened to fund primary challenges against any GOP member of Congress who supports legislation he doesn't. 'Is it time to create a new political party in America that actually represents the 80 percent in the middle?' Musk asked on Thursday. Democrats agree with Musk that Trump's 'big, beautiful bill' is a disaster but aren't necessarily welcoming him to the party after the right-wing billionaire torched government agencies and helped but Trump back in office. 'We should ultimately be trying to convince him that the Democratic Party has more of the values that he agrees with,' California Democratic Rep. Ro Khanna, whose district represents Silicon Valley, told Politico. 'A commitment to science funding, a commitment to clean technology, a commitment to seeing international students like him.' Liam Kerr, co-founder of the centrist WelcomeFest meeting underway in Washington during the Trump-Musk feud, told the outlet that 'of course' Democrats should be open to Musk. 'You don't want anyone wildly distorting your politics, which he has a unique capability to do. But it's a zero-sum game,' Kerr told Politico. 'Anything that he does that moves more toward Democrats hurts Republicans.' It took just four hours for a feud playing out on two different social media platforms for Musk to drop what he called a 'bomb' against the president. 'Time to drop the really big bomb,' he wrote on X. '[Trump] is in the Epstein files. That is the real reason they have not been made public.' That loaded accusation — Musk's suggestion that Trump was involving the sex offender's trafficking scheme — appeared to be the tipping point in their feud. Musk, who just days ago seemed to have no problem associating with a man he is now alleging is implicated in Epstein's crimes, could launch a humiliation campaign against the president for an audience that has been largely disappointed with the Trump administration's approach to the Epstein case. Far-right influencers have turned on top federal law enforcement officials over the case, accusing Trump of continuing what they believe is a 'deep state' conspiracy theory covering up powerful people. Musk could leverage that hostility. Musk hired a small army of young loyalists and old allies for his government-wide operation to not only eliminate jobs and spending but extract reams of data from millions of Americans. DOGE's unprecedented access to Americans' data 'is alarming, made worse by the complete absence of meaningful oversight,' according to Ben Zipperer, a senior economist with the Economic Policy Institute. 'That unrestrained access to data will likely worsen the problem of identity theft in the United States, which could cost working families tens of billions of dollars annually.' A report from Democratic Senator Elizabeth Warren's office also uncovered more than 100 instances that Musk allegedly abused his role as a 'special government employee' overseeing DOGE to benefit his private interests. Musk violated 'norms at an astonishing pace,' amounting to 'scandalous behavior regardless of whether it subjects him to criminal prosecution.' The report accuses Musk of using the government to promote his businesses, including turning the White House lawn into a Tesla showroom, and allegedly discovered roughly two dozen instances where the government 'entered or explored new lucrative contracts' with the billionaire while halting enforcement actions against his companies.
42 minutes ago
Transgender troops face a deadline and a difficult decision: Stay or go?
WASHINGTON -- As transgender service members face a deadline to leave the U.S. military, hundreds are taking the financial bonus to depart voluntarily. But others say they will stay and fight. For many, it is a wrenching decision to end a career they love, and leave units they have led or worked with for years. And they are angry they are being forced out by the Trump administration's renewed ban on transgender troops. Active duty service members had until Friday to identify themselves and begin to leave the military voluntarily, while the National Guard and Reserve have until July 7. Then the military will begin involuntary separations. Friday's deadline comes during Pride Month and as the Trump administration targets diversity, equity and inclusion efforts, saying it's aiming to scrub the military of 'wokeness' and reestablishing a 'warrior ethos.' 'They're tired of the rollercoaster. They just want to go,' said one transgender service member, who plans to retire. 'It's exhausting.' For others, it's a call to arms. 'I'm choosing to stay in and fight,' a noncommissioned officer in the Air Force said. 'My service is based on merit, and I've earned that merit.' The troops, who mainly spoke on condition of anonymity because they fear reprisals, said being forced to decide is frustrating. They say it's a personal choice based on individual and family situations, including whether they would get an infusion of cash or possibly wind up owing the government money. 'I'm very disappointed,' a transgender Marine said. 'I've outperformed, I have a spotless record. I'm at the top of every fitness report. I'm being pushed out while I know others are barely scraping by.' Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has said this is President Donald Trump's directive and what America voted for. The Pentagon, he said, is 'leaving wokeness & weakness behind' and that includes 'no more dudes in dresses.' Sen. Tammy Duckworth of Illinois, a veteran, and 22 other Democratic senators have written to Hegseth urging him to allow transgender troops to keep serving honorably. Already, more than 1,000 service members have voluntarily identified themselves as transgender and are slated to begin leaving, according to rough Defense Department estimates. Defense officials say there are about 4,240 active duty transgender troops but acknowledge the numbers are fuzzy. For many, the decision is financial. Those who voluntarily leave will get double the amount of separation pay they would normally receive and won't have to return bonuses or tuition costs. Those who refuse to go could be forced to repay reenlistment or other bonuses as high as $50,000. That was the tipping point for Roni Ferrell, an Army specialist at Joint Base Lewis-McChord near Tacoma, Washington. Ferrell, 28, lives on base with her wife and two children and had planned to stay in the Army for at least another decade. But she said she felt 'backed into a corner' to sign the voluntary separation agreement, fearing she would have to repay an $18,500 reenlistment bonus. 'My commander basically said it was my only option in order to make sure my kids are taken care of,' Ferrell said. The Marine, who has served for more than 25 years, said she had planned to stay and fight, but changed her mind. Lawyers, she said, told her an involuntary separation would put a code in her record saying she was forced to leave 'in the interests of national security.' That designation, she said, could mean those involuntarily separated could lose their security clearances, hurting future job prospects. In a statement Friday, a defense official said the code 'is not intended' to trigger clearance revocations and that gender dysphoria is not a security reporting requirement, according to the director of national intelligence. The official spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss internal deliberations. Cynthia Cheng-Wun Weaver, senior director of litigation for Human Rights Campaign, said it's important for troops to talk with judge advocates general in their services to ensure they understand the different procedures being implemented. The Air Force service member and a transgender officer in the Army National Guard both said they plan to stay and fight. Lawsuits over the ban continue and could change or block the policy. For troops involved in the court battles as plaintiffs, leaving voluntarily now would likely hurt their standing in the case. For others, it's simply dedication to their career. 'I've really embraced military culture, and it's embraced me,' the Air Force member said. 'It's not about money. It's the career that I love.' The Guard soldier echoed that sentiment, saying he will stay on "because it is important to me to serve. Frankly, I'm good at it, I'm well trained so I want to continue.' Others without bonuses to repay or who have been in the military only a short while and won't get much in separation bonus pay may opt to stay and see what happens. National Guard members who are heading to their monthly drill weekend or annual two-week drill in June could be required to go but serve as the gender they were assigned at birth. That means they would have to wear uniforms and haircuts of that gender, use that bathroom and be referred to as 'sir' or 'ma'am' based on that gender. For many, that could be close to impossible and create uncomfortable situations. 'If I were to show up to drill this weekend, I'd be expected to use all female facilities, I would be expected to wear a woman's uniform,' said the Army Guard officer, who transitioned to male about five years ago and says others in his unit know him as a man. 'I don't look like a woman. I don't feel like a woman. It would be disruptive to good order and discipline for me to show up and to tell my soldiers, you have to call me 'ma'am' now.' It's not clear if Guard units are handling it all the same way, and it could be up to individual states or commanders. Some may allow troops to postpone the drill or go on administrative leave. The service members interviewed by The Associated Press said they don't know what will happen once the deadline passes to leave voluntarily. Some believe that unit commanders will quickly single people out and start involuntary separations. Others say the process is vague, may involve medical review boards and could take months. The defense official said Friday that as the Pentagon takes these steps, it 'will treat our service members with dignity and respect.' Under Hegseth's directive, military commanders will be told to identify troops with gender dysphoria — when a person's biological sex does not match their gender identity — and send them to get medical checks to force them out of the service, defense officials have said. The order relies on routine annual health checks — so it could be months before that evaluation is scheduled. 'My real big sticking point is that this administration's whole push is to reform this country based around merit, and that gender, race, etc., should have no factor in hiring,' the Air Force service member said. 'If that's true, I'm solely being removed for my gender, and merit is no longer a factor.'
