logo
They voted for Trump, most still back him but not on everything

They voted for Trump, most still back him but not on everything

Khaleej Times7 hours ago

From her corner of the United States near Houston, Texas, stay-at-home mother Loretta Torres, 38, admires President Donald Trump's confidence and bargaining style. She has no complaints with his presidency.
In Des Moines, Iowa, Lou Nunez, an 83-year-old US Army veteran, has been horrified by Trump's cuts to federal agencies, whipsaw tariff announcements and crackdowns on protesters.
Terry Alberta, 64, a pilot in southwestern Michigan, supports most of Trump's policies but he thinks some of the slashed federal spending might have to be restored and he dislikes the president's demeanor. 'I get really frustrated with him when he starts calling people names and just saying crazy things,' he said.
Although they all helped elect Trump in November, Torres, Nunez and Alberta have very different reactions to his presidency so far. They are among 20 Trump voters Reuters has interviewed monthly since February about the president's dramatic changes to the United States' government, trade policy and immigration enforcement, among other issues.
Nunez and one of the other 20 voters now regret casting a ballot for the president. Torres and four others say they fully support his administration. But most – like Alberta – fall somewhere in between.
The 20 voters were selected from 429 respondents to a February 2025 Ipsos poll who said they voted for Trump in November and were willing to speak to a reporter. They are not a statistically representative portrait of all Trump voters, but their ages, educational backgrounds, races/ethnicities, locations and voting histories roughly corresponded to those of Trump's overall electorate. Even monthly check-ins cannot always keep pace with the breakneck news cycle under Trump. Reuters most recently interviewed the group in May, before Trump deployed U.S. service members to Los Angeles and other cities to quell widespread protests against the administration's immigration crackdown and prior to tensions erupting with Iran. Trump's efforts to tighten border security were most popular among the group. Describing their concerns about the administration, these voters most often cited the economic uncertainty triggered by Trump's federal cuts and tariffs. That tracks with the latest Ipsos-Reuters poll findings, which show Trump polling below his overall approval rating on the economy, and above it on immigration. Recent polls also show that Americans who helped elect Trump to his second term overwhelmingly like what they see so far. In a six-day Ipsos-Reuters poll that concluded on June 16, 9 out of 10 respondents who said they voted for Trump in November also said they approved of his performance in office so far.
"I like the way he portrays himself as being a strong leader," said Torres. "It makes us look stronger to other countries."
White House spokesman Kush Desai said in a statement that Trump had delivered on his campaign promises by reducing US border crossings to historic lows and keeping inflation lower than expected.
"The Administration is committed to building on these successes by slashing the waste, fraud and abuse in our government and levelling the playing field for American industries and workers with more custom-made trade deals," Desai said.
Most of the 20 voters interviewed say they now have qualms about some of Trump's most extreme measures.
Brandon Neumeister, 36, a Pennsylvania state corrections worker and former National Guardsman, said he disagreed with a May request by the Department of Homeland Security for 20,000 National Guard members to help detain illegal immigrants. 'To deploy troops on American soil in American cities, I think that sends a very severe message,' he said.
Neumeister voted for Trump hoping for lower prices and inflation, and said he knows it will take time for the president's economic policies to yield results. But people close to him have lost jobs as a result of Trump downsizing the federal government, and several friends of his are anxious about losing pensions or healthcare due to budget cuts at the US Department of Veterans Affairs.
'Anxiety is the buzzword for everything right now,' Neumeister said, adding that it was 'hard to say' whether he's glad Trump is president.
Federal workforce reductions are also wearing on Robert Billups, 34, an accountant in Washington state currently searching for his next job. He has seen federal positions disappear from job sites and he frequently gets worried calls from his mother, who is a contractor with the Internal Revenue Service.
'This is more than my mom has ever reached out to me. I feel like it's freaking her out,' he said.
Several Trump voters in the group also said they were uneasy about actions by Trump that critics say overstep his presidential authority.
Don Jernigan, 74, a retiree in Virginia Beach, said he likes the outcomes of most of Trump's policies but not the way he sometimes pushes them through, such as his record number of executive orders or his imposition of tariffs on other countries, a power that Jernigan says belongs to Congress. Nor does he like the fact that Trump accepted a jet given to the United States by Qatar, which Jernigan views as an enemy nation. 'Trump works off of ideas. He doesn't work off of principles. He has no principles,' Jernigan said.
Overall, however, he thinks Trump is protecting US borders and deterring threats against the nation better than the other candidates for president would have.
Trump's acceptance of the Qatari jet also struck Amanda Taylor, 51, an insurance firm employee near Savannah, Georgia, as potentially unethical. 'It just seems a little like he can do whatever he wants to without repercussion,' she said.
Taylor, who voted for former President Joe Biden in 2020, says it is too early to tell yet whether Trump is an improvement. She likes Trump's pledges to deport criminals and gang members. But she has been most closely watching economic indicators, especially interest rates, because she and her husband closed on a new house this month.
Among Trump voters with fewer complaints about the president's second term, there are still areas where they hope to see some change.
David Ferguson, 53, hoped the Trump administration would revitalize U.S. manufacturing, and so far he is 'pleased with the groundwork' and 'at least the direction that they're communicating.'
At the industrial supply company in western Georgia where he works as a mechanical engineer and account manager, Ferguson has seen Trump's tariffs drive up prices on a range of products, from roller bearings to food-processing equipment. He does not expect the prices to fall as quickly as they've risen.
Ferguson would like the administration to offer tax incentives to companies like his that are making it possible for more things to be made in the United States. 'It would help encourage businesses that are already domesticating manufacturing and give them some relief from the tariffs, kind of reward their good behavior,' he said.
Several other Trump voters voiced support for a policy that might surprise left-leaning voters: a clearer legal immigration pathway for aspiring Americans who are law-abiding and want to contribute to the US economy.
Gerald Dunn, 66, is a martial-arts instructor in New York's Hudson Valley and 'middle-of-the-road' voter who said he is frustrated by extremism in both US political parties. Dunn said he knows people who have tried to enter the United States legally but encountered 'horrendous' red tape.
People with skills and stable employment offers could become "assets to the country" instead of liabilities if it were easier for them to immigrate, Dunn said.
In Charlotte, North Carolina, engineer Rich Somora, 61, said he supports Trump's efforts to deport criminals but he also recognises that immigrants are increasingly doing key jobs that US citizens don't want to do, such as building construction.
'If somebody's contributing, give them a pathway, you know? I got no problem with that,' Somora said.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

US judge blocks Trump's attempts to bar international students from Harvard
US judge blocks Trump's attempts to bar international students from Harvard

Middle East Eye

timean hour ago

  • Middle East Eye

US judge blocks Trump's attempts to bar international students from Harvard

A federal judge on Monday blocked the US government's attempt to bar foreign nationals from studying at Harvard University, citing concerns about free speech. Massachusetts judge Allison Burroughs issued an injunction preventing President Donald Trump's administration from barring Harvard from enrolling international students amid an ongoing legal feud between the two sides. In her ruling, she said the case was about "core constitutional rights that must be safeguarded: freedom of thought, freedom of expression, and freedom of speech". 'Here, the government's misplaced efforts to control a reputable academic institution and squelch diverse viewpoints seemingly because they are, in some instances, opposed to this Administration's own views, threaten these rights,' Burroughs wrote Monday. 'To make matters worse, the government attempts to accomplish this, at least in part, on the backs of international students, with little thought to the consequences to them or, ultimately, to our own citizens,' she added. New MEE newsletter: Jerusalem Dispatch Sign up to get the latest insights and analysis on Israel-Palestine, alongside Turkey Unpacked and other MEE newsletters There are almost 7,000 international students at Harvard University, who make up more than a quarter of its student body. The preliminary injunction extends a temporary order the judge issued on 5 June that prevented the administration from enforcing a proclamation Trump signed on 4 June, which cited national security concerns to justify why the Ivy League institution could no longer enrol international students. Trump signed the proclamation after his administration had already frozen billions of dollars in funding for the university, threatened Harvard's tax-exempt status, and launched several investigations into the school. The proclamation prohibited foreign nationals from entering the US to study at Harvard or participate in exchange visitor programmes for a preliminary period of six months, and directed Secretary of State Marco Rubio to consider whether to revoke visas of international students already enrolled at Harvard. The ruling followed Trump's announcement on Truth Social on Friday that a deal with the university was imminent "over the next week or so", but it was unclear what any deal might entail. Escalation Attempting to revoke Harvard's ability to enrol international students is one of a string of measures aimed at curtailing the university's academic freedom and punish it for not capitulating to the Trump administration's demands. The battle really took off at the end of March when the Trump administration announced it was reviewing $9bn in federal funds and grants to Harvard. It said it would review more than $255.6m in current contracts and $8.7bn in grants spread over multiple years. 'Are they troublemakers?': Trump questions why Harvard has so many international students Read More » The administration accused the university of failing to adequately protect Jewish students on campus from antisemitic discrimination and harassment, in violation of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. On 3 April, the Trump administration sent an initial list of demands to 'right these wrongs', as part of its crackdown on what it calls antisemitism on campuses across the US, referring to the widespread campus protests against Israel's war on Gaza. Then, on 11 April, the Federal Task Force to Combat Antisemitism sent Harvard an expanded list of demands - such as reporting foreign students for code violations, reforming its governance and leadership, discontinuing its diversity, equity, and inclusion programmes, and changing its hiring and admission policies, especially for international students.. In response to the expanded list of demands, the institution took a stand against the Trump administration, saying in a letter issued by Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan LLP and King & Spalding LLP that "the university will not surrender its independence or relinquish its constitutional rights'. The Trump administration then escalated its attack on Harvard with a $2.3bn federal funding freeze, which represents 35.9 percent of Harvard's $6.4bn operating expenses. Then, the US Department of Health and Human Services said that it was terminating $60m in federal grants to the university, saying it failed to address antisemitic harassment and ethnic discrimination on campus. While Monday's court decision represents a victory for Harvard, it is still embroiled in a legal war with the government that is not over yet.

Trump doesn't think Iran deal needed after facilities ‘blown up to kingdom come'
Trump doesn't think Iran deal needed after facilities ‘blown up to kingdom come'

Middle East Eye

timean hour ago

  • Middle East Eye

Trump doesn't think Iran deal needed after facilities ‘blown up to kingdom come'

US President Donald Trump said on Wednesday that his administration plans to resume talks with Iran next week, but he doesn't care if a nuclear agreement is signed because Iran's facilities have been 'blown up to kingdom come'. 'We are going to talk to them next week, with Iran. We may sign an agreement. I don't know…I don't care if I have an agreement or not,' he said. 'The only thing we would be asking for is what we were asking for before…we want no nuclear, but we destroyed the nuclear… it's blown up to kingdom come. I don't care very strongly about it. If we got a document, it wouldn't be bad.' Trump's comments during a Nato summit in the Netherlands come amid conflicting reports about the damage US strikes did to Iran's Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan nuclear facilities over the weekend. On Wednesday, Iran's foreign ministry spokesman Esmail Baghaei said the country's nuclear facilities had been 'badly damaged' by the American strikes. New MEE newsletter: Jerusalem Dispatch Sign up to get the latest insights and analysis on Israel-Palestine, alongside Turkey Unpacked and other MEE newsletters But a day earlier, several US media outlets reported unnamed sources briefed on a battle damage assessment by the Defence Intelligence Agency that claimed the US strikes had only set Iran's programme back a few months. CNN cited one source as saying that some of Iran's centrifuges were 'intact'. Trump confirmed the leak was legitimate, but accused American media outlets of misrepresenting the assessment. 'The document said 'it could be limited or it could be very severe [damage]'… and you didn't choose to put that,' he said, addressing a CNN reporter. CNN was the first to report the leak. Trump said the US received more intelligence about the damage after the report, including by speaking with sources on the ground in Iran with access to Iran's nuclear programme. What the Israel-Iran-US conflict taught Pakistan Read More » 'We have also spoken to people who have seen the site. The site is obliterated. Everything nuclear is down there. They didn't take it out,' he said. Trump was likely referring to reports that Iran was able to move a stockpile of uranium from sites before the US struck them. An Arab official briefed on the matter previously told Middle East Eye that Iran had received advance warning of the US strikes. Amwaj Media first reported that Tehran was notified before the US attacked. The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) said that just five days into the war, its inspectors lost track of Iran's 409 kilograms of highly enriched uranium. That amount, which could be easily transported in a container by truck, is enough for 10 nuclear warheads if Iran were to pursue weaponisation. Before Israel's attack, Iran and the US were in talks to curb the Islamic Republic's nuclear programme in exchange for sanctions relief. Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian said on Tuesday that his country was willing to return to negotiations over its nuclear programme, according to state media. Since launching strikes on Iran over the weekend, Trump has moved to de-escalate tensions. He thanked Iran on Monday for providing advance notice about its retaliatory strike on the US's al-Udeid military base in Qatar. Trump announced a ceasefire to the war a few hours after the attack. On Tuesday, he lashed out at both Israel and Iran when it appeared to wobble, saying the two foes "have been fighting so long and so hard that they don't know what the fuck they're doing'. Speaking at the Nato summit, Trump said both Iran and Israel were 'tired [and] exhausted' and 'satisfied to go home and get out'. He also said he would have no problem with Iran selling its oil to China. The US slapped sanctions on Iran's oil sales to China during the nuclear talks. 'They just had a war. They fought it bravely. They are in the oil business…they are going to need money to put that country back into shape….If they are going to sell oil, they are going to sell oil,' Trump said.

With defence spending set to rise, Trump reassures NATO allies
With defence spending set to rise, Trump reassures NATO allies

Dubai Eye

timean hour ago

  • Dubai Eye

With defence spending set to rise, Trump reassures NATO allies

NATO leaders were set to sign up on Wednesday to a big increase in defence spending at a short summit tailor-made for US President Donald Trump, who struck a reassuring tone on his commitment to protecting fellow members of the alliance. The summit is expected to endorse a higher defence spending goal of 5 per cent of GDP - a response to a demand by Trump and to Europeans' fears that Russia poses a growing threat to their security following the 2022 invasion of Ukraine. NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte acknowledged that it was not easy for European countries and Canada to find the extra money but said it was vital to do so. "There is absolute conviction with my colleagues at the table that, given this threat from the Russians, given the international security situation, there is no alternative," he told reporters. DEBATE OVER NATO MUTUAL DEFENCE PLEDGE Speaking to media before the summit opened, Trump played down concerns over his commitment to mutual defence among allies as set out by Article 5 of NATO's charter, saying: "We're with them all the way." The debate has been fuelled by Trump's own comments en route to the summit on Tuesday. Speaking to reporters aboard Air Force One, he had said there were "numerous definitions" of the clause. Finnish President Alexander Stubb, whose country borders Russia and joined NATO two years ago, said the alliance was evolving. "I think we're witnessing the birth of a new NATO, which means a more balanced NATO and a NATO which has more European responsibility," he told reporters. SPENDING TO JUMP BY HUNDREDS OF BILLIONS The new spending target - to be achieved over the next 10 years - is a jump worth hundreds of billions of dollars a year from the current goal of 2 per cent of GDP, although it will be measured differently. Countries would spend 3.5 per cent of GDP on core defence - such as troops and weapons - and 1.5 per cent on broader defence-related measures such as cyber security, protecting pipelines and adapting roads and bridges to handle heavy military vehicles. All NATO members have backed a statement enshrining the target, although Spain declared it does not need to meet the goal and can meet its commitments by spending much less. Rutte disputes that but accepted a diplomatic fudge with Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez as part of his efforts to give Trump a diplomatic victory and make the summit go smoothly. Spain said on Wednesday that it did not expect its stance to have any repercussions. TRUMP TO MEET ZELENSKYY Rutte has kept the summit and its final statement short and focused on the spending pledge to try to avert any friction with Trump. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy had to settle for attending the pre-summit dinner on Tuesday evening rather than the main meeting on Wednesday, although he was set to meet Trump separately. Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban diluted the display of unity when he told reporters that NATO had no business in Ukraine and that Russia was not strong enough to represent a real threat to NATO. The Kremlin has accused NATO of being on a path of rampant militarisation and portraying Russia as a "fiend of hell" in order to justify its big increase in defence spending.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store