Over half of registered voters approve of how President-elect Donald Trump is doing, with Hispanic and younger voters driving his increased popularity, according to a new poll.   Of the 52% who approve of Trump, 31% said they “strongly approve” and 21% said they “somewhat approve,” according to the survey commissioned by Napolitan News Service.  The poll found that 43% of voters disapprove of Trump’s performance so far, with 34% saying they “strongly disapprove” and 9% saying they “somewhat disapprove.”  Five percent of those surveyed said they were “not sure” or neutral.   Veteran pollster Scott Rasmussen’s RMG Research Inc. conducted the online survey Monday and Tuesday, speaking to 1,000 registered voters with varying demographics and political affiliations. The margin of error is plus or minus 3.1 percentage points.   The survey found that 59% of Hispanic voters approve of Trump. Of them, 26% said they “strongly approve.”   Hispanic voters traditionally have leaned Democratic. But in the 2024 presidential election, a greater percentage of Hispanics—though still not a majority—voted for Trump than during his past two races, The Daily Signal previously reported.    A total of 55% of younger Americans aged 18-35 approve of Trump, the survey found, with 30% saying they “strongly approve” and 25% saying they “somewhat approve.”   In the Nov. 5 election, young Americans 18 to 29 were the age group with the highest support for the Democratic nominee, Vice President Kamala Harris, according to TuftsNow.   Napolitan’s survey results suggest that a majority of younger voters now appear to favor Trump. Of the 44% who said they disapprove of him, however, 29% said they “strongly disapprove.”   Trump recently has resonated with voters on certain cultural issues such as whether men should be allowed to compete in women’s sports, according to the New York Post. Such issues may have won Trump voters in swing states, the newspaper reported.   Many Hispanic voters tend to cite economic issues as top concerns, which potentially led to their increased support for Trump this year, according to Reuters.   The post Trump Approval Rating Tops 50%, Thanks to Younger Voters, Hispanics  appeared first on The Daily Signal.

The Massachusetts Education Association apparently pushed three neighboring teachers unions to go on strike at the same time, sources close to the unions say. Because of the strikes, schools in three districts in Massachusetts have been closed for over two weeks, leaving working parents in the lurch without child care and extending the school year into the summer break. In October 2023, the Massachusetts Teachers Association, a branch of the far-left National Education Association, asked teachers union members in the North Shore area whether they’d be willing to strike for higher salaries and better benefits after the November 2024 elections, someone with knowledge of the meeting told The Daily Signal. The Gloucester Teachers Association and the Beverly Teachers Association went on strike Nov. 8; the Marblehead Education Association followed suit Nov. 12. Strikes are illegal for public employees in Massachusetts, so the teachers unions each have incurred fines north of $100,000. On Nov. 13, Essex Superior Court Judge Janice Howe ordered that the Gloucester and Beverly teachers unions pay $50,000 if they didn’t end the strike by 6 p.m. that day. The fines were to increase by $10,000 each day that the strike didn’t end by 3 p.m., according to court documents. A concerned parent and former union member, who asked for anonymity because of fear of retribution, said he spoke to two union representatives who confirmed that the Massachusetts Teachers Association pushed the local unions to strike. The Massachusetts Teachers Association, however, didn’t respond to The Daily Signal’s request for comment on the strikes in the three school districts and whether it encouraged the actions. Max Page, president of the state union, attended a rally in Seaside Park in Marblehead, Massachusetts, at the beginning of the strike, the sources said. Page also participated in a Nov. 20 “vigil” at Marblehead High School, where teachers talked to area residents about the state of contract negotiations with the district’s School Committee. Sources close to the unions speculated that the Massachusetts Teachers Association pushed the strikes to show its strength and power over the schools. The state teachers union encouraged teachers to be active on social media, according to a source with knowledge of the meeting in October 2023. Some teachers seemingly took this advice as a directive to bully parents who are critical of the strikes on Facebook. One union, Marblehead Education Association, posted School Committee members’ phone numbers and emails on social media and urged readers to “help them understand by giving them a call and telling them you support an override vote that will fully fund our schools.” For the teachers union to secure the requested salary increase, the town of Marblehead would need to take an override vote to increase local taxes. If it doesn’t carry, the union’s proposal would put the town in millions of dollars of debt. “The union’s proposal would create a $7 million hole in the town’s budget and would necessitate a property tax override that would add more than $900 to the average tax bill if passed or result in the loss of 75 staff members,” the School Committee said. One Facebook post lays out the Marblehead teachers’ requests and the School Committee’s responses, adding that the strike is losing support because of the amount of the requested salary increase and the risks to the town. A teacher commented on the post: “It’s actually not the Marblehead educators’ problem that the town’s funds have been mismanaged, or to help them figure out where to find the money to pay for raises. People in this town need to stand up and declare how much they value their teachers, and demand that they get the fair contract they deserve.” One parent’s Facebook post complains that since students are out of school, some won’t have access to meals, heat, and running water, as well as safety from domestic violence. The parent expresses concerns about learning loss and urges teachers to “come to a compromise for our children.” A teacher responded, saying: “This post makes me so sad to see. … Please stand with us as we beg the school committee to come to the table and actually bargain.” Another parent suggested the teachers’ raise request is unreasonable, as the School Committee “can’t create money that doesn’t exist.” One teacher responded: “Stop by the pick line and we will answer any questions you have… “ Massachusetts law requires school districts to provide students with 180 days of school by June 30, so the district will likely need to nix February break and extend the school year into summer. The School Committee in Marblehead reportedly made efforts to keep schools open, but the teachers union rejected them. The School Committee offered twice to allow the Marblehead Education Association’s bargaining team to leave their classrooms to negotiate during the school day rather than for all teachers to go on strike, committee member Jennifer Schaeffner said at a Nov. 12 press conference. Teachers would still receive pay while a substitute teacher covers their classes, but the Marblehead teachers union turned down the committee’s offer both times. Page, president of the Massachusetts Teachers Association, defended the teachers’ decision to break the law by striking. He told MassLive that teachers strike because they believe “short-term learning loss” caused by school closures is worth it for the “long-term success” of students, although the strikes largely are over teachers’ pay. “It’s an extreme action that [union] members never imagine taking,” Page said. “But clearly, some members, in overwhelming numbers, decided ‘This is what we have to do to have the schools that our students deserve.’” Because striking is illegal for teachers unions in Massachusetts, teachers hardly ever go on strike and it is unheard of for teachers in three school districts to strike at the same time, the sources said. In February, the Newton Teachers Association racked up $625,000 in court fines for a strike costing 11 days of school. As parents and students grow increasingly restless, an Essex County Superior Court judge said late Thursday that fines would not be levied against striking teachers for Friday if teachers agree to go back to school Monday. A neutral third party was to take over negotiations if a deal isn’t reached by 6 p.m. Monday. “My daughter’s sad that she can’t go to school,” the local parent told The Daily Signal. “She misses it, she loves her school, she loves her teacher. So it’s awful.” The post NEA Chapter Seemingly Incited 3 Illegal Teachers Strikes Costing Students Weeks of Class appeared first on The Daily Signal.

If you're tired of censorship and dystopian threats against civil liberties, subscribe to Reclaim The Net. G20 leaders convened in Rio de Janeiro have called for enhanced responsibility and transparency from digital platforms to tackle the growing challenges of “misinformation,” “disinformation,” “hate speech,” and others on their long list of supposed online “harms.” The summit’s final declaration highlighted the transformative role of digital platforms in global communication but noted the adverse effects of digital content’s rapid spread. It called for increased accountability from platforms to manage speech, which should raise eyebrows among free speech advocates who’ve heard all this before. We obtained a copy of the declaration for you here. During the summit, the leaders highlighted the transformative impact of digital platforms in communication and information dissemination across the globe. However, they also alleged negative ramifications of unchecked digital spaces, where “harmful” content can proliferate at an unprecedented pace and scale. In response, the G20’s final declaration underscored the critical role of digital platforms in ensuring their ecosystems do not become breeding grounds for speech they don’t like. The declaration states: “We recognize that digital platforms have reshaped the digital ecosystem and online interactions by amplifying information dissemination and facilitating communication within and across geographical boundaries. However, the digitization of the information realm and the accelerated evolution of new technologies, such as artificial intelligence (AI), has dramatically impacted the speed, scale, and reach of misinformation and disinformation, hate speech, and other forms of online harms.” The G20 goes on to say that it emphasizes the “need for digital platforms’ transparency and responsibility in line with relevant policies and applicable legal frameworks and will work with platforms and relevant stakeholders in this regard.” The declaration even says more measures need to be taken to control what it says is the spread of online misogyny and the need to combat it “online and offline.” If you're tired of censorship and dystopian threats against civil liberties, subscribe to Reclaim The Net. The post G20’s Online Speech Clampdown Calls Set To Ignite Free Speech Fears appeared first on Reclaim The Net.

Bulwark: Trump Is Running Again in 2028

A federal agency is reportedly planning to put Google under federal supervision, making Google accountable to the government for its actions. The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) is aiming to put Google under formal federal supervision, according to a Nov. 14 Washington Post report. The Big Tech company could potentially become subject to regular federal inspections and monitoring the likes of which government requires banks to undergo. While this could be the beginning of the end of Google’s monopoly, it could also spell danger for increased government overreach, as Big Tech-Big Government ties have increased and the battle to protect free speech rages on. “Be suspicious. Be very suspicious,” warned MRC Free Speech America Director Michael Morris. “If there’s one thing Americans should have learned in recent years regarding government involvement with Big Tech, it’s that the government has gone out of its way to eliminate freedoms in the name of safety — and chief among those attacked freedoms, free speech. Google has done enough on its own to censor online speech. To the extent that the CFPB can be helpful at all concerning Google, it should do a deep dive and investigate how Google’s overt bias and censorship has harmed the American public.” Google has previously fought against the federal supervision, according to The Post, which cited unnamed insiders. The Post predicted “a major legal clash with vast implications for the CFPB’s powers in the digital age.” That is especially true as the agency, like all other federal agencies, is set for new leadership under a Trump administration. The Post noted that CFPB’s specific objections to Google have not been made public, though they apparently relate to Google’s financial services, such as Google Wallet. The CFPB, formed during the first Obama presidential term, has what The Post called “broad powers to protect consumers from unfair, deceptive or predatory financial practices.” The agency already surveils banks and credit unions, and it supposedly has the power to supervise firms, too, with regulators having potentially direct access to internal company records.  The Post claimed that hundreds of customers have sent complaints to CFPB about Google’s financial services such as Wallet and its previous app Google Pay over the last few years. If CFPB deems that there is a risk for customers, it could place the firm under supervision; and not just Google, but other tech giants that offer financial services as well, such as Amazon, Apple and PayPal. There is a major red flag for free speech and privacy advocates, however. Google and its YouTube platform have been accused of colluding with the federal government to censor speech in the Murthy v. Missouri lawsuit and to exchange private user data, according to a March 2024 Forbes report. If Google falls under direct CFPB supervision, that could make the government‘s ties to Google even closer, raising concerns about potential censorship — particularly financial censorship — and surveillance activity in future. Conservatives are under attack. Contact Google here and demand that it be held to account to mirror the First Amendment while providing transparency, clarity on so-called hate speech and equal footing for conservatives. If you have been censored, contact us using CensorTrack’s contact form, and help us hold Big Tech accountable.

Comedy Central’s The Daily Show host of the week, Desi Lydic, declared on Thursday that Speaker Mike Johnson and Rep. Nancy Mace appear to believe that their mandate after Republicans won all three elected parts of the government is to make transgender Rep.-elect Sarah McBride’s life more difficult, as Johnson recently affirmed that sex-based restrooms are what those words mean. Lydic was not happy at the idea that Democrats lost the election because they’ve gone too woke, “We've all heard the official story of the 2024 election: According to the pundits, the Democrats were obsessed with woke they/them politics that didn't connect with voters, while Republicans were talking about real issues that affect people day-to-day. So, now Republicans are in charge of both houses of Congress, so let's hear about the economy.”     In a local news clip, a reporter declared, “On Capitol Hill, Speaker of the House Mike Johnson took aim at Democrat Sarah McBride, the first trans member of Congress. He barred transgender people from using the Capitol complex bathrooms that do not align with the sex assigned at birth.” Names are assigned at birth; sex is just a fact of biological life. Nonsensical babble aside, Lydic lamented, “Okay, forget about the economy. I guess the national mandate was making it harder for this one woman to poop at work.” She also claimed, “Sarah McBride, the first trans congresswoman, hasn't even started work yet, and she already has to run around the corner to Starbucks to pee.” Fact-check: False. Every member of Congress has a private bathroom in their office. According to Lydic, the only reason this is even a story is because “of one congresswoman: Nancy Mace, the Republican from South Carolina, where things must be running so smoothly that she can devote all her energy to this.” After a trio of clips Mace posted of herself to social media, Lydic responded, “I don't love her bigotry there, but I do respect her dedication to getting her steps in. I listen to podcasts, but bullying your co-workers is also a choice. Honestly, transphobic Cruella de Vil’s logic might backfire here because all her drama is ironically affirming Sarah McBride's gender. There is nothing that defines the female experience more than starting a new job and a woman at work just decides she hates you. And Nancy Mace really seems to hate Sarah McBride. It's like it's her full-time job.” The whole premise behind the segment was odd. If voters think Democrats went too far with wokeism, naturally the GOP would seek to push back while also focusing on the economy. Here is a transcript for the November 21 show: Comedy Central The Daily Show 11/21/2024 11:02 PM ET DESI LYDIC: We've all heard the official story of the 2024 election: According to the pundits, the Democrats were obsessed with woke they/them politics that didn't connect with voters, while Republicans were talking about real issues that affect people day-to-day. So, now Republicans are in charge of both houses of Congress, so let's hear about the economy. LOCAL NEWS REPORTER: On Capitol Hill, Speaker of the House Mike Johnson took aim at Democrat Sarah McBride, the first trans member of Congress. He barred transgender people from using the Capitol complex bathrooms that do not align with the sex assigned at birth. LYDIC: Hmm. Okay, forget about the economy. I guess the national mandate was making it harder for this one woman to poop at work. And by the way, who appointed Mike Johnson as the king of bathrooms? LOCAL NEWS REPORTER 2: Under House rules, the Speaker has general control of facilities in the chamber. LYDIC: Oh! I guess he's the king of bathrooms. Pardon me, your majesty! Government is weird sometimes. This guy is second in line for the presidency and he also has to refill the soap dispensers? Anyway. So now, Sarah McBride, the first trans congresswoman, hasn't even started work yet, and she already has to run around the corner to Starbucks to pee. And she is handling this situation more calmly than I would when I have to get to the bathroom. … LYDIC: But the point is, Sarah McBride is not the one pushing this issue. The whole thing started because of one congresswoman: Nancy Mace, the Republican from South Carolina, where things must be running so smoothly that she can devote all her energy to this. NANCY MACE: I'm going to fight like hell for women and girls to keep men out of women's private spaces, to include bathrooms, restrooms, locker rooms, changing rooms, you name it. You are not welcome. If being a feminist makes me an extremist or a bigot or a monster, I am totally here for it. I've said it before and I'll say it again. Come at me, bro, or bros, in this case. LYDIC: I don't love her bigotry there, but I do respect her dedication to getting her steps in. I listen to podcasts, but bullying your co-workers is also a choice. Honestly, transphobic Cruella de Vil’s logic might backfire here because all her drama is ironically affirming Sarah McBride's gender. There is nothing that defines the female experience more than starting a new job and a woman at work just decides she hates you. And Nancy Mace really seems to hate Sarah McBride. It's like it's her full-time job. 

You Don't Despise the Media Enough! MSNBC Edits AWFUL Laken Riley Trial Headline After Getting Dragged

Oops, She Did it Again ... 'LOL-yer' Sunny Hostin Forced to Read ANOTHER Legal Notice

Chris Murphy Warns Pam Bondi Would Turn DOJ Into a Political Arm of the WH (Who Wants to Tell Him?)

Matt Gaetz Shares a Nugget of Information About His Future and it Raises Even More Questions