Rep. Clyburn says Americans starting to see Trump admin is 'danger' to democracy
The liberal candidate in Wisconsin's Supreme Court special election beat out the Elon Musk-backed GOP candidate. Rep. Jim Clyburn (D-SC) joins Katy Tur to share what he believes the race shows about voters' opinions of the Trump administration.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
35 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Latest Donald Trump approval ratings: new poll finds good news for president
Registered voters like what they see from President Donald Trump, according to a new poll. A survey released by Napolitan News Service found that 51% of respondents approve of Trump's handling of the presidency. Of those respondents, 30% said they 'strongly' approve of the work Trump has done so far, while 21% said they just 'slightly' approve. The poll also found that 46% of respondents disapprove of Trump's work in the Oval Office. Among those who said they disapprove, 35% said they 'strongly' disapprove, while 11% said they only 'somewhat' disapprove. Only 2% of respondents said they were not sure about how Trump has handled the job of the presidency, according to the poll. The poll was conducted between May 27 and June 3 with a sample size of 3,000 registered voters. The poll's margin of error is plus or minus 1.8%. The Napolitan News Service is part of the Napolitan Institute, founded by veteran Republican pollster Scott Rasmussen, The organization bills itself as involved in 'rigorous, unbiased polling,' providing 'deep insights into American sentiment.' These numbers represent an incremental improvement in Trump's approval rating when compared to Neapolitan News Service's previous poll, conducted between May 20 and May 29. In that poll, 50% of respondents said they disapproved of Trump's handling of the presidency, while 49% said they approved. The previous poll's sample size also was 3,000 registered voters. It had a margin of error of plus or minus 1.8%. The last time a Napolitan News Service poll found that a clear majority of respondents approved of Trump's handling of the presidency was in May. The poll, conducted between May 7 and May 15, found that 52% of respondents expressed approval, while 48% expressed disapproval. Like the other two polls, the survey's sample size is 3,000 registered voters and has a margin of error of plus or minus 1.8%. Other polls conducted around the same time as the Napolitan News Service poll offer mixed results for the president's approval rating. A YouGov/Economist poll conducted between May 30 and June 2 found 49% of respondents disapproving of the job Trump is doing as president, while 45% approve of the work he is doing. The poll's sample size is 1,610 U.S. adults. It has a margin of error of plus or minus 3.2%. A CBS News/YouGov poll conducted between June 4 and June 6 found that a majority of respondents (55%) disapprove of Trump's work as president compared to 45% who said they approve. The CBS News/YouGov poll's sample size is 2,428 U.S. adults. Its margin of error is plus or minus 2.4%. Over 12,000 Harvard alums lend weight to court battle with Trump in new filing Mass. Sen. Warren: DOGE accessed 'sensitive' student loan data at Education Dept., calls for probe Markey: Trump using National Guard in LA to distract from big cuts in 'Big Beautiful Bill' Can the Mass. GOP flip this Taunton state House seat? | Bay State Briefing ABC News suspends correspondent over social media post critical of President Trump Read the original article on MassLive.
Yahoo
35 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Paraguay president's X account likely hacked in Bitcoin scheme
ASUNCION (Reuters) -Paraguay's government on Monday said that President Santiago Pena's X account had likely been hacked after the leader appeared to promote trading of cryptocurrency Bitcoin. "The president's official X account has presented irregular activity which suggests possible unauthorized entry," the government said in a statement. A post on Pena's account in English, with a Spanish-language statement purporting to be from the government, had declared that the Latin American country had made Bitcoin legal tender and that it would roll out a $5 million Bitcoin-backed reserve fund. The government asked citizens to ignore posts from the account until official confirmation was made available. Paraguay's national cybersecurity team was working with X to investigate the situation, the government added. X did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
The Hill
35 minutes ago
- The Hill
Censorship is no way to get people to respect transgender rights
There was good and bad news for transgender rights in the U.S. last week. The good news was that a transgender high school athlete won two events in a girls' state track meet. And the bad news was that the Supreme Court allowed a school to censor a student's expression of the belief that there are only two genders. Suppressing ideas is never a good look in the U.S., whose Bill of Rights presupposes a freedom of speech that cannot be legislated away. And if we deny that freedom to anyone, then all of us — including transgender people — will lose. Free speech was on full display at the California track-and-field championship in Clovis, Calif. Under a new rule promulgated by the state interscholastic federation, the girls who finished just behind transgender athlete AB Hernandez in the high jump and triple jump were elevated to share her medals. That seemed just fine to Hernandez and also the other girls on the podium, who all exchanged high-fives and hugs. But it was not okay with protesters who gathered outside the stadium, chanting 'No boys in girls' sports.' Taylor Starling, a cross-country runner went on Fox News with her father to denounce 'guys that are taking away girls' awards, their medals, their spots.' Starling is part of a lawsuit alleging that she was demoted from her varsity track and field team when a transgender athlete took her spot. President Trump, meanwhile, threatened 'large scale fines' against California for allowing a 'Biological male' to compete the 'Girls State Finals.' Hernandez's mother fired back, denouncing people 'in positions of power' for harassing her daughter. Hernandez also spoke up against her critics: 'I'm still a child, you're an adult, and for you to act like a child shows how you are as a person.' But as petty and small as it may be for Hernandez's detractors to malign her as a 'boy' or a 'male,' they have the right to say it — just as I have the right to call them out. That's called America. Alas, that's also a memo that educators in Middleborough, Mass. seem to have missed. Earlier this spring, they sent home a seventh-grader for wearing a T-shirt declaring, 'There Are Only Two Genders' because 'other students had complained about the T-shirt and that it had 'made them upset.'' Then the student came back in a T-shirt that said, 'There are CENSORED Genders.' The school told him that wouldn't be allowed, either. I'm sure the shirts did make some people upset, but I also imagine that some were upset by a student at the same school who wore a T-shirt that read, 'HE SHE THEY IT'S ALL OKAY.' Once we decide to censor upsetting speech, we won't be able to speak at all. That's why the Supreme Court ruled in 1969 that 13-year-old Mary Beth Tinker could wear a black armband to her Iowa middle school to protest America's war in Vietnam. Schools cannot suppress speech out of 'a mere desire to avoid the discomfort and unpleasantness that always accompany an unpopular viewpoint,' the court declared in Tinker v. Des Moines. The only justifiable reason for restricting speech was if it threatened 'material and substantial interference with schoolwork or discipline.' Did the T-shirt saying there are only two genders pose that kind of danger? Of course not. But a federal trial judge ruled that the school could censor the student anyway, because he was threatening 'the rights of others' to attend school 'without being confronted by messages attacking their identities.' So what would prevent a school from prohibiting the 'HE SHE THEY' shirt, on the grounds that it threatened the identities of devout Christians and Muslims? And couldn't a school also bar speech in support of AB Hernandez, whose critics might claim that their own gender identities were under fire? In each case, the answer is yes. Nevertheless, an appeals court upheld the Massachusetts judge's decision. And last week, the Supreme Court declined to hear the case on appeal. In doing so, it turned its back on Tinker v. Des Moines and its ringing affirmation of freedom, which is fundamental to our shared identity as Americans. 'Any word spoken in class, in the lunchroom, or on the campus, that deviates from the views of another person may start an argument or cause a disturbance,' the Tinker ruling acknowledged. 'But our Constitution says we must take this risk, and our history says that it is this sort of hazardous freedom — this kind of openness — that is the basis of our national strength.' In California, AB Hernandez demonstrated precisely that strength. But in Massachusetts, school officials closed off speech out of fear. That's a hazard to the freedom of everyone, no matter what they think about gender. And if you think otherwise, watch out. Someday soon, the censors may be coming for you. Jonathan Zimmerman teaches education and history at the University of Pennsylvania and serves on the advisory board of the Albert Lepage Center for History in the Public Interest.
