Vice President Kamala Harris struggled mightily with — and ultimately failed to answer — the first question put to her at the ABC News presidential debate that took place on September 10: Do you believe that the American people are better off now than they were four years ago? Nearly two weeks later, during a Monday morning appearance on CNN, the Harris campaign’s senior spokesman Ian Sams made it clear that they were no closer to finding the answer to that particular question. WATCH: CNN: Kamala was asked at the debate if Americans are better off now than 4 years ago, and she refused to answer. So, are they? HARRIS INTERN @IanSams: *incoherent word salad* CNN: You didn't answer the question. SAMS: She has a plan to bring costs down. CNN: But they went up… pic.twitter.com/msNaQuA9pd — Trump War Room (@TrumpWarRoom) September 23, 2024 “The bottom line, here, when you look at a metric like grocery prices, they’re up still 20% compared to four years ago,” the CNN anchor pointed out. “And Harris was asked recently on the debate stage whether she thinks Americans are better off now than four years ago, and she didn’t directly answer that question. So I’ll ask you: Does she think Americans are better off now, or not?” Am I Racist? Is In Theaters NOW — Get Your Tickets Here! Sams did not directly answer the question either, instead delivering the typical talking points — namely that Harris had an as-yet undisclosed “plan” to bring prices down — adding no details and giving no explanation as to why, despite being in office herself for the last three and a half years, no plan had yet been implemented to tackle that issue. The anchor pushed back, noting that prices had, in fact, gone up under the Biden-Harris administration, and pressed Sams to answer the direct question. Sams ignored the question entirely, saying that people who were running for president should be looking forward and telling the people what they planned to do rather than looking backward at the way things used to be and why that might be the case. He concluded by suggesting that questions like that shouldn’t matter anyway, since the alternative to Harris was former President Donald Trump — whose time in office, it should be noted, was marked by record-low unemployment numbers, wage growth, and manageable inflation rates.

Weill Cornell Medicine is distancing itself from New York City’s former senior health advisor Jay Varma after the COVID czar was caught on tape discussing the “drug-fueled sex parties” he hosted while preaching COVID social-distancing practices. The Daily Wire reviewed Varma’s public Cornell profiles on Monday, and discovered that the institution had scrubbed his name from the site. Archived webpages show that his biography page — which was online as recently as six days ago — as well as his contact information page, have both been removed. In response to an inquiry on the website changes, Weill Cornell Medicine confirmed to The Daily Wire that Varma is no longer affiliated with the institution. “Jay Varma was a full-time employee from September 2021 to August 2023 after which he continued as an unpaid advisor,” a Weill Cornell Medicine spokeswoman told The Daily Wire. “We were not aware of the alleged unethical behavior that occurred prior to his employment with us, and he is no longer affiliated with our organization.” “As an institution that was on the frontlines during the pandemic, we firmly upheld all safety regulations to protect public health,” the spokeswoman added. Varma’s sex parties were first revealed by conservative podcaster Steven Crowder, who released video last week showing Varma discussing how he violated city rules that he was publicly pushing by privately hosting orgies and dance parties with his wife. Crowder says an undercover operative recorded the videos between July 27 and August 14 in New York. “I had to be kind of sneaky about it … because I was running the entire COVID response in the city,” Varma says in one of the clips. “We went to some, like, underground dance party … underneath a bank on Wall Street … We were all rolling, we’re all taking molly [MDMA] and everybody’s high. And I was so happy because I hadn’t done that in like a year and a half,” he shares in another clip. “But I was looking around being like, ‘F–k, I wonder if anybody sees me, they’re gonna be pissed.’ Because this was not COVID-friendly,” he adds. Varma did not immediately respond to requests for comment from The Daily Wire. He has admitted that what he said in the recordings was true, and that he takes responsibility “for not using the best judgment at the time.” The New York City Council Common-Sense Caucus has called on the City Council to hold a hearing addressing Varma’s “blatant hypocrisy” and “recklessness.” “The public deserves answers,” the caucus said in a letter published Sept. 20. The Common Sense Caucus is calling on the City Council to hold a special hearing on the recent damning admissions by former @BilldeBlasio COVID-19 Czar Dr. Jay Varma about the city’s COVID response. (1/2) pic.twitter.com/m9yd85pAYC — NYC Council Common Sense Caucus (@NYCCCommonSense) September 20, 2024

CNN hit Kamala Harris senior campaign spokesman Ian Sams with some tough poll numbers during a Monday interview, and Sams’ response was essentially to reject the presented poll out of hand and substitute one that he liked better. The CNN anchor presenting the poll — recently released by The New York Times and Siena College — conceded that not everyone believed what they saw in the polls but argued that this particular source was one that could be trusted. WATCH: CNN: This credible New York Times/Sienna poll — 45% of voters say Trump's policies would help people like them versus just 37% for Kamala. What do you say to that? HARRIS SPOX @IanSams: *copes and seethes* pic.twitter.com/uBqxE5rrv6 — Trump War Room (@TrumpWarRoom) September 23, 2024 “When you look at this latest poll — and again, I know people have their views of the polls, but this is a credible New York Times/Siena College poll,” the anchor explained. “They actually asked voters about policies from both Trump and Harris that they think could impact them in the future.” “And 45% of voters say Trump’s policies would help people like them versus just 37% for Harris. That’s looking at the future, not just the past here. What do you say to that, Ian?” she pressed Sams to respond. The Harris campaign spokesman, rather than take the question head on, ignored the New York Times/Siena poll entirely. Instead, he brought up unspecified “Quinnipiac polls just over the last few days,” claiming that they were more favorable to Harris on specific issues. “Well, again, there’s been some Quinnipiac polls just over the last few days that suggest a different picture of the country, of people thinking that her economic or immigration or reproductive freedom plans would help them more,” he said. “You know, the polls are going to kind of shift around a little bit.” Of the three issues Sams listed specifically, however, the most recent Quinnipiac poll gave Trump the edge on two. The poll, released on September 18, showed Harris beating Trump in the swing states of Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, and Michigan on the abortion issue — but Trump had a clear lead in all three states when it came to both the economy and immigration.

There’s an inevitable moment in every presidential election campaign when the entertainment industry gets together and tells us to vote for the Democrat. It doesn’t matter who the candidate is, or who they’re running against. In every case, Hollywood tells us, the choice is supposedly between the fascist and whatever candidate Democrats are running. Twenty-four years ago, Al Gore was touting the endorsements of Kevin Costner, Tom Hanks, Jerry Seinfeld, Sharon Stone, Robert De Niro, Harrison Ford, and so on. Barack Obama took things to another level, as we all remember, bringing in endorsements from Oprah and throwing concerts featuring Bon Jovi and Mariah Carey. They all told us that we need to turn the page on the neocon, Dick Cheney-era of foreign policy — because Dick Cheney represented a greater evil than Hitler and Satan combined. After last week’s Oprah infomercial for Kamala Harris, it’s clear that it’s time for Harris to collect the endorsements that she’s apparently entitled to. Kamala started her campaign with the blessing of Beyonce and Megan Thee Stallion. Then there was the Taylor Swift endorsement a week ago. But with the Oprah infomercial, things really took off. Along with representatives from the racially segregated groups “Black Women for Harris,” “White Dudes for Harris,” and “White Women for Harris,” celebrities like Julia Roberts, Meryl Streep, Bryan Cranston, Chris Rock, Ben Stiller, and Jennifer Lopez all hopped on a Zoom call to express their support for Kamala Harris’ campaign. The expected rash of celebrity endorsements is officially pouring in. WATCH: The Matt Walsh Show What’s interesting about these endorsements is that all of these celebrities are now on the side of Dick Cheney’s preferred candidate. They’re also campaigning on behalf of a candidate who was just endorsed by hundreds of former high-ranking “national intelligence officials” at the CIA and the Pentagon, along with a union affiliated with the IRS. So these celebrities have gone from raging against the neocon, establishment machine to campaigning on behalf of it. It’s like watching a vegan activist get a new job as a Burger King spokesman. It’s not impossible to imagine, but you’d probably ask yourself: How did that happen, exactly? What are the lucid, rational arguments that celebrities are making in order to justify this massive reversal of everything they once claimed to believe? A few days ago, the latest celebrity to endorse Kamala Harris — Hayley Williams, the lead singer of the band Paramore — did not provide any lucid, rational arguments to support her decision. Instead, at the iHeartRadio Music Festival in Las Vegas on Friday, she made it clear why Donald Trump has to stand inside a case of bulletproof glass every time he speaks in public. Watch: Hayley Williams has lost it pic.twitter.com/vXJFxicREG — Clown World ™ ? (@ClownWorld_) September 22, 2024 This is nothing really new from Hayley Williams, who’s been struggling for relevance lately. The band’s not generating hits anymore, so she’s lashing out. A year ago she attacked all of her fans who support Ron DeSantis, saying they’re dead to her. She mixed in some profanity for good measure. And now we have this supposedly spontaneous moment, where she rambles like a lunatic about “Project 2025” and how Donald Trump hates poor people and the “LGBTQ+ community.” Twenty years ago, when celebrities had public meltdowns like this, they were talking about things that were really happening — like the war in Iraq. But now that they’re on the side of the Defense Department and the IRS union and the military-industrial complex, they can’t criticize wars anymore. So they’re becoming delusional instead. But this particular rant was even more embarrassing than it looks, because it wasn’t even spontaneous, really. It was scripted. Some guy was apparently holding up a piece of paper that Hayley Williams was reading from. Watch: Paramore’s Hayley Williams’ passionate, completely “spontaneous” rant about Donald Trump and Project 2025 was completely scripted. Here she is, reading the whole thing from a script that’s being held up by somebody else. pic.twitter.com/Ez98TxK1WL — Ian Miles Cheong (@stillgray) September 22, 2024 So Hayley couldn’t speak off-the-cuff for 30 seconds — just thirty seconds — about why people should vote for Kamala Harris. You’d think that, if you were the kind of “entertainer” who wanted to use your concert to promote a political message, then you’d at least understand what you’re talking about. You’d be comfortable enough with your beliefs that you could articulate them without needing to read them off a piece of paper. And maybe, you’d even say something remotely interesting. But none of that happened here. This has become something of a trend for celebrities who are coming out for Kamala Harris. A couple of weeks ago, the “Hulk” actor Mark Ruffalo had his own meltdown. He was specifically upset about Elon Musk because he’s one of the few wealthy celebrities who hasn’t fallen in line. Watch: “Elon Musk is a two faced turn coat traitor,” rants Mark Ruffalo. pic.twitter.com/QQ6CDYlkZ5 — Ian Miles Cheong (@stillgray) September 22, 2024 “He sold himself out for a buck and some power,” says Mark Ruffalo. It’s too bad he didn’t elaborate on that point because it doesn’t make any sense whatsoever. Elon Musk is being investigated by numerous federal agencies who want to sanction him and destroy his companies, solely because he’s allowing people to speak freely on the internet. His purchase of Twitter appears to have lost him billions of dollars, by conservative estimates. So who exactly did Elon Musk “sell out” to? Instead of answering those questions, Ruffalo instructs his audience: “Don’t follow him. Don’t listen to him. We are the ones who we have to believe in. We’re the ones we’re waiting for.” Then he mocks Elon Musk’s accent for some reason. Am I Racist? Is In Theaters NOW — Get Your Tickets Here! This is a guy whose most noteworthy achievement in life is pretending to be the Hulk. And he’s attacking someone who’s built several successful companies in this country. SpaceX is now rescuing astronauts that government contractors like Boeing got stranded in space. They’re trying to build colonies on Mars. Tesla meanwhile is an electric car manufacturer that makes the best-selling car in the world. Particularly if you care about “carbon emissions,” as people like Mark Ruffalo claim to, then you should be very happy about that. But Mark Ruffao’s not happy, because Elon Musk isn’t voting for Kamala Harris. Therefore he’s a “traitor.” This is the kind of celebrity endorsement that Harris’ campaign is now receiving. They’re even more unhinged than what we’re used to. And we’re getting a lot of them. If he counts as a celebrity, Bill Nye also put out a video endorsing Kamala Harris. And while he’s less vulgar than the Paramore singer, and a little less insulting than Mark Ruffalo, it’s still pretty hard to watch. Bill Nye is a 68-year-old man who most adults recognize from his show in the 90s, which was designed for elementary school students. And yet Bill Nye is still effectively in character, pushing 70. He’s still treating his audience as if they’re children. Watch: Science rules, @BillNye pic.twitter.com/noUFu1QAbF — Kamala HQ (@KamalaHQ) September 22, 2024   “Vice President Harris knows science rules,” says Bill Nye. And then Kamala Harris’ campaign account tweeted out this video with the message, “science rules.” It’s like we’re all back in 5th grade again. “Infantilizing” does not begin to describe this. Then Bill Nye praises Kamala Harris for passing the “biggest climate investment” ever, which is a reference to the Inflation Reduction Act — a law that, as the name implies, was supposedly about reducing inflation. Now they’re admitting it was about printing a ton of money to spend on “climate investment,” which of course made inflation worse. (Which is why Kamala Harris is now talking about price controls). We’re told by Bill Nye — the aging adult man who still pretends he’s talking to children — that a whole bunch of spending is necessary because the climate is changing very quickly, and it’s all our fault. That’s the assumption that people like Bill Nye have made for a very long time, even though there’s no reason to think it’s true. In fact, there’s new evidence that suggests the opposite. It comes from the journal Science. Here’s how The Washington Post reported on the data a couple of days ago:  An ambitious effort to understand the Earth’s climate over the past 485 million years has revealed a history of wild shifts and far hotter temperatures than scientists previously realized … The timeline, published Thursday in the journal Science, is the most rigorous reconstruction of Earth’s past temperatures ever produced. … Created by combining more than 150,000 pieces of fossil evidence with state-of-the-art climate models, it shows the intimate link between carbon dioxide and global temperatures and reveals that the world was in a much warmer state for most of the history of complex animal life. Here’s the graph the researchers came up with: Washington Post. As you can see, according to this model, this planet has previously experienced much warmer temperatures — and much more dramatic temperature increases — than what we’ve seen in recent times, after the Industrial Revolution. We’re actually at a relative low point for global average surface temperature right now. Of course, if you ask the Bill Nyes of the world, they’ll find ways to spin this data. They’ll tell you things are getting too hot, too quickly, and so on. But as these climate researchers admit, at a minimum, this data was shocking to them. They had no idea that temperatures were so hot, long before Americans were driving pick-up trucks and using gas stoves. So you’d think that maybe some humility would be called for at this point. But we won’t get any humility from Bill Nye. Nor should we expect any. After all, this is a “science guy” who doesn’t understand the basic facts of human biology and reproduction, so his endorsement of Kamala Harris is no surprise. But there’s a bigger issue here for Kamala Harris. Even the relatively sane celebrities in her corner still aren’t helping her very much. According to the Financial Times: An ABC News/Ipsos poll published on Sunday found that 81 per cent of voters said the endorsement [of Kamala Harris by Taylor Swift] would make no difference in how they cast their ballots, and just 6 per cent said it would make them more likely to vote for Harris. Another 13 per cent said it would make them less likely to support the vice-president. In other words, Taylor Swift’s endorsement may have done more harm than good for Kamala Harris. And if Taylor Swift didn’t help, you can imagine the damage that Bill Nye, Mark Ruffalo and Hayley Williams are doing. There are a few reasons why this might be happening. But the most obvious explanation is that celebrities aren’t respected anymore. They’ve become too political, too dumb, and too shrill. They’re also not expected to uphold any kind of ethical standards. In the 1960s, an actor was fired from “Perry Mason” because the cops found him at a party where they suspected adultery was going on. We’ve come a very long way since then. Now, according to the government, entertainers like Sean “Diddy” Combs can engage in “widely known” criminal conduct for more than a decade before anyone does anything about it. He can publicly brag about his sex parties and how he hangs out, unsupervised, with underage children like Justin Bieber and Usher. And then he can hold a town hall with Kamala Harris about COVID, and no one thinks anything of it. That’s because we are now accustomed to the fact that insanely wealthy, out of touch, degenerates always line up behind the Democrat nominee. But at this point, we shouldn’t be. These celebrities have become so repulsive that their behavior is now a clear and direct reflection on the candidate they’re endorsing, especially since Kamala Harris is embracing all of these endorsements. WATCH THE TRAILER FOR ‘AM I RACIST?’ — A MATT WALSH COMEDY ON DEI To be clear, there are a lot of reasons not to vote for Kamala. This isn’t top of the list, but it’s on the list at least. She is beloved by debauched elitists — not to mention, she’s favored by all of the most powerful institutions in America. Is that because she’s a “middle class kid” who has the best interests of the average American at heart? That’s a question the Kamala Harris campaign would rather you didn’t ask. But the more these celebrities weigh in on the presidential race — and the more they angrily read the DNC talking points that are shoved in front of them — the more obvious the answer becomes.

Multiple Democratic senators expressed concern that former President Donald Trump has more support from the American people than polling suggests. After Trump performed better than the polling projections in both 2016 and 2020, Democrats told The Hill in an article published on Monday that the 2024 election will be close no matter what the polls are currently showing. Trump trails Vice President Kamala Harris by 2.2 points nationally as of Monday afternoon, according to the RealClearPolitics average. The margin between Harris and Trump is closer than Biden’s lead over Trump at this point in 2020 (7 points) and Hillary Clinton’s lead at this point in 2016 (3 points). “That’s ominous,” said one anonymous Democratic senator while discussing how Trump is performing better in the polls against Harris. “There’s no question that is concerning, but you’re working as hard as you can work, no matter what. My sense there’s not a lot more you can do than we’re already doing.” The lawmaker added that he thinks undercounting of Trump’s support may be due to people feeling “embarrassed.” “Most of what he preaches, most of us have taught our children to try to not be that way on the playground,” the senator said. “So there’s a certain amount of reluctance to admit I’m going to vote for somebody whose conduct I tell my children is wrong.” Sen. John Fetterman (D-PA) warned against putting any stock in the polls, arguing, “Polling has really been seriously damaged since 2016. And that’s one of the truths, is that Trump is going to be tough in Pennsylvania, and that’s absolutely the truth.” Democratic Sen. Raphael Warnock from the battleground state of Georgia said that “the only poll that matters is Nov. 5.” “We know this election is going to be close. It’s going to be close in the battleground states, including Georgia, which is why I’m doing everything I can to make sure we put Georgia in our column,” he said. “The only poll that matters is Nov. 5, right?” “We talk about margin of error for a reason,” Warnock added. Another Democratic senator who spoke to The Hill on the condition of anonymity said, “I don’t think any poll right now means much of anything.” The lawmaker added that many people are “delusionally” viewing the Trump administration’s economic policies as successful. Am I Racist? Is In Theaters NOW — Get Your Tickets Here! “I’m surprised that people look back on the Trump economy delusionally as being so good, which I think is the major factor that supports his approval rating,” the senator said. In the all-important battleground states, Trump and Harris are essentially tied, according to RealClearPolitics, and neither candidate saw much of a change in swing state polling following their September 10 debate. “Figuring out the turnout is the hardest thing out there. This cycle there may be a surprise Trump vote and a surprise Harris vote,” Democratic pollster Celinda Lake said. “I, too, share the concern that there are going to be some surprises. What accentuates my concern is when you poll people who have not voted in ’20 but are planning to vote today, they are disproportionately Trump voters.” “If you look at first-time voters who didn’t vote in ’20, they are leaning toward Trump and they’re very low information and they like his kind of style,” Lake added. “And they like Elon Musk and they like a lot of things like that. I worry about that. I think it’s definitely a concern, and I think we just have to get enough margin to compensate for that.”

Director Aaron Sorkin said he has some ideas for a reboot of “The West Wing” following a visit to the White House this weekend. The 63-year-old Hollywood exec also said he was open to revisiting the series again, per Variety.  “If I had an idea, sure,” Sorkin said. “I didn’t think about it seriously, frankly, until today… We’ll see what happens when I wake up tomorrow. But, if you’re asking me now, this is how I feel.” “I just got a couple of ideas for episodes just walking around the White House,” he added. “Like, ‘why didn’t we ever do this? Why didn’t we ever do that?’” “The West Wing” is an American political drama that aired on NBC from 1999 until 2006. It’s widely regarded as one of the greatest television shows of all time, winning numerous accolades including two Peabody Awards, three Golden Globes, and 26 Primetime Emmy Awards, including Outstanding Drama Series four consecutive times from 2000 to 2003. The series creator told the outlet he had resisted a reboot in the past because he was afraid viewers wouldn’t respond well to new cast members.  “I suspect that a new president would have a hard time living up to people’s memories of Martin [Sheen],” he said, referring to the actor who played President Jed Bartlet on the series. “But maybe enough time has gone by and it’s a whole new generation. A generation which, by the way, thanks to streaming, thinks we’re making the show today!” Sorkin insisted that the show wouldn’t have a political agenda. “I just thought it was a great workplace against which to set,” he told Variety. “There are all kinds of stories that come over the transom that you can tell, and that aspirational, idealistic, romantic style of writing suits me.” “We couldn’t possibly come up with stories in the room that are crazier than the actual stories that we see,” he added. Sorkin also said it would be “very hard” to do the same kind of storytelling in today’s political climate. “Because part of it is being idealistic, it does need to feel like it’s taking place in the world that we live in for it to work,” he said. The showrunner said Donal Trump winning in November wouldn’t affect his decision to reboot the show. “It would certainly present incentives to do it, but also headaches,” Sorkin told Variety. “The worry would be that everything we did on the show would be seen as a rebuttal to the world of Donald Trump.”

A controversial study by Just Facts is raising concerns about the integrity of U.S. elections, claiming that up to 27% of non-citizens are illegally registered to vote. This study, spearheaded by researcher James Agresti, suggests that millions of non-citizens could be influencing American elections, potentially including congressional and presidential outcomes. According to the study, the U.S. Census recorded more than 19 million adult non-citizens in 2022, meaning that approximately 2 to 5 million of these individuals may be registered to vote. Agresti’s study builds on earlier research from a 2014 Electoral Studies paper, which analyzed non-citizen voter registration data. The latest findings use enhanced methodologies to provide what Agresti argues are more accurate estimates of illegal voter registration among non-citizens. According to the research, while 10% to 27% of non-citizens are registered, about half of them turn out to vote in federal elections. This would mean that roughly 5% to 13% of non-citizens could participate in the 2024 elections unless stronger voter verification measures are enacted. If it's already illegal for non citizens to vote in our election that why do you have such an issue with people proving they are citizens at the polls? Shut it down. Screw it pic.twitter.com/uAsBM6QWzD — Shipwreck (@shipwreckshow) September 18, 2024 Critics, however, have pushed back against these claims, citing flaws in the methodology and the underlying data. Experts such as Jesse Richman, a political scientist whose earlier work Agresti references, have distanced themselves from the higher estimates. Richman acknowledges that while non-citizen voter registration does occur, it is far less widespread than Agresti suggests. He argues that the original 10% to 27% estimate is likely an overreach, with a more realistic figure being closer to 1%. One of the primary challenges in verifying non-citizen voter registration is the lack of a robust system to cross-check citizenship status. Although federal law requires U.S. citizenship to register to vote in federal elections, enforcement mechanisms vary significantly across states. In many cases, individuals only need to declare their citizenship without providing proof. This opens the door for potential mistakes or fraudulent registrations, which critics argue could be exploited, particularly in states with looser voter registration requirements. And here is, the State of Texas, + 6,500 illegal aliens caught registering to vote and nearly 2,000 caught voting. This is Texas, can you imagine November 3, 2020? Rigged voter rolls + Illegal Aliens + Mail-In-Ballots + Zuckerberg + NGO’s + Mules = November 3, 2020 Election,… https://t.co/qX3kCpDWre pic.twitter.com/HlqgXq48Dk — RealRobert (@Real_RobN) September 14, 2024 Conservative groups like True the Vote have sounded alarms about this issue, pointing to weaknesses in federal laws and the lack of stringent documentation requirements as major contributors to the problem. They argue that recent federal initiatives, such as the Biden administration’s Executive Order 14019, which directs federal agencies to promote voter registration, further exacerbate the risks of illegal voting. These critics claim that current policies allow for the registration of non-citizens and other ineligible groups without effective oversight. Defenders of current laws, however, argue that there is no widespread evidence of non-citizens voting in large numbers. Organizations like Snopes and various election integrity experts have criticized Agresti’s findings as based on outdated or biased data. They emphasize that previous surveys and studies have found very few non-citizens illegally registered to vote, and that the issue, while real, is not as rampant as some claim. For instance, the Cooperative Congressional Election Study (CCES), a prominent survey often cited in these discussions, was not designed to specifically study non-citizens, raising concerns about the reliability of conclusions drawn from this data set. Despite these debates, the issue of non-citizen voter registration remains a flashpoint in the ongoing discussion about election security. Republican lawmakers have introduced legislation that would require proof of citizenship to register to vote in federal elections. Supporters of these measures argue that stricter laws are necessary to safeguard the electoral process, while opponents believe that such laws could disenfranchise eligible voters, particularly minorities. As the 2024 elections approach, the question of non-citizen voter registration will likely remain a contentious topic. Whether the figures presented by Agresti and other conservative researchers hold up under scrutiny will be key in determining how election integrity reforms are shaped in the coming years. The post Study Claims 10% to 27% of Non-Citizens Are Registered to Vote Illegally appeared first on The Conservative Brief.

'The results of our joint investigation are alarming'

'Harris's dreams of living in the White House are over'

'One of the most important fights of our day'