Once the heart of President Donald Trump’s political base, the Midwest — the region he promised to revive with factory jobs and “America First” trade policies — is showing signs of disillusionment.
The latest TIPP Insights poll, conducted between September 30 and October 2, found Trump’s favorability in the Midwest at 40 percent favorable and 49 percent unfavorable, one of his weakest showings nationwide. The decline is striking given that Trump has long positioned himself as a champion of blue-collar workers and has frequently touted his record of reviving the region’s industrial economy.
“I think of the Midwest as quintessentially the most ‘purple’ or swingy region in national politics,” J. Miles Coleman, associate editor of Sabato’s Crystal Ball at the University of Virginia Center for Politics, told Newsweek. “With that, it’s not too surprising to me that Trump’s approval there, -9, is roughly in line with where he is nationally.”
Trump’s highest favorability was recorded in the Northeast (47 percent favorable, 43 percent unfavorable) — an unexpected result for one of the nation’s most liberal regions. He also performed well in the South (46 percent favorable, 43 percent unfavorable), where Republican registration remains strong.
The West was Trump’s least favorable region, with 38 percent viewing him positively and 50 percent negatively.
The Midwest at the Heart of Trump’s 2024 Strategy
The Midwest was central to Trump’s 2024 re-election campaign. He won eight of the 12 Midwestern states, flipping both Michigan and Wisconsin — two states he had narrowly lost in 2020. In Wisconsin, Trump won 49.6 percent of the vote to Kamala Harris’s 48.7 percent, while in Michigan he became the first Republican to carry the state twice since Ronald Reagan.
His choice of Ohio Senator JD Vance as his running mate underscored the region’s political importance. Announcing the pick, Trump said Vance “will be strongly focused on … the American Workers and Farmers in Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin, Ohio, Minnesota, and far beyond.”
At the time, Anthony Zurcher, the BBC’s North America correspondent, wrote that “the pick suggests Trump knows this election will be won and lost in a handful of industrial Midwest battleground states.”
And ahead of that announcement, Angelia Wilson, a politics professor at the University of Manchester, England, told Newsweek: “Any reasonable political strategy points to Vance and the need to ensure a solid win in Ohio and the Rustbelt.”
Trump’s Midwest Promise
Throughout the 2024 campaign, Trump returned repeatedly to the theme that only he could restore the region’s lost industrial power. In Saginaw, Michigan, he vowed to make the state once again the “car capital of the world,” blasting what he called “energy policies that are stripping jobs” from American workers. “Michigan, more than any other state, has lost 60 percent of your automobile business over the years,” he said.
In Mosinee, Wisconsin, Trump leaned on trade threats as a key policy tool. Speaking at a rally, he warned of “unprecedented tariffs” against foreign competitors and argued that immigrants were displacing U.S. workers — framing his agenda as a defense of the industrial Midwest, Reuters reported.
And in one of his most direct economic moves, Trump threatened 200 percent tariffs on John Deere if the agricultural giant shifted production to Mexico, a signal to Midwestern manufacturers that his “America First” stance still applied to them.
Tariffs, Inflation, and the New Economic Anxiety
But while Trump’s message of protectionism once resonated deeply across the Midwest, cracks are beginning to show. Many farmers and manufacturers are now feeling the pinch of tariffs that have reduced exports and driven down crop prices.
“There have been constant headlines of farmers being caught in the middle of Trump’s tariff fights, so that might be an especially salient issue in the Midwest,” Coleman said.
Trump has dramatically expanded U.S. tariffs since returning to office, marking one of the most sweeping protectionist shifts in decades. In February 2025, he imposed new duties of 25 percent on imports from Canada and Mexico and 10 percent on Chinese imports, citing national security concerns related to drug trafficking and border security, according to a White House fact sheet.
Two months later, Trump issued Executive Order 14257, known as “Liberation Day,” introducing a 10 percent baseline tariff on nearly all imports and authorizing higher duties — in some cases up to 50 percent — on goods from countries accused of unfair trade practices. The order also revoked the de minimis exemption that had allowed low-value imports to enter the U.S. tariff-free, and expanded tariffs under existing laws such as Section 232 and the International Emergency Economic Powers Act. The measures targeted key industries including autos, steel and aluminum.
The administration has defended the tariffs as essential to rebuilding American manufacturing and protecting domestic jobs. But economists have warned of steep costs. The Penn Wharton Budget Model estimated the tariffs could reduce long-run GDP by six percent and lower wages by five percent, costing a typical middle-income household about $22,000 in lifetime income losses. The group also projected that the tariffs could raise between $4.5 and $5.2 trillion in federal revenue over the next decade — gains that could be offset by inflation and supply chain disruptions.
For farmers, tariffs have been a thorn in their side since 2017, when Trump first imposed tariffs on key trading partners.
Since then, American farmers have struggled with the loss of China as the top buyer of U.S. soybeans and a major market for corn. Exports of soybeans — America’s largest grain export by value — recently fell to a 20-year low, deepening fears that China may not purchase any U.S. grain this season.
“With [tariffs] in place, we are not competitive with soybeans from Brazil,” Virginia Houston, director of government affairs at the American Soybean Association, told The Guardian. “No market can match China’s demand for soybeans. Right now, there is a 20 percent retaliatory duty from China.”
Trump has said little publicly about the impact on farmers, though in August he demanded on Truth Social that China quadruple its soybean purchases. Chinese officials have instead pledged to boost domestic production by 38 percent by 2034, and U.S. farm groups say no new Chinese orders have been placed for the upcoming season.
Despite the financial pain, many rural voters continue to back Trump, emphasizing that their support isn’t determined by a single issue like tariffs.
“Tariffs are probably something that will help in the long run,” Ohio farmer Brian Harbage, told The Guardian, acknowledging current export difficulties and economic uncertainty.
To ease the strain, the Trump administration included $60 billion in farm subsidies in its latest tax bill, but critics argue the money favors large producers over family farms. Meanwhile, falling commodity prices, smaller cattle herds, and declining ethanol production have further weakened the sector.
“The farm economy is in a much tougher place than where we were in 2018,” Houston said. “Prices have gone down while inputs – seed, fertilizer, chemicals, land and equipment – continue to go up.”
Harbage said if Trump visited his farm, his message would be simple: “The exports is number one. That’s the number one fix. We have to get rid of what we’re growing, or we have to be able to use it. China, Mexico and Canada – we export $83 billion worth of commodities to them a year. So if they’re not buying, we’re stuck with our crop.”
Renewable Energy Rift
Trump’s opposition to renewable energy subsidies is also creating unease among farmers.
In Iowa, where nearly two-thirds of electricity comes from wind and more than 50 wind-related companies operate, the end of federal incentives under Trump’s “One Big Beautiful Bill” has thrown the industry into turmoil. The cuts have imperiled $22 billion in wind investments and tens of thousands of jobs tied to wind manufacturing and land leases. Wind farms are the top taxpayer in a third of Iowa’s counties, contributing up to 55 percent of local property taxes and $91.4 million in annual lease payments to farmers, according to Power Up Iowa.
Farmers and local officials warn that Trump’s policies threaten this economic lifeline. “I don’t know how anybody in good faith could vote against alternative energy if they’re elected by the people in Iowa,” Fort Madison Mayor Matt Mohrfeld, told Politico, calling the cuts “a crucial mistake.”
Republicans argue that wind and solar are now “mature industries” that no longer need government help. But clean energy developers and local leaders say the rollback is already causing uncertainty, job losses, and halted projects — including the shutdown of Iowa wind manufacturer TPI Composites, which cited “industry-wide pressures” after losing federal support.
Trump Energy Secretary Chris Wright has argued that heavy federal government spending on renewable energy is “nonsensical.”
https://www.newsweek.com/the-midwest-has-turned-on-trump-10860327
In recent months more than one friend has said to me “Don’t you think Trump is doing great?” On each occasion my friend seemed perplexed when I say “No, he is not doing great.”
When I get into the reasons — management style, rhetoric, policies and the constant self massaging of an outsized and out of control ego — my friends are further perplexed. Talk about Trump’s numbers in the polls invariably leads to a counterpunch that the polls are always wrong or that a specific poll is rigged to make Trump look bad.
So for all my MAGA friends who think things are going great, let’s put some facts on the record. This is not about one poll from an organization that leans left. This is about multiple polls from multiple respected outlets.
This is undoubtedly where American public opinion is, and MAGA and the White House needs to accept it and change accordingly. Failure to do so will effectively end the Trump administration with Democratic majorities in the Congress issuing subpoenas on a daily basis.
The current state of the Democratic Party is the best thing Republicans have going for us as we approach the 2026 midterm election. High-ranking elected Democratic officials seem incapable of coherently and concisely explaining what their party stands for. Vehement opposition to everything Trump says or does is not a winning message.
In a normal political environment, Republicans would be staring at a disastrous showing. Lucky for them 2026, as of now, does not look like it is going to be a normal political environment. I would caution my fellow Republicans that placing our electoral destiny in the hands of our opponents and hoping they continue to screw up is not a strategy with which any of us should be comfortable.
The president’s overall approval in the polls is consistently underwater, meaning his disapproval exceeds his approval. That would not be terribly concerning until you dig into the specifics as to why that is.
Many polls ask if respondents approve or disapprove on the economy, inflation, tariffs, immigration, deportations, crime control, national guard in cities. On all of those specific policy issues Trump is underwater, on most questions significantly, meaning a majority disapprove.
I am not talking about one poll here where the pro and anti-Trump split is close. The polls are close to unanimous on the lack of popularity of Trump administration policies.
Outside of border control, for which Trump deserves great credit and liberals still do not understand was a major factor in their 2024 defeat, Trump’s actions and policies do not receive majority support. In fact, they are not close to earning majority support.
In the September Washington Post poll, 70 percent of respondents said tariffs are increasing the prices they pay for basic necessities. Seventy percent! Also in that same poll, by a margin of 59 percent to 40 percent, respondents disapprove of how Trump is handling the economy. That 70 percent is referring to the tariffs which are the basis of the Trump administration’s economic plan for America.
Hello: Is anyone in the White House awake?
Part of Trump’s problem is that when he talks about the economy, he talks about how tariffs will be great for American consumers. What he sees as positive voters overwhelmingly see as a negative. Trump’s overall lack of attention to the economy, inflation and consumer sentiment is a huge negative for the administration.
The administration’s political success depends a lot more on the price of coffee and ground beef than it does on Jimmy Kimmel’s latest stupid comment. The Trump administration requires a significant mid-course correction.
The president’s predisposition is to take things to the extreme. When he does that with his rhetoric, Americans can laugh it off. When he does that with policy it is more difficult to write it off.
President Trump sees himself as an agent of change who wants to change America into his likeness. Americans are not buying the president’s vision of what he wants the future to have in store for them.
Constitutional conservatives are sounding alarm bells about the administration’s effort to suppress criticism. The White House and its MAGA supporters need to cut back on their goals, and especially their tactics, and soon.
As President Reagan used to say “The person who agrees with you 80 percent of the time is a friend and ally, not a 20 percent traitor.”
Trump needs to quickly recalibrate his desires down from 100 percent to 80 percent. If he fails to do so, MAGA will fade into political history alongside the Square Deal, the Fair Deal, the New Frontier and a Thousand Points of Light, none of which left America with anything resembling an identifiable political constituency.
https://thehill.com/opinion/campaign/5545377-trump-approval-rating-decline
President Donald Trump told a group of reporters on Thursday that he is considering forcibly relocating 2026 World Cup matches out of cities if he believes they are “dangerous” — even though he is not in charge of FIFA and doesn’t have the authority to relocate World Cup matches — and specifically mentioned Chicago as a potential example, even though Chicago is not scheduled to host any World Cup matches in the first place.
“If I think it’s not safe, we’re going to move it out of that city,” said Trump. “If, like, the governor of Illinois, who is, look, you know, last week, between last week and the week before, 11 murders, and 38 people were shot. And he gets up and says, ‘this is a very safe,’ and then he says crime is better.”
“The reason crime is better is because Kash [Patel] put, about five months ago, a whole team of FBI there to get ready for when we go in, and they’ve lowered it a little bit,” he said. “You know, 20, 25 percent, which isn’t good enough, but it’s a good start. But that was only put there because they’re preparing for us to go in. And they’ve done, by the way, they’ve done a good job. So then Pritzker gets up, ‘We’ve lowered crime 25…’ It’s because the FBI was there.”
“So, no, if any city we think is going to be even a little bit dangerous for the World Cup, or for the Olympics, you know, when they have Olympic overthrow, right, but for the World Cup in particular, because they’re playing in so many cities, we won’t allow it to go — we’ll move it around a little,” Trump continued. “But I hope that’s not going to happen.”
Trump has repeatedly cited the crime rate in Chicago — often wildly exaggerating it — as a possible pretext to sending in federal troops to keep order, much the way he did in Los Angeles to crack down on protests against his mass deportation policies.
Illinois Gov. J.B. Pritzker has repeatedly condemned Trump’s threats against his state’s most populous city, and indicated he will strenuously oppose any military occupation of his state.
Donald Trump has said he ate “whatever they hell they served us” during a banquet staged in his honour at Windsor Castle.
Trump said being with the “wonderful” King was the best part of his historic state visit to the UK, as he heaped praise on the royal family following his departure.
The US leader said he saw more paintings “than any human being has ever saw” and when asked what he ate at the Windsor Castle banquet staged in his honour, he said: “Whatever the hell they served us.”
Guests at the lavish event – attended by “the biggest people in the world” according to Mr Trump – were treated to Hampshire watercress panna cotta with parmesan shortbread and quail egg salad, followed by organic Norfolk chicken ballotine wrapped in courgettes, with a thyme and savoury infused jus.
Mr Trump, who is known to have a sweet tooth, is likely to have enjoyed the dessert – a bombe glacee cardinal, which is a vanilla ice cream bombe with Kentish raspberry sorbet interior with lightly poached Victoria plums.
The US President ‘s record has come under scrutiny after he renamed the Department of Defense as the Department of War to expel ‘wokism’.
He previously claimed the old name was ‘too defensive’ while the new title, last used in 1947, reverted to a time when ‘we won everything’ in wars.
The move drew criticism from Navy veteran and retired NASA astronaut Captain Mark Kelly, who said: ‘Only someone who avoided the draft would want to rename the Department of Defense to the Department of War.’
The historical evidence appears to back up Capt Kelly’s claim that the commander in chief avoided the draft in the 1960s.
Documents held in US archives show that he received student deferments while in college, followed by a medical exemption after graduating.
Trump, now 79, was assessed eight times for military service but was never enlisted, and was disqualified as a result of an armed forces physical examination, one of the records shows.
Although the exact reason is not stated, Trump has previously said that a bone spur — either on one or both of his heels — was the reason.
Another document only deepens the question marks over why he was not called up — referring to birth marks on both of his heels.
Professor David Dunn, chair in international politics at the University of Birmingham, said: ‘Trump refuses to release his medical records and he’s never had an operation to remove the bone spur, which suggests that it’s spurious.
‘His former lawyer Michael Cohen testified to Congress that Trump told him, “You think I’m stupid, I wasn’t going to Vietnam.”
‘The other aspect of this is the contempt Trump has shown to the military, such as his comment about the former Navy pilot John McCain, who was held in a prisoner of war camp, when he said, “I like people who weren’t captured.”
‘There’s a long history of Trump having a fraught relationship with the military and we can see within this his contempt of the notion of military service.’
Then US President Harry Truman established the agency’s name as the Department of Defense in 1949.
Although the current stamp is set out in law, the executive order introduces a ‘secondary title’, according to a White House document.
The Trump administration wants a ‘warrior ethos’ at the Pentagon and is ‘not interested in woke garbage or political correctness’, according to the Secretary of War Pete Hegseth, whose title has accordingly changed from Secretary of Defense.
US Presidents who avoided the draft?
Donald Trump, Bill Clinton, Joe Biden and George W. Bush all avoided service in Vietnam. Clinton received educational draft deferments while he was studying in England and W. Bush got a coveted spot in the 147th Texas Air National Guard as a pilot and was not eligible for the draft. Biden received student draft deferments and a ‘1-Y’, meaning he could only be drafted in a national emergency.
Dr Laura Smith, a specialist in American presidential history at the University of Oxford, told Metro: ‘While being labeled a “draft dodger” was once seen as political dynamite, the ability of politicians to become commander in chief regardless of their service seems to have become a trend, one that is likely to continue considering the unpopularity of America’s foreign interventions.
‘Trump justified his recent decision to return to the War label as somehow a return to glory days. However, the Defense Department has existed since the end of WWII – the entirety of the period of America’s existence as the global superpower.
‘The War Department existed from George Washington’s cabinet and oversaw the long period up until the end of the 19th Century, when America did not have the power to engage or effectively challenge Old World powers on the global stage as Britain still ruled the waves.
‘It seems that once again, this executive decision is made upon a rhetorical concept of history, rather than the facts.’
In addition to the rebranding — a costly endeavour involving changing signs and websites worldwide — Trump has promised to bring one-on-one combat to the White House next year in the shape of a UFC event.
For Dunn, there is a disconnect between the warrior image and reality contained in the service record documents.
‘We have to ask what Trump’s service record tells us about modern politics or modern America more broadly,’ he said.
‘It tells us that someone shown to have dodged the draft can be elected president, that it’s no block to service.
‘It’s about performativity; it seems Americans prefer candidates, or presidents, who are performative rather than substantive.
Then US President Harry Truman established the agency’s name as the Department of Defense in 1949.
Although the current stamp is set out in law, the executive order introduces a ‘secondary title’, according to a White House document.
The Trump administration wants a ‘warrior ethos’ at the Pentagon and is ‘not interested in woke garbage or political correctness’, according to the Secretary of War Pete Hegseth, whose title has accordingly changed from Secretary of Defense.
In addition to the rebranding — a costly endeavour involving changing signs and websites worldwide — Trump has promised to bring one-on-one combat to the White House next year in the shape of a UFC event.
For Dunn, there is a disconnect between the warrior image and reality contained in the service record documents.
‘We have to ask what Trump’s service record tells us about modern politics or modern America more broadly,’ he said.
‘It tells us that someone shown to have dodged the draft can be elected president, that it’s no block to service.
‘It’s about performativity; it seems Americans prefer candidates, or presidents, who are performative rather than substantive.
‘What we have now with the Department of War is in marked contrast to the fact that Trump is appeasing Vladimir Putin, who is the enemy of human rights, international law and is wanted for war crimes.
‘It’s sacrificed for the performativity of Trump cos-playing Ronald Reagan and pretending to be this grand statesman on the world stage.’
Trump had five deferments: four times as a student and once for medical reasons, assumed to be because of one or more bone spurs.
In 2018, the daughters of New York foot doctor Dr Larry Braunstein said that he had diagnosed the future president with the condition to help him avoid the draft as a ‘favour’ to his property mogul father, Fred Trump.
The podiatrist is said to have made the diagnosis in the 1960s while he was working out of an office owned by the Trump family.
Trump Jnr, who graduated from New York Military Academy, would say many years later that a doctor provided a ‘very strong letter’ about the condition, but that he could not recall the person’s name.
Bone spurs are bony lumps that grow around joints and can affect movement or put pressure on nerves.
As far as high school went, they did not seem to have stopped Trump playing sports including baseball, football and soccer.
He also studied at Fordham University and the University of Pennsylvania, with the medical disqualification covering him after he graduated.
Seasoned White House watcher Mike Tappin was in the US in 1968 during the nation’s bloodiest year in Vietnam, when it lost almost 17,000 personnel.
Trump’s record at the time shows he was only classified as being available for service for four months before being marked 1-Y — which is only given to men deemed to qualify for national service ‘in times of national emergency.’
In 1972, he was finally marked 4-F, which means not qualified, an amendment that may have been caused by the abolition of the 1-Y category.
‘Trump graduated in 1968 when the war in Vietnam was at its height, so he should have been eligible for military service as were other men of his age,’ Tappin said.
‘But of course, the history of American politics shows rich people got out of it. Another famous example of a president who avoided the draft is Bill Clinton.
‘Senator Tammy Duckworth, a Congressional Medal of Honor holder who was seriously injured in Iraq, publicly called Trump “cadet bone spurs” and a draft dodger.
‘So one could make an argument that Michael Cohen’s words in the Senate were true; Trump did not want to go to Vietnam.’
Tappin, honorary fellow at Keele University and co-author of American Politics Today, is among the commentators who believe that Trump’s avoidance of the draft was down to his multi-millionaire father.
‘One can draw the conclusion that his father Fred bought him the deferment,’ he said.
Tappin also defended Truman’s original emphasis on defence, not war.
‘Trump has said that the Defense Department “went woke”,’ he said.
‘Truman was anything but woke.
‘He served in the military in the First World War, he was a major, and he was a solid American president. He would be turning in his grave if he knew what Trump has said about his decision.’
Trump has said in an interview that he had ‘spurs’ in the back of his feet, which at the time ‘prevented me from walking long distances.’
He has also said that he had a ‘very, very high draft number’ in 1969 which the military draft lottery did not get near to, apparently as it worked in ascending order through a list of eligible men.
In 2019, Trump told Piers Morgan he was ‘never a fan’ of the Vietnam War but would have been happy and honoured to have served.
US Presidents who avoided the draft?
Donald Trump, Bill Clinton, Joe Biden and George W. Bush all avoided service in Vietnam. Clinton received educational draft deferments while he was studying in England and W. Bush got a coveted spot in the 147th Texas Air National Guard as a pilot and was not eligible for the draft. Biden received student draft deferments and a ‘1-Y’, meaning he could only be drafted in a national emergency.
Dr Laura Smith, a specialist in American presidential history at the University of Oxford, told Metro: ‘While being labeled a “draft dodger” was once seen as political dynamite, the ability of politicians to become commander in chief regardless of their service seems to have become a trend, one that is likely to continue considering the unpopularity of America’s foreign interventions.
‘Trump justified his recent decision to return to the War label as somehow a return to glory days. However, the Defense Department has existed since the end of WWII – the entirety of the period of America’s existence as the global superpower.
‘The War Department existed from George Washington’s cabinet and oversaw the long period up until the end of the 19th Century, when America did not have the power to engage or effectively challenge Old World powers on the global stage as Britain still ruled the waves.
‘It seems that once again, this executive decision is made upon a rhetorical concept of history, rather than the facts.’
From universities to museums, President Donald Trump is making a concerted effort to purge institutions of what MAGA Republicans call a “woke” version of U.S. history.
But historians and Trump opponents are pushing back, stressing that discussing the darker side of U.S. history is not bashing the United States but rather, is an effort to learn from mistakes of the past and avoid repeating them. Presidential historian Jon Meacham, a frequent guest on MSNBC, often describes frank discussions as part of the journey toward a “more perfect union.”
In an opinion column published by The Guardian on September 4, Sidney Blumenthal — a former adviser to ex-President Bill Clinton and ex-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton — argues that Trump is trying to whitewash U.S. history even though he has a painfully limited knowledge of it.
“Of all the presidents, Donald Trump — the man who would remake the Smithsonian and alter its presentation of ‘how bad slavery was,’ as he put it — is surely the most ignorant of American history itself,” Blumenthal laments. “What Trump doesn’t know fills the Library of Congress, whose chief librarian he has fired, along with driving out the heads of the National Archives and the National Portrait Gallery, as well as dissolving programs of the National Endowment for the Humanities and defunding the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, which as a result, has paused the acclaimed ‘American Experience’ documentary series.”
The former Clintons adviser adds, “Trump claims he is tearing down the entire federal support for history in order to reveal the true story.”
A Trump White House aide, Blumenthal notes, bragged that one of Trump’s goals is to “get the woke out of the Smithsonian.”
“But this gospel of positive-thinking twaddle aside, Trump, proudly ignorant though he is, has for years articulated a vision of American history,” Blumenthal warns. “That vision does not emphasize the strides the nation has made through tumultuous struggle since the abolition of slavery. Instead, it honors those who defended slavery, committed treason to preserve it and claim it to be a worthy American ‘heritage.’ Trump has repeatedly sought to shield the Confederate statues and symbols erected as tribute to the ‘lost cause’ myth.”
Blumenthal continues, “He has expressed and unqualified admiration for Robert E. Lee as a quintessential American hero almost always coupled with belittling remarks about (President Abraham) Lincoln. His view of history squarely aligns him with neo-Confederates, not least those who carried the Confederate flag at the U.S. Capitol during the insurrection on 6 January 2021 and whom he subsequently pardoned. Trump’s version of history is not, however, simply reactionary nostalgia, or treacly kitsch for the restoration of ‘Uncle Herschel,’ the ‘Old-Timer’ to the Cracker Barrel logo. His use of the culture war is a key element to advance his policy agenda.”
https://www.alternet.org/trump-sidney-blumenthal-smithsonian
Juan Rivera voted for President Donald Trump, hoping that the president’s efforts to rid the United States of illegal immigration would improve safety in the Southern California city where the 25-year-old content creator lives.
Neighborhoods near Rivera’s home in San Marcos that used to be frequented by migrants with “violent tendencies” do feel much safer now, he said. But he also said he’ll “never forget” seeing U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents pull over a truck of Latino workers and haul the men into their cars without asking for identification, leaving the empty truck behind.
Some of Rivera’s family members work for U.S. Border Patrol. Other relatives who are in the process of establishing legal residency in the United States “are scared of going to work because they fear that they’re going to get pulled over by immigration,” he said.
Overall, however, Rivera gave the Trump administration very high marks on its handling of immigration because “there’s a lot more public safety.”
Seven months into his second term, Trump’s signature issue – immigration – is still helping buoy his overall sinking approval ratings, making up for a downturn in support for his economic policies. A group of 20 Trump voters Reuters has interviewed monthly since February, including Rivera, illuminated the complex views behind the numbers.
Reuters asked the voters to rate the Trump administration’s handling of immigration on a scale of 1 to 10. Sixteen gave it a rating of 7 or higher, and none rated it below 5.
They universally support Trump’s tightening of U.S. border security to prevent further illegal immigration and his efforts to expel immigration offenders with violent criminal records. But there was less consensus about how Trump is going about the crackdown.
“President Trump was elected based on his promise to close the border and deport criminal illegal aliens,” said White House spokesperson Abigail Jackson in an emailed statement. “The Trump Administration will continue carrying out the largest mass deportation operation in history.”
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 correspond to those of Trump’s overall electorate.
Seven of the voters said they worried about the means Trump was using to achieve his goals, with some recoiling at the way authorities are rounding up immigrants for deportation.
“I agree that you have to have an immigration policy and enforce it. I don’t agree with kidnapping people off the street,” said Virginia Beach-based retiree Don Jernigan.
Jernigan, 75, said that footage of ICE raids he has seen on ABC and Fox News “reminds me of Nazi Germany. And you would rarely hear me say that name, Nazi, okay? But it does, the way they snatch people.”
Other voters, such as Will Brown, 20, a student at the University of Wisconsin – Madison, urged the administration to pursue even more ambitious deportation goals.
Brown, who said he “couldn’t be more of a fan of Stephen Miller,” the White House aide credited with designing Trump’s immigration policy, noted that the deportation rate of Trump’s second term so far lagged that of the last two Democratic administrations. “Honestly, I don’t think they’re doing enough,” he said.
REALITY DIVIDE
The voters’ attitudes towards traditional news outlets heavily affected their view of Trump’s immigration crackdown.
“If you get your information from one source, ICE is devils incarnate, and if you get it from another source, they’re superheroes,” said Gerald Dunn, 66, a martial arts instructor in upstate New York.
Dunn said he rarely reads or watches news from mainstream outlets because “everything is so exaggerated.” Instead, he browses headlines and watches YouTube videos to stay informed.
He has heard reports of ICE agents detaining non-criminal immigrants, but said such incidents are blown out of proportion.
“You’re going to arrest people wrongfully, and it turns out they shouldn’t have been arrested. That doesn’t mean you don’t arrest anybody.”
In the Chicago suburbs, municipal office secretary Kate Mottl, 62, said she is thrilled with Trump’s immigration policy. She does not believe news outlets that report immigrants without a criminal record are being swept up in raids.
Mottl was dismayed to learn that some immigrants without legal status she knows are afraid of being deported under Trump.
“I tell them, ‘you shouldn’t be worried about that because you’re not a bad person. You’re not committing crimes,’” she said, adding that she feared they were being misinformed by the news sources they watch.
CLEARER PATHWAY TO LEGAL STATUS
Fourteen of the 20 voters said they hoped Trump would improve the immigration system and vetting process to help deserving foreigners with the potential to contribute to the U.S. economy legalize their status more easily in the United States.
Like Mottl, Lesa Sandberg of St. George, Utah, said she knows undocumented immigrants “who are raising their families here, who are working, who are contributing to our economy and our society. And my heart goes out to them.”
Sandberg, 57, who runs an accounting business, rents properties and works for a former Republican congressman’s political action committee, said she is glad to see the administration cracking down on immigrants with criminal backgrounds.
But when it comes to the immigrants in the U.S. illegally she considers friends, she said, “I would never call ICE on them … [it’s] that whole concept of when we know people in the situation, feelings are different about it because we know how bad it is for them.”
David Ferguson, 53, a mechanical engineer and account manager in western Georgia, said some of the foreign students in his daughter’s graduate school program want to stay and work in the United States but fear they won’t be able to re-enter if they visit their home countries, despite having valid visas.
Some immigrants really do “want to have long-term residency and be productive members of our society. Let’s give them a path for that,” he said.
Ferguson said he doesn’t think an amnesty program is necessarily the solution. But Juan Rivera, the Trump voter in southern California, thinks it could attract wide support.
“It’s actually a really big sentiment I’ve been hearing from a lot of local Republican elected officials, that the Trump administration [should] offer amnesty the way that Reagan did,” said Rivera, who does Latino outreach advocacy for his county’s Republican Party.
His own father was able to become a U.S. citizen after former Republican President Ronald Reagan signed legislation in 1986 granting amnesty to about 3 million immigrants without legal status, according to Rivera.
He said he hopes Trump moves the country toward “an immigration system that balances security with humanity.”
President Donald Trump has taken control of D.C.’s law enforcement and ordered National Guard troops to deploy onto the streets of the nation’s capital, arguing the extraordinary moves are necessary to curb an urgent public safety crisis.
Even as district officials questioned the claims underlying his emergency declaration, the Republican president promised a “historic action to rescue our nation’s capital from crime, bloodshed, bedlam and squalor and worse.” His rhetoric echoed that used by conservatives going back decades who have denounced cities, especially those with majority non-white populations or led by progressives, as lawless or crime-ridden and in need of outside intervention.
“This is liberation day in D.C., and we’re going to take our capital back,” Trump promised Monday.
As D.C. the National Guard arrived at their headquarters Tuesday, for many residents, the prospect of federal troops surging into neighborhoods represented an alarming violation of local agency. To some, it echoes uncomfortable historical chapters when politicians used language to paint historically or predominantly Black cities and neighborhoods with racist narratives to shape public opinion and justify aggressive police action.
April Goggans, a longtime D.C. resident and grassroots organizer, said she was not surprised by Trump’s actions. Communities had been preparing for a potential federal crackdown in D.C. since the summer of 2020, when Trump deployed troops during racial justice protests after the murder of George Floyd.
“We have to be vigilant,” said Goggans, who has coordinated local protests for nearly a decade. She worries about what a surge in law enforcement could mean for residents’ freedoms.
“Regardless of where you fall on the political scale, understand that this could be you, your children, your grandmother, your co-worker who are brutalized or have certain rights violated,” she said.
Other residents reacted with mixed feelings to Trump’s executive order. Crime and homelessness has been a top concern for residents in recent years, but opinions on how to solve the issue vary. And very few residents take Trump’s catastrophic view of life in D.C.
“I think Trump’s trying to help people, some people,” said Melvin Brown, a D.C. resident. “But as far as (him) trying to get (the) homeless out of this city, that ain’t going to work.”
“It’s like a band-aid to a gunshot wound,” said Melissa Velasquez, a commuter into D.C. “I feel like there’s been an increase of racial profiling and stuff, and so it’s concerning for individuals who are worried about how they might be perceived as they go about their day-to-day lives.”
Uncertainty raises alarms
According to White House officials, troops will be deployed to protect federal assets and facilitate a safe environment for law enforcement to make arrests. The Trump administration believes the highly visible presence of law enforcement will deter violent crime. It is unclear how the administration defines providing a safe environment for law enforcement to conduct arrests, raising alarm bells for some advocates.
“The president foreshadowed that if these heavy-handed tactics take root here, they will be rolled out to other majority-Black and Brown cities, like Chicago, Oakland and Baltimore, across the country,” said Monica Hopkins, executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union’s D.C. chapter.
“We’ve seen before how federal control of the D.C. National Guard and police can lead to abuse, intimidation and civil rights violations — from military helicopters swooping over peaceful racial justice protesters in 2020 to the unchecked conduct of federal officers who remain shielded from full accountability,” Hopkins said.
A history of denigrating language
Conservatives have for generations used denigrating language to describe the condition of major cities and called for greater law enforcement, often in response to changing demographics in those cities driven by nonwhite populations relocating in search of work or safety from racial discrimination and state violence. Republicans have called for greater police crackdowns in cities since at least the 1965 Watts Riots in Los Angeles.
President Richard Nixon won the White House in 1968 after campaigning on a “law and order” agenda to appeal to white voters in northern cities alongside overtures to white Southerners as part of his “Southern Strategy.” Ronald Reagan similarly won both his presidential elections after campaigning heavily on law and order politics. Politicians, including former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani and former President Bill Clinton have cited the need to tamp down crime as a reason to seize power from liberal cities for decades.
D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser called Trump’s takeover of local police “unsettling” but not without precedent. Bowser kept a mostly measured tone during a Monday news conference but decried Trump’s reasoning as a “so-called emergency,” saying residents “know that access to our democracy is tenuous.”
Trump threatened to “take over” and “beautify” D.C. on the campaign trail and claimed it was “a nightmare of murder and crime.” He also argued the city was “horribly run” and said his team intended “to take it away from the mayor.” Trump on Monday repeated old comments about some of the nation’s largest cities, including Baltimore, Chicago, Los Angeles, Oakland and his hometown of New York City. All are currently run by Black mayors.
“You look at Chicago, how bad it is. You look at Los Angeles, how bad it is. We have other cities in a very bad, New York is a problem. And then you have, of course, Baltimore and Oakland. We don’t even mention that anymore. They’re so far gone. We’re not going to let it happen,” he said.
Civil rights advocates see the rhetoric as part of a broader political strategy.
“It’s a playbook he’s used in the past,” said Maya Wiley, CEO of the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights.
Trump’s rhetoric “paints a picture that crime is out of control, even when it is not true, then blames the policies of Democratic lawmakers that are reform- and public safety-minded, and then claims that you have to step in and violate people’s rights or demand that reforms be reversed,” Wiley said.
She added that the playbook has special potency in D.C. because local law enforcement can be directly placed under federal control, a power Trump invoked in his announcement.
Leaders call the order an unjustified distraction
Trump’s actions in Washington and comments about other major cities sent shock waves across the country, as other leaders prepare to respond to potential federal action.
Democratic Maryland Gov. Wes Moore said in a statement that Trump’s plan “lacks seriousness and is deeply dangerous” and pointed to a 30-year-low crime rate in Baltimore as a reason the administration should consult local leaders rather than antagonize them. In Oakland, Mayor Barbara Lee called Trump’s characterization of the city “fearmongering.”
The administration already faced a major flashpoint between local control and federal power earlier in the summer, when Trump deployed National Guard troops to quell protests and support immigration enforcement operations in LA despite opposition from California Gov. Gavin Newsom and LA Mayor Karen Bass.
Civil rights leaders have denounced Trump’s action in D.C. as an unjustified distraction.
“This president campaigned on ‘law and order,’ but he is the president of chaos and corruption,” said NAACP President Derrick Johnson. “There’s no emergency in D.C., so why would he deploy the National Guard? To distract us from his alleged inclusion in the Epstein files? To rid the city of unhoused people? D.C. has the right to govern itself. It doesn’t need this federal coup.”
https://apnews.com/article/trump-washington-dc-takeover-race-39388597bad7e70085079888fe7fb57b
