Republican, independent voters react positively to Trump declaring US ‘woke no longer'
In two separate dial tests administered by maslansky + partners' Lee Carter for Fox News Digital on Tuesday night, the three sets of voters indicated how they felt about the two prominent moments from the address as they happened.
The two most notable results showed that both Republican and independent voters reacted very favorably to Trump's proclamation that the U.S. will be "woke no longer," while Democratic voters revealed their negative feelings towards his statement on there being two genders.
During the first test, a clip was shown of Trump saying, "We've ended the tyranny of so-called diversity, equity and inclusion policies all across the entire federal government and, indeed, the private sector and our military. And our country will be woke no longer." As he said those words, the red line representing Republican voters shot up and stayed well above the neutral position.
He continued, saying, "We believe that whether you are a doctor, an accountant, a lawyer or an air traffic controller, you should be hired and promoted based on skill and competence, not race or gender. Very important." The red line stayed high, and even climbed slightly.
Meanwhile, the yellow line representing independents – though it shot up somewhat slower – eventually climbed to a highly positive point where it met the red line and remained there for the rest of Trump's statement.
Democrats, however, remained neutral and only slightly negative towards Trump's comments on wokeness. Their blue line dipped just below the neutral mark on the chart and stayed there throughout the president's point.
Carter gave her analysis of this test, stating, "Republicans and independents celebrated this moment. So many said it's about time. Many called back his line about common sense rulings, saying things like, 'Welcome Back... Common Sense!'"
For the second test, the group listened as Trump said, "I signed an order making it the official policy of the United States government that there are only two genders, male and female."
The red line climbed to a high point quickly and remained there, showing that Republicans favored the words. A similar dynamic could be seen among independent voters, as the yellow line started climbing slowly but eventually shot up almost to the red when Trump said "two genders."
The blue Democratic line stayed neutral for a moment and then dipped a bit into the negative zone in response to the president's words.
"AGAIN, [Republicans] and INDs celebrated while their Dem counterparts scowled, saying things like, 'Good gawd. Trump is bringing this country back to the dark ages,'" Carter said, giving her analysis.
She did offer a couple of observations about the dial tests overall, saying, "Dems barely reacted – wasn't dialing on the floor like we usually see. They were just neutral. It's like they weren't willing to listen to him at all. Independents behaved much more like Republicans than Democrats."
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Boston Globe
12 minutes ago
- Boston Globe
Meet the Harvard Law alum at the center of the White House's campaign against Harvard
To get Harvard to that point, the administration has implemented a multipronged pressure campaign that includes canceling Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up Mailman, a 2015 law school graduate, is the White House's senior policy strategist and a deputy assistant to the president. She is a right hand to deputy chief of staff Stephen Miller, atop the nerve center of the White House on Trump's policy priorities. That includes Trump's current campaign against Harvard and other universities under the stated objective of ending diversity policies the administration considers discriminatory and combating antisemitism, particularly the protests and environment on campuses since Hamas's 2023 attack on Israel and the ensuing war in Gaza. Advertisement While Mailman credits other officials across the administration with coming up with many of the measures so far, she coordinates and spearheads the execution of Trump's vision and ideas. Advertisement Her role as a central player in the high-stakes confrontation has emerged from interviews, press accounts, and internal documents unearthed during legal challenges to the administration's canceling of funding. Mailman, 37, declined to discuss what the administration specifically wants from Harvard, but she pointed to other universities' settlements as a roadmap. 'There's almost a fear of [reaching an agreement] because it might be seen as too pro-Trump,' Mailman said. 'And it's like, don't be scared. Penn survived it. Columbia survived it.' Columbia University, an early target of the administration, this week Harvard has taken and has sued the government over canceled research funding and efforts to bar international students. Mailman cited the Columbia agreement as showing the administration's priorities: 'quality and fairness, a commitment to ending racial hierarchies, but an equal commitment to academic freedom and freedom of speech.' Advertisement 'There is nothing in that deal that would constrain academic freedom or freedom of speech, or micromanage the university,' she continued. Harvard declined to comment on Mailman or the negotiations. Though she makes frequent media appearances, Mailman is a lesser-known member of the administration. A Trump veteran from his first term, she left Washington after he left office, eventually settling with her husband and two small children in Texas, where her family still lives. She initially resisted joining the White House again, but Miller recruited her back and she commutes between D.C. and Texas each week. She will soon be stepping down from her current role and moving back home, but she intends to continue working for the administration on issues including higher education in a more limited capacity. Interviews with eight former classmates, friends, and former colleagues describe Mailman as a smart, energetic, amiable, driven person who doesn't suffer fools. They describe her as an intellectual conservative who is passionate about effectuating change in the world, but not a longtime activist looking for a political career. Her entree into Trump's West Wing came after a Harvard Law School classmate connected her with the administration. She was working for a law firm in Denver after an appellate clerkship when a fellow Harvard Law alum reached out and notified her that his colleague, Rob Porter and Trump's new staff secretary, was hiring. 'He texted me and said, 'Do you want to work in the center of the universe?'' Mailman recalled. 'And I said, 'I hate New York,' and he said 'No, the White House.' And that was it.' Advertisement Derek Lyons, Mailman's former colleague from the first administration, said she impressed the team immediately with her résumé, interview, and readiness to move to D.C. from Denver within days of getting a job in Porter's office. 'She won people over with high competence, enormous drive, strong work ethic, and high energy,' Lyons said. 'She was often seen as somebody who could execute at a very high level under intense time constraints. She's an excellent lawyer, but also understands policy nuances and political nuances.' A Kansas native 'who came from nothing from the middle of nowhere,' as she describes it, Mailman has a bachelor's degree from the University of Kansas, served two years with Teach for America, and has a master's degree in elementary education and teaching from the University of Missouri-St. Louis. She entered Harvard Law School in 2012 and became president of the school's chapter of the Mailman said that during her time at Harvard, the class did not feel divided by partisanship even though students had different leanings, a sentiment shared by her classmates who spoke to the Globe. Mailman had and maintains friendships with political liberals. Advertisement In the years since, however, she said Harvard and other top institutions have lost their way, coddling students and 'glorifying victimization' to create a culture that isn't producing resilient leaders. She is particularly passionate about rooting out diversity initiatives — which some in her orbit attribute in part to her own self-made biography, strong belief in meritocracy, and distaste for elitism — as well as advocating for barring transgender people from domains historically reserved for women. Between administrations, she litigated on that issue with the Independent Women's Forum, a conservative-leaning advocacy organization. She authored She didn't seek out her role in the Harvard talks, but nevertheless embraces it. Ultimately, she said, the administration and Harvard largely want the same things. 'I think Harvard thinks that it is excellent, I think it wants to be excellent, I think it knows what excellence looks like,' Mailman said. 'I think there's some desire to not be seen as a Trump lackey or bend the knee to Trump, and like, whatever, do what you need to do to have the [messaging] that you need. 'But at the end of the day, I think it should be the case that our vision and their vision is the same, which is: How do we create the next generation of great leaders, science, and medicine.' Mike Damiano of the Globe staff contributed to this report. Tal Kopan can be reached at
San Francisco Chronicle
12 minutes ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
Lumbee tribe of North Carolina sees politics snarl recognition by Washington
Since the 1980s, the Lumbee Tribe has lobbied Congress to acknowledge it as a sovereign nation. There was renewed hope last year when both major party candidates in the presidential election promised to intervene on behalf of the Lumbee. In his first week in office, President Donald Trump appeared to be making good on his endorsement. He issued an executive order directing the Interior Department to create a plan for federal recognition, a move Lumbee Chairman John Lowery called a 'significant step forward.' But several months later, it remains unclear if Trump will take further action. The plan was submitted to the White House in April, according to the Interior Department. However, a White House official told The Associated Press last week that the Lumbee will have to achieve its goal through legislation — which the Interior Department also confirmed. 'We anticipate the tribe will work with Congress on a path forward to be formally recognized,' Interior spokesperson Elizabeth Peace said in a statement. Federal acknowledgement comes with a bevy of resources owed to tribal nations through treaty rights and acts of Congress, including health care through the Indian Health Service, access to certain federal grants, and the ability to create a land base such as reservations through the land-to-trust process. Many of the 574 federally recognized tribes in the U.S. have been acknowledged through legislation. Dozens more have been recognized through the Office of Federal Acknowledgement, which determines if applicants have a documented history of political and social existence as a tribe. Critics of the Lumbee Tribe, including several tribal nations, argue that it has not been able to prove its historic and genealogical claims and it should do so through the formal federal process. The tribe is recognized by the state of North Carolina. 'The gaps in the Lumbee's claims are staggering,' said Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians Principal Chief Michell Hicks. He said the Lumbee have yet to show who they descend from and that recognizing them through legislation would open the door for fraudulent groups to gain federal acknowledgement. 'Congress wouldn't be recognizing a tribe, it would be manufacturing one,' he said. Lowery argues that the Lumbee can prove who they descend from but that the application and vetting process through the Office of Federal Acknowledgement is too long and arduous and could take decades complete. He has been working closely with U.S. Sen. Thom Tillis of North Carolina to pass a bill that would federally recognize the Lumbee Tribe. 'For anyone, from any tribe, to somehow think that a tribe that receives federal recognition via legislation is somehow circumventing the process,' Lowery said, 'is being disingenuous.' The Lumbee Tribe applied for recognition in 1987. But Arlinda Locklear, a Lumbee attorney who has worked on the issue for decades, said staff at the Office of Federal Acknowledgement offered conflicting opinions because a 1956 congressional act acknowledged the Lumbee exist but denied them access to federal resources. She said they asked the office to issue a formal opinion regarding the 1956 bill. 'If we're not eligible then tell us at the beginning so we can ask for it from Congress,' she said. The Office of Federal Acknowledgement determined the Lumbee Tribe was ineligible for recognition, but that decision was reversed in 2016 by Interior's Office of the Solicitor. Despite being allowed to reapply since 2016, both Locklear and Lowery said that process remains too lengthy and have opted instead to urge Congress to pass legislation. That could prove difficult in the current climate, as Trump and Republicans lawmakers are slashing federal spending. In 2011, the Congressional Budget Office estimated that recognizing the Lumbee Tribe and providing the necessary federal resources would cost the U.S. more than $840 million in the first four years. A 2022 CBO estimate put that number at more than $360 million. This month, a Brookings Institution report found that the Trump administration's directive to freeze federal grants could disrupt $24 billion that go to tribes. Tillis, the author of the bill, has also been the subject of the Trump's ire recently, after he voted against the president's tax bill in June. Trump threatened to campaign against him, and Tillis said he would not seek reelection. His bill, the Lumbee Fairness Act, was referred to the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs in January. Sen. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, who chairs the committee, said she will work with Tillis on the bill. David Wilkins, a Lumbee author and professor at the University of Richmond, has advocated for federal recognition for decades. But, he said the Lumbee face opposition across Indian Country, and he's concerned that gaining it with Trump's endorsement will add to that. 'The way he's battering Indian Country with his cuts or with his layoffs,' Wilkins said. 'If we do slip through because Trump convinces his Secretary of Interior to either expedite the acknowledgement process or get Congress to find a move on the Lumbee bill and get it through, I worry about how that's going to be received in Indian Country.'
New York Times
13 minutes ago
- New York Times
Trump's Trip to Scotland Echoes an Earlier Visit, When He Applauded Brexit
On a sunny June morning eight years ago, Donald J. Trump arrived at his golf resort in Scotland, the day after Britain voted to leave the European Union. At that time, he took credit for predicting Brexit and said it foretold victory in the insurgent presidential campaign he was mounting back home. On Friday, a second-term President Trump returned to that resort, Trump Turnberry, with a good part of what he said in 2016 now a reality. He had correctly claimed that the political forces that drove Brexit went beyond a single country. Five months after that visit, Mr. Trump captured the White House, having played to anxieties about immigration in ways that echoed the 'Vote Leave' campaign. Yet in Britain, history has diverged from Mr. Trump's vision in important respects. Polls show that close to 60 percent of Britons now believe Brexit was a mistake. Prime Minister Keir Starmer has made mending relations with the European Union one of the priorities of his Labour government. The populist wave that Mr. Trump predicted would wash across Europe has ebbed and flowed, leaving a fragmented political landscape with a handful of populist leaders whose fortunes are mixed. Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni of Italy is on the rise, but Prime Minister Viktor Orban of Hungary is struggling. 'Populism is still a relatively limited phenomenon,' said Kim Darroch, who was Britain's ambassador to the United States during Mr. Trump's first term. 'Brexit happened, but it's very hard to argue, even by its most ardent proponents, that it has been anything other than a comprehensive disaster.' Want all of The Times? Subscribe.
