'We will continue to wage this fight'

These are bedrock issues on which our Republic rests

'I was shocked'

He didn't mince words with his complaint

Abortion was on the ballot Tuesday in more ways than one. Nationally, Kamala Harris’ campaign increasingly emphasized the issue, claiming that electing Donald Trump again would lead to a “national abortion ban.” And voters in 10 states had the opportunity to amend their state constitutions to protect a right to abortion. Here are the results. The Harris campaign’s claims were demonstrably false. Trump repeatedly said he would veto a national abortion ban if Congress ever passed one. House Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., claimed that Project 2025’s set of policy proposals called for a national abortion ban even though the 920-page volume says nothing about it. Abortion took center stage as a long line of celebrities endorsed Harris. Trump’s victory, winning a higher percentage of the popular vote than in 2020 or 2016, showed that this strategy failed. The picture is different at the state level, where the abortion issue itself was on the ballot. In Roe v. Wade, the U.S. Supreme Court in 1973 invented a right to abortion that prevented states from enacting virtually any law to protect the unborn. Over the next few decades, 12 state courts interpreted existing provisions in their constitutions to protect that right. And then the Supreme Court overruled Roe in 2022, leaving state charters as the only source of constitutional protection. In the 2022 election, voters in California, Michigan, and Vermont added language to their state constitutions protecting a broad right to “reproductive freedom.” That step was cosmetic in California and Vermont, where the two states’ supreme courts had already interpreted the constitution to protect this right. But it was a dramatic change in Michigan, where the new language covered a vague category of “decisions about all matters related to pregnancy.” Ohio voters adopted a similar constitutional amendment in 2023. Which brings us to the 2024 ballot. Even if the line for prohibiting abortion remains the same, voters drawing that line in their state constitution makes a more significant statement than legislators doing so in a statute. With that in mind, voters in six states were asked whether their state constitution should prohibit any limitation on abortion before “viability” or, even after viability, when necessary to protect the mother’s life or health. The measure passed in five of those states: Arizona, Colorado, Missouri, Montana, and Nevada. Viability is a subjective term that designates when an unborn child can survive outside of the womb; generally, it’s considered to be at about 24 weeks. Data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention show that 99% of abortions occur before viability. Colorado, Montana, and Nevada already had drawn a legislative line at viability; Arizona had done so at 15 weeks. Although moving the line for permissible abortions from 15 weeks to viability might appear significant, the CDC data show that a 15-week ban still allows 94% of abortions. The most dramatic change occurred in Missouri, which legislatively bans abortion from conception. A slim majority of voters (52%) approved amending the state Constitution to remove this ban and allow abortions up to viability. In Florida, 57% of voters supported Amendment 4, which also would have prohibited any abortion limitations before viability. Florida, however, is one of the few states that requires 60% of voters to amend their constitution. The measure would have passed under a simple majority threshold, a dramatic change from the current six-week legislative ban. Maryland currently has no gestational limit on abortion and, therefore, voters adopting a constitutional provision protecting “reproductive freedom” didn’t change the overall legality of abortion there. Similarly, New York voters adopted a broad constitutional provision protecting women from unequal treatment based on “reproductive health care and autonomy.” This shift effectively legalizes 100% rather than 99% of abortions in New York state. Voters in Nebraska approved a ballot measure that will allow abortion only in the first trimester, but Nebraska already allows first-trimester abortions. Nebraskans rejected a separate proposal to protect “a fundamental right to abortion until fetal viability.” The margin for both ballot measures, however, was narrow: 55% voted to restrict abortion to the first trimester but 49% voted to allow the 99% of abortions that occur before viability. Finally, 60% of South Dakota voters rejected adding protection for abortion to the state Constitution. This proposal would have established different standards for restrictions on abortion during different periods of pregnancy, a complicated approach that the Supreme Court had imposed in Roe v. Wade but abandoned because it is unworkable. These results for the state ballot measures give abortion advocates cause to celebrate. The percentage of voters supporting the measure on Election Day, for example, exceeded preelection polling by four percentage points in Arizona, five points in Nebraska, six points in Colorado, and 11 points in Florida. The result matched polling in Maryland and Missouri. Even in Montana, where polling overestimated support, voters still approved the abortion measure. And even in states with pro-life legislatures, such as Missouri and Nebraska, voters chose to protect the right to abortion during all or part of pregnancy in the constitution, the state’s fundamental law. The pro-life movement always has known that its goal must be to achieve a life-affirming culture. These results show how much work still needs to be done. The post Voters Put Abortion in Their State Constitutions appeared first on The Daily Signal.

After skipping out on speaking to supporters Tuesday night, Vice President Kamala Harris delivered her concession speech at Howard University on Wednesday afternoon. The sitting vice president, thrown into the race without a primary some 100 days before the election after President Joe Biden’s withdrawal, told supporters not to despair but continue “the fight that fueled this campaign.” By the time Harris addressed her supporters from her alma mater, the bleachers were nearly empty. The bleachers here at Howard University are almost empty as we await Kamala Harris’ concession speech. pic.twitter.com/LVEt5XsL0R— Spencer Lindquist ?? (@SpencerLndqst) November 6, 2024 While some states remain to be called, Harris fell to former president and now president-elect Donald Trump by what will surely be a larger electoral college margin than Hillary Clinton in 2016. Harris appears unlikely to carry a single swing state after crushing defeats in the Rust Belt states of Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin. “Let me say my heart is full today. My heart is full today, full of gratitude for the trust you have placed in me, full of love for our country, and full of resolve,” Harris told the crowd. “The outcome of this election was not what we wanted, not what we fought for, not what we voted for, but hear me when I say the light of America’s promise will always burn bright as long as we never give up and as long as we keep fighting.” Before Harris delivered her concession speech, she called Trump to concede the election. Trump campaign communications director Steven Cheung released a statement after the call. “President Donald J. Trump and Vice President Kamala Harris spoke by phone earlier today where she congratulated him on his historic victory,” the statement read. “President Trump acknowledged Vice President Harris on her strength, professionalism, and tenacity throughout the campaign, and both leaders agreed on the importance of unifying the country.” Biden has also called Trump to congratulate the president-elect on his victory. Biden’s predecessor and successor, Trump is only the second president in U.S. history to return to the White House after spending four years out of power. Come January, Harris will be the one to certify the results. The post Kamala Harris Concedes, But Tells Supporters Not To Give Up the ‘Fight’ appeared first on The Daily Signal.

DAILY CALLER NEWS FOUNDATION—Following President-elect Donald Trump’s sweeping victory in the U.S. presidential election on Tuesday, several leaders from countries around the world offered their responses—some more congratulatory in nature than others. Trump made a historic comeback from his loss in 2020 and swept the electoral vote by at least a 277-224 Electoral College margin—with several states still uncalled, but with Trump leading—while also taking the popular vote by nearly 5 million votes, according to multiple reports. World leaders were closely watching the election—as Harris’ and Trump’s approach to foreign policy varies widely—and offered compliments on his victory, while other nations typically considered American adversaries seemed to take a more muted and cautionary tone. “Italy and the United States are ‘sister’ nations, linked by an unshakable alliance, common values, and a historic friendship,” Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni said in a statement on Wednesday. “It is a strategic bond, which I am sure we will now strengthen even further.” A nome mio e del Governo italiano, le più sincere congratulazioni al Presidente eletto degli Stati Uniti, Donald #Trump.Italia e Stati Uniti sono Nazioni “sorelle”, legate da un’alleanza incrollabile, valori comuni e una storica amicizia.È un legame strategico, che sono certa…— Giorgia Meloni (@GiorgiaMeloni) November 6, 2024 “Congratulations on history’s greatest comeback!” Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said on Wednesday. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu:Dear Donald and Melania Trump,Congratulations on history’s greatest comeback!Your historic return to the White House offers a new beginning for America and a powerful recommitment to the great alliance between Israel and America.— Prime Minister of Israel (@IsraeliPM) November 6, 2024 “The future of the [South Korea]-U.S. alliance and America will shine brighter. Look forward to working closely with you,” South Korean Prime Minister Yoon Suk Yeol said on Wednesday. Congratulations to @realDonaldTrump! Under your strong leadership, the future of the ROK-U.S. alliance and America will shine brighter. Look forward to working closely with you.— ??? Yoon Suk Yeol (@President_KR) November 6, 2024 Other world leaders that Trump differs from vastly on politics—including Canada’s and the U.K.‘s—also offered compliments to Trump on his win, even as Trump has publicly criticized their left-wing policies. “I know President Trump and I will work together to create more opportunity, prosperity, and security for both of our nations,” Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau said on Wednesday. Congratulations to Donald Trump on being elected President of the United States. The friendship between Canada and the U.S. is the envy of the world. I know President Trump and I will work together to create more opportunity, prosperity, and security for both of our nations. pic.twitter.com/yEnL6gxyzO— Justin Trudeau (@JustinTrudeau) November 6, 2024 Most European Union nations applauded Trump’s victory, though some countries signaled that Europe needs to be ready to rely more closely on itself. Trump’s “America First” approach has been popular among swaths of the American electorate but has left some European countries nervous that Trump may take a different approach than President Joe Biden’s seemingly no-holds-barred relationship with Europe in recent years. During his first term, Trump had a sometimes tense relationship with some European countries, as he felt that they contributed to the U.S.’ global trade imbalance and weren’t paying enough to be part of the NATO alliance. Trump on multiple occasions has threatened to pull the U.S. out of NATO unless European countries pay their agreed share. Trump’s threat was successful—a higher number of NATO allies met their defense spending goals at the end of his term than at the beginning. “The European Union must stand close together and act in a united manner,” German Chancellor Olaf Scholz told reporters on Wednesday, noting that he and French President Emmanuel Macron were working closely with other European partners. China offered few remarks on Trump’s win, while other adversaries such as Iran and North Korea have yet to publicly comment on the matter, although Tehran has made it clear it did not want another Trump term. Chinese officials have reportedly feared the policies of another Trump term compared to a Harris presidency and actively interfered in this year’s elections. “We respect the choice of the American people and congratulate Mr. Trump on being elected as president of the United States,” a Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman said on Wednesday. Russia’s message on the election appeared more veiled and hostile. Russian President Vladimir Putin does apparently not plan to offer any congratulations to Trump, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov told reporters on Wednesday, arguing that the U.S. is “an unfriendly country that is both directly and indirectly involved in the war against our state.” “We have repeatedly said that the U.S. is able to contribute to the end of this conflict. This cannot be done overnight, but … the U.S. is capable of changing the trajectory of its foreign policy. Will this happen, and if so, how … we will see after [the U.S. president’s inauguration in] January,” Peskov said. Russia has waged war against Ukraine since 2022 and has dragged the U.S. and Europe deeper and deeper into the conflict. Biden has failed to significantly alter the course of the war. Trump has vowed that he could strike a peace settlement between Russia and Ukraine by the time he retakes office in January. Similarly, Trump has promised that the ongoing conflict in the Middle East—which was borne out of Hamas’ invasion of Israel on Oct. 7, 2023—by the time he takes office in January, warning that he will treat Iran far more harshly than Biden has and will impose sanctions to ensure Tehran cannot build its funding reserves. Trump spoke to Netanyahu in July and reportedly told him that the war in Gaza needs to end by January, potentially in a bid to reestablish some norms between the Israelis and the Palestinians. On China, Trump has promised fair competition but warned that he will impose stricter tariffs in a bid to balance the trade deficit, encourage Americans to buy more domestic goods, and compel China to import more American products. Originally published by the Daily Caller News Foundation The post Here’s How Leaders From Around World Responded to Trump’s Victory appeared first on The Daily Signal.

If you're tired of censorship and dystopian threats against civil liberties, subscribe to Reclaim The Net. During this election season, the US presidential race not only captured extensive media attention but also significantly impacted the live-streaming world. As the election unfolded on November 5th, hundreds of streamers worldwide provided live updates on state-by-state voting results. This led to a notable increase in viewership for many online broadcasters, with certain platforms reaching new viewership benchmarks. Rumble, a platform favored by free speech audiences, particularly distinguished itself by breaking its own viewership records. According to Stream Charts, on Election Day, the platform’s streams peaked at an impressive 1.79 million viewers, surpassing its previous record of 1.04 million during a presidential debate in September. This achievement placed Rumble in the top three streaming services. The platform is a known haven for political commentators who have been censored on Big Tech platforms. High viewership figures were particularly recorded on channels hosted by Dan Bongino and Steven Crowder, with peak numbers of 515K and 460K respectively. These figures represent the highest viewership for any channel on Rumble to date, with both hosts also setting personal records during the debates in September. If you're tired of censorship and dystopian threats against civil liberties, subscribe to Reclaim The Net. The post Rumble Rises on Election Night, Powers Record-Breaking Audience Surge appeared first on Reclaim The Net.

If you're tired of censorship and dystopian threats against civil liberties, subscribe to Reclaim The Net. Another “fine” story about what is known as the Big Tech-Big Government revolving door is coming from the UK, where a former Facebook vice president has just joined the Ofcom (Office of Communications) regulator. Handpicked by Secretary of State for Science, Innovation, and Technology (DSIT) Peter Kyle, Lord Richard Allan – previously Facebook vice president of public policy, or, as some reports put it, “Facebook lobbyist in the EU” – is now a member of the Ofcom Board as a non-executive director. The most obvious problem: Ofcom is supposed to regulate Facebook as well as the rest of the industry, and now the question of a possible conflict of interest is arising. After all, Allan spent a full decade as Facebook’s vice president. And coming up with a “strategic direction” for Ofcom is among the regulator’s Board’s tasks. But DSIT reassured the public that in picking Allan for the role, “an open process in line with the Governance Code on Appointments” had been observed. One example of how these figures go through that revolving door, but in the other direction, is former UK Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg, who is now Facebook owner Meta’s president of global affairs. The “ties that bind” in this particular case happen to be even more specific: Allan was, all the way up to October 2 this year, “affiliated” with the UK’s Liberal Democrats (he in the past also served as an MP for the party). And Clegg was the leader of that party before he embarked on his Big Tech adventures. Back to Allan’s Ofcom appointment, and in explaining the choice, DSIT described him as a member of the House of Lords for the past 10 years – and someone who has worked on “communications and technology policy” for close to 30 years. Ofcom Chair Lord Michael Grade issued a statement upon hiring Allan to put an emphasis on what he said was the former Facebook exec’s extensive experience “across technology, telecoms, and media,” with a career in both public and private sectors. Allan in the past worked for UK’s National Health Service (NHS), to serve as MP, move on to Cisco, and then to Facebook. If you're tired of censorship and dystopian threats against civil liberties, subscribe to Reclaim The Net. The post Ex-Facebook VP Joins UK Media Regulator Ofcom Sparking Fresh Conflict of Interest Concerns appeared first on Reclaim The Net.

Checking In on the Libs...