|
美國「政、經」備忘錄 – 開欄文
|
瀏覽18,250 ｜回應27｜推薦1 |
|
|
|
本部落格「政治和社會」版在「兩岸議題」和「國際議題」外，轉載最多的報導、評論、和分析就屬跟「美國議題」相關的文章。除了我久居美國對她略有所知這個因素，也因為：
1) 孔夫子說的：「見賢思齊焉，見不賢而內自省也」(《論語•里仁》第17)。
2) 孫子說的：「知彼知己，百戰不殆」(《孫子兵法．謀攻》第6)。
「美國123」一欄日後將以社會、人情、風俗等軟性議題為主；「政治」和「經濟」兩個領域是硬議題，故另開此欄。
編後記：
本欄開欄文原來在2026/05/09刊出(《貝寶黑幫》，轉載自：《Wikipedia》)。為了把主題相近文章集中於一處，以便於搜尋；特更改欄名以符合內容意旨。該文將另行刊出。 -- 2026/07/20
本文於 修改第 6 次
|
|
美國2026期中選結果的影響 -- Frida Ghitis
|
|
|
推薦1 |
|
|
|
The real impact of the Democrats’ Big Win
What it means for Israel, Iran, JD Vance, the far left (not what you think!)
Frida Ghitis, 11/04/26
Democratic voters just sent a mighty wind across the country, uprooting Republican seats that had stood for decades and transforming the political landscape of the United States. It was a powerful message that will reverberate all the way to November 2028.
What happens in the months ahead will be shaped by what we saw on Tuesday, from the prospects for JD Vance to the fight against corruption and the struggle over what will be the dominant ideology within the Democratic party, to the war in Iran and the future of the US relationship with Israel.
Here are some of the lessons of the Midterms and their implications going forward:
1. Here’s a genuine surprise: even though far-left Democratic candidates had a strong showing, the sheer scale of the Democrats’ victories will weaken their hand. It’s an unfortunate paradox for the left. With a narrow majority, Democrats would need virtually every vote to pass legislation. But with this blowout result, the new speaker, Hakeem Jeffries has something he wouldn’t have had with a smaller majority, room to govern without being held hostage by a small minority. He will be able to build majorities even if the Democratic Socialist of America and the so-called “bloc” disagree and make their own demands.
Despite the victories of DSA members and their allies, this was a favorable result for centrists and moderates. With few exceptions, left-wing lawmakers will have little seniority. The powerful committee chair will likely go to more experienced Democrats, often moderates who have been in Congress for years and have learned to compromise. The newcomers, who in many cases come propelled by social media prowess, will find their influence by making memorable statements during dramatic televised hearings.
2. The 2028 presidential race has now started. Voters signaled an unmistakable repudiation of President Donald Trump. That has weakened the prospects for Vice President JD Vance, his MAGA heir apparent.
3. Another big loser on Tuesday was Elon Musk, who spent $500 million backing losing candidates. Turns out buying elections is harder than it seems, a refreshing lesson for an embattled democracy.
4. Trump was the biggest loser of the night, even if he claims Republican losses happened because he wasn’t on the ballot. And yet, the fact is that he has governed with little regard for Congress, passing few laws. He has mostly issued unilateral executive orders, and he will continue to do so. Until now, the Republican-controlled Congress has acted as a feeble rubber stamp for the president. Now Congress will come back to life and start working to pass legislation, probably restoring Obamacare subsidies and taking other cost-of-living measures. Trump will veto some and let others pass. Democrats, despite their large majorities, are far short of the two-thirds votes required to override a presidential veto. In the Senate they are nowhere near the 60 votes needed to overcome a filibuster.
視頻 川普回電話 (Watch this amazing live phone call to Trump in the middle of Tuesday’s vote counting, where he talks about how he will govern now)
5. One thing Trump cannot veto is the ability of Congress to launch public investigations into corruption and incompetence in his administration. Expect to see Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth in their crosshairs -- perhaps Trump will fire him before that starts -- with many others to follow. The likely incoming chairman of the House Oversight Committee, Robert Garcia of California, snarkily warned Republicans on Tuesday night to “LAWYER UP.”
6. Because he is losing control of Congress and, his freedom of action on the domestic front will be more limited. As a result, Trump is likely to focus more on two things: foreign policy – Ukraine, Russia, Iran, etc. -- and his physical remaking of Washington: the ballroom, the arch, the gold statues, etc. Foreign policy is an area where presidents have a lot of latitude.
7. On Iran, Democrats will try to stop the war, but it will not be easy. Much of what happens there will remain up to Trump. Democrats will again try to block new funding for the war, but the Pentagon still has a lot of money.
8. U.S. policy toward Israel is changing, and it will stand at the core of divisions within the Democratic Party. Democrats elected several virulently anti-Israel candidates, with campaigning veering into antisemitism. On Election Day, perhaps desperate to salvage some close elections, Trump said U.S. military aid to Israel will stop at the end of this year. He claimed the decision had been reached jointly by him and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Israel had wanted it tapered off more slowly. It’s unclear if he can do that since the existing agreement runs through 2028.
The candidates whose platform focused sharply on ending U.S. support for Israel will not be satisfied. The incoming Congresswoman from New York, Darializa Avila Chevalier, for example, who appeared to celebrate the massacre of Oct. 7 by joining an anti-Israel rally on Oct. 8, already said the U.S should ban all weapons sales to Israel and demand the “right of return.” That’s a call for bringing millions of descendants of Palestinians into Israel, effectively ending the world’s only Jewish-majority state.
Incoming Speaker Jeffries said in July that Israel remains a valuable U.S. ally, but American policy in the region “must change dramatically.”
In the Senate, Abdul el-Sayed, who turned anti-Israel positions into a major campaign issue and expressed ambivalence about whether Israel should exist, will agitate for a sharply anti-Israel policy -- and he will have some support. Israel policy will remain in the headlines. The days of unquestioned bipartisan support for a strongly pro-Israel are in the past, thanks to Netanyahu and Trump, as I have written many times before.
Israelis watched the U.S. election with as much as interest as Americans did. The inconclusive results of last week’s Israeli election mean the bilateral relationship could also be harmed by the outcome of the government-formation process there. If Netanyahu ends up losing power, the new government will work to rebuild bipartisan support in the U.S. It won’t be easy. If he survives, it will continue to deteriorate.
There are many more lessons from this election, but these are enough to make for an interesting last two years of the Trump administration.
Welcome to the beginning of the end of the Trump era. It seems U.S. democracy may just survive!
相關報導
* Democrats’ House majority is trending toward historic (11/06)
* Republicans have control of Congress for 2 more months. Here’s what they hope to get done. (11/06)
* One big midterm result was overlooked by many - and it might have the biggest impact (11/05)
* Midterms over, Democrats plunge into wide-open 2028 presidential race (11/05)
* Republicans call for Trump to change course after midterm drubbing (11/05)
* Some Democratic Senate candidates would have won even if nobody voted for them on Election Day (11/05；因為提早投票和通信投票兩者的總票數已經多過對手得票總數)
本文於 修改第 3 次
|
|
美國2026期中選結果的分析 - JILL COLVIN等
|
|
|
推薦1 |
|
|
|
請參考：
* Follow live updates on the midterm elections
* 文後所附「相關報導」下的評論、分析、和報導
Democrats win the US House and Senate as voters deliver a strong rebuke to Trump and Republicans
JILL COLVIN/MARY CLARE JALONICK/WILL WEISSERTJILL COLVIN, 11/04/26 3:57 PM (台北時間)
WASHINGTON (AP) — Democrats won control of both chambers of Congress, delivering a decisive rebuke of Republican governance in Washington and ushering in a new era of congressional resistance to President Donald Trump.
Tuesday’s midterm elections laid bare voters’ deep frustrations over high prices, the Iran war and concerns over government corruption. Democrats routed their rivals across the map, flipping states that have voted Republican for decades and that Trump won by double digits just two years ago.
That includes James Talarico’s stunning Senate victory in Texas, where no Democrat had won statewide office in more than 30 years, and Annie Andrews’ upset victory over Sen. Darline Graham in South Carolina. Trump had thrown his full weight behind both losing candidates.
In Michigan, progressive Abdul El-Sayed — one of a crop of left-wing candidates who prevailed in Democratic primaries — topped Republican Mike Rogers. Even Republican Sen. Susan Collins of Maine, a battle-tested survivor of difficult elections, lost to Democrat Troy Jackson.
The results marked a fundamental unraveling of the coalition that returned Trump to the White House two years ago, with young people and Latinos moving away from Republicans, according to The AP Voter Poll. Only about one-third of Hispanic voters said they backed the Republican in their local U.S. House races.
It was all a major blow to Trump, who spent nearly every day of the last month holding rallies to energize his supporters but was unable to stop a wipeout.
The results will reshape the rest of Trump’s term
While Trump has proven adept at steamrolling efforts to rein him in, Democratic control will profoundly reshape Trump’s final two years in office and hamstring his legislative agenda.
Party leaders have signaled they’ll use their new power to ensure Trump’s final two years in office are dominated by a series of investigations of top members of his administration and deeper scrutiny of how he’s enriched his family. Impeachment of Trump and his Cabinet officials is not off the table. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and tech titan Elon Musk, a former top Trump adviser, are among possible targets for investigations.
In celebratory events Tuesday night, Democratic Senate Leader Chuck Schumer called the results a “generational remake of the Senate map.” Democratic House Leader Hakeem Jeffries said “the American people are crying out for transformational change.”
Trump immediately sought to shift blame for his party’s losses, posting on his social media site before polls even closed on the West Coast that he wasn’t on the ballot — even though he spent weeks asking voters to act like he was. He vowed to veto Democrat-controlled legislation, sharing a picture of a red baseball cap with “VETO” stenciled in the style of his trademark “Make America Great Again”
In a late-night phone interview with Fox News, Trump said he didn’t consider the elections to be a personal defeat. Voters, he said, “didn’t like the candidates.”
Democrats had braced for Trump to again try to undermine the results if they won after he warned that noncitizens would cast ballots en masse and filed lawsuits in Alaska and California. Instead, he said on Fox that he would accept them.
Despite the results, Senate Majority Leader John Thune wrote on X that “Senate Republicans will not stand idly by as the far-left, socialist wing of the Democrat Party attempts to unwind everything we’ve done.” He said they will work with Trump “to stop the worst impulses of Democrat extremism.”
Democrats charted an extraordinary path to Senate victory
Midterm elections are typically difficult for the president’s party, but Republicans had originally expected that their Senate majority was safe. Instead, Democrats marched through some of the most conservative states in the nation.
Josh Turek defeated Rep. Ashley Hinson in Iowa, while Adam Hamilton ousted Sen. Roger Marshall in Kansas to become the state’s first Democratic senator since 1932. A cascade of surprising Democratic victories included Talarico defeating Ken Paxton in Texas, Andrews upsetting Graham in South Carolina, Sherrod Brown topping Sen. Jon Husted in Ohio and Roy Cooper taking an open North Carolina seat.
Trump played an outsized role in many of the races. He endorsed the scandal-plagued Paxton and helped him defeat incumbent Sen. John Cornyn in the Texas primary, even as Republican officials warned his efforts could be costly. He sharply criticized North Carolina Republican Sen. Thom Tillis, who opted not to seek reelection. He also supported Graham, despite doubts within the party that she was the right candidate to replace her brother, who died unexpectedly earlier this year.
Less of a surprise was Democratic Sen. Jon Ossoff winning reelection in Georgia, defeating Rep. Mike Collins. Rep. Chris Pappas also won a Senate race in New Hampshire, defeating former Sen. John Sununu to replace retiring Democratic Sen. Jeanne Shaheen.
One outstanding Senate battleground was Alaska, where the Trump administration filed a lawsuit to block certification of Senate results if Republican incumbent Dan Sullivan loses the race, citing the presence of a second candidate named Dan Sullivan on the ballot. Mississippi’s Senate race remained too early to call.
In the House, Democrats reached deeply into Trump-won territory to defeat his preferred candidates and win in even some of the most Republican states. There were multiple Democratic pickups in Iowa, Texas, Florida and Pennsylvania and new Democratic seats in Kentucky, Missouri, Nebraska, Ohio and Utah. In Iowa, there was an all-Republican congressional delegation going into the election. Democrats will now represent three of them.
Bracing for a tough night, Republicans had spent the campaign’s final stretch pumping tens of millions of dollars into states and districts that Trump won handily two years ago, as Trump campaigned in heavily red areas. But even Republicans’ money advantage didn’t stem the Democratic tide.
“I wasn’t on the Ballot and if I was, we would have won IN A LANDSLIDE!” Trump wrote on his social media site.
The electorate is frustrated and unhappy
Voters were sour heading into Tuesday, deeply unhappy with the country’s direction and pessimistic about the future, according to The AP Voter Poll.
Most said they felt frustrated, with about three-quarters saying they felt “angry” or “dissatisfied” with the country’s current trajectory. Dissatisfaction was particularly high in blue states, but even in red states, a majority of voters were at least “dissatisfied.”
The economy was key to Trump’s White House comeback two years ago. But the poll found that three-quarters of voters said the economy is “not so good” or “poor.” About 8 in 10 said inflation has caused a “severe” or “moderate” financial hardship for their households.
Government corruption was also a big issue with voters. Roughly half cited it and the cost of living as “crucial” to their vote for Congress — higher than immigration enforcement policies, the war in Iran and artificial intelligence data centers. About 6 in 10 voters said Trump prioritizes his own personal interests more than the country’s interests.
Despite their relative advantage on issues, the Democratic Party was not much more popular with voters than the Republicans. Just under half of voters said they have a “somewhat” or “strongly” favorable view of the Democratic Party, while about 4 in 10 viewed Republicans positively.
Republicans tried to buck historical midterm precedent with an aggressive redistricting effort aimed at creating a more favorable congressional map. But in Florida and Texas, where Republicans hoped to pick up as many as nine seats, the plan fell short, with Democrats picking up targeted districts.
Democrats dominate governor’s races
Beyond Washington, 36 states elected governors. Democrats Josh Shapiro in Pennsylvania, JB Pritzker in Illinois, Wes Moore in Maryland, Maura Healey in Massachusetts and Kathy Hochul in New York all won reelection. In a stunning upset in Texas, Gina Hinojosa defeated Republican Gov. Greg Abbott, who was seeking a fourth term.
In Ohio, Republican Vivek Ramaswamy lost to Democrat Amy Acton after his campaign faced backlash for an ad featuring Acton’s estranged mother, who lost custody of Acton decades ago after her husband, Acton’s stepfather, was indicted for raping Acton as a child.
Democrat Keisha Lance Bottoms of Georgia will be the first Black female governor of any state. In neighboring Florida, Byron Donalds became the nation’s first Black Republican to be elected governor.
Jeffries, in line to make history as the nation’s first Black speaker of the House, has outlined a 100-day agenda focused on lowering the cost of living and aggressively overseeing the Trump administration.
The especially strong showing for Democrats could boost the party’s large crop of potential presidential candidates. It may also complicate the paths of Vice President JD Vance and other Republicans who may have been looking to turn their loyalty to Trump into momentum.
Associated Press journalists Joey Cappelletti, Lisa Mascaro, Linley Sanders, Aaron Kessler and Ali Swenson in Washington; Cody Jackson in Palm Beach Gardens, Fla.; and Allen Breed in Raleigh, N.C., contributed.
JILL COLVIN is an Associated Press national political reporter covering campaigns and elections.
WILL WEISSERT Weissert covers the White House for The Associated Press. He is based in Washington.
相關報導
* Conservative US Supreme Court justices Thomas and Alito in spotlight after Democratic landslide (11/05)
* Democrats Deliver a Big Blue Bludgeoning (11/04)
* Five reasons why Republicans lost so badly (11/04)
* Four investigations Democrats could launch after winning control of Congress (11/05)
* From the 1st Black woman governor to the 1st Muslim senator, here are 12 historic firsts of the 2026 midterm election (11/04)
* Midterms 2026: How Democrats built a blue wave and won control of Congress (11/04)
* Pete Hegseth stares down likely impeachment vote. And he's not the only one (11/04)
* Takeaways: Voters punish Trump, and the GOP pays the price almost everywhere
* Trump’s gerrymanders fail spectacularly as Democrats hold nearly every seat (11/04)
* World Leaders Revel in 'Crumbling' Trump's Humiliation (11/04；Revel：得意，高興)
選前花絮
* Trump in Ohio and Obama in Georgia make closing stretch appeals to midterm voters in pivotal states
* Obama, in Midwest, assails ‘cruelty’ and indecency from Trump and his allies in the midterm campaign
本文於 修改第 3 次
|
|
美國期中選最新結果 - 聯合報/Yahoo News
|
|
|
推薦1 |
|
民主黨期中選如未能過半分析 - CBC
|
|
|
推薦1 |
|
|
|
相關分析：
* Five questions that will determine how the midterms shake out (11/03)
台灣時間今晚美國期中選鏖戰開始，轉載戰前分析；如果民主黨未能得到民調顯示的結果，這兩篇分析或可參考、解惑。
5 reasons why the Democrats might not take control of Congress in U.S. midterms
CBC, 11/02/26
Political strategists of both main parties in the U.S. believe it's almost certain the Democrats will take control of the House of Representatives from the Republicans in Tuesday's midterm elections.
The likelihood of the Democratic Party flipping the Senate, however, is another story.
In the House, non-partisan election-forecast websites such as Cook Political Report rate the Republicans as vulnerable in as many as 30 GOP-held seats. The Democrats need a net gain of merely three to get a majority.
Also, consider that the party of the sitting president has suffered a net loss of House seats in all but two midterm elections since the late 1930s, and that no U.S. president has gone into a midterm with a lower approval rating than what Donald Trump has right now.
But when it comes to the Senate, there are doubts the Democrats have a clear path to flipping the four states they need to reach the majority threshold of 51.
Here are five reasons why the Democrats may not wind up with control of both houses of Congress for the remainder of Trump's time in office.
1. The 2026 Senate map is tough for Democrats
Flipping the Senate this year was always going to be a tough haul for the Democrats, simply because of their limited opportunities to gain seats in this particular midterm.
Only one-third of Senate seats are up for grabs each election, because senators are elected to six-year terms.
Nearly all of the Republican-held seats the Democrats are seeking to flip are in states that Trump carried by at least 11 percentage points in 2024. (The only exceptions within easier reach are Maine and North Carolina.)
That means to get a majority, the Democrats must gain at least two states from a list that includes Ohio, Iowa, Texas, Alaska and Kansas.
That will require a giant swing toward the Democrats in states that have long been ruby red.
2. The polls could be off
There's been a well documented history of polling in the Trump era failing to measure the full extent of support for Republicans. On the final weekend before the 2024 presidential election, a poll in Iowa (by a pollster with a sterling reputation) showed Kamala Harris up by three points. Trump won the state by 13.
Polling firms have, over the years, adjusted their methods to try to compensate for the tendency of Democrats to be more likely than Republicans to answer polls.
They weight responses so samples better reflect the full demographics of who actually shows up at the polls, factoring in education, income and ethnicity. They ask respondents who they voted for in the last election to check the sample isn't torqued toward one party or the other.
Polling is a science, but an inexact one, and it's important to remember its limitations. One key limitation is that when two candidates are polling within the margin of error — say, a lead of just two percentage points — you really can't say who's winning.
Recent polls in the Senate races in Maine, Michigan, Ohio and Kansas have all shown results within the margin of error.
3. So much depends on turnout
Voter turnout in midterm election years has historically lagged behind turnout in presidential election years. The key midterm challenge for each party, whether on the offensive or defensive, is getting their supporters simply to show up.
While polling broadly suggests registered Democrats are more enthusiastic about punishing Trump than the Republican base is defending him, Democratic candidates still need help from independent voters to win in toss-up races.
It's worth noting that the highest turnout for a midterm election since the First World War came in 2018, during Trump's first term.
One factor that could dampen a blue wave is whether the Democratic Party and its candidates made strong enough arguments for why Americans should vote for them, rather than simply relying on their desire to vote against the Republicans.
4. GOP money has flooded the airwaves
Extraordinary amounts of money have gone into campaign advertising this midterm cycle.
In just the competitive Senate races, Republicans and their affiliated political action committees (PACs) have spent some $1.2 billion US, outpacing Democrats by $237 million US, according to a Bloomberg analysis of ad-buying data from the consulting firm AdImpact.
Elon Musk alone has spent the staggering sum of nearly half a billion dollars supporting Republican candidates in the midterms ($475 million US, reports the New York Times, $446 million US, according to the Guardian.)
The race to be come the next U.S. senator for Texas — between Republican Ken Paxton and Democrat James Talarico — is poised to become the most expensive non-presidential campaign in history, with spending since the primaries already surpassing $500 million US, according to data compiled by AdImpact.
5. Democrat candidates could underperform
Don't discount the possibility the Democrats could fall short in a state or two because their particular candidate fails to capture the full extent of the swing away from the Republicans elsewhere in the country.
In Maine, the Democrats had to scramble in July to nominate a candidate to replace Graham Platner, the oysterman who'd attracted national attention for his anti-establishment campaign only to be forced to resign amid allegations he'd sexually assaulted a former partner.
His replacement, Troy Jackson, is a logger who's been a politician for 20 years and, while equally plain-spoken, lacks much of Platner's charisma.
Jackson is also battling a formidable opponent in Susan Collins, who has held this Senate seat for 30 years despite Maine's history of voting Democrat for president.
Michigan is another state where the Democrat candidate is potentially at risk. Abdul El-Sayed, one of the most left-leaning Senate candidates the party is fielding this cycle, won the bitter nomination battle this summer to replace the retiring Gary Peters.
Trump has leaned into Islamophobic rhetoric to attack El-Sayed, repeatedly calling him a "jihadist" who's "on the side of the terrorists." The results on Tuesday will give some indication whether those attacks resonated with Michigan voters or repelled them.
本文於 修改第 2 次
|
|
美國政治：「百萬富翁」的遊戲 -- Jess Bidgood
|
|
|
推薦1 |
|
|
|
A Millionaire’s Game
Your Senate candidates are probably richer than you.
Jess Bidgood, 10/30/26
One theme has risen above every other this election, as inflation ticks up and inequality yawns ever wider. Say it with me: affordability.
Rising prices — and the financial strain that comes with them — have become a talking point for candidates across the nation.
But the personal finances of most of the top Senate candidates put them far out of touch with regular Americans’ economic concerns.
Earlier this fall, I asked my colleague Matt Zdun, a data reporter, if he could help me comb through the financial disclosure forms that candidates for the Senate are required to put on file with the federal government.
We learned that running for the Senate is, by and large, a rich person’s game. At least half of the 63 major Senate candidates who have filed financial disclosure forms so far have a household net worth of at least $1 million.
Let’s dig into the findings.
Hotels, cows and an airplane
The median American household net worth was $215,900 as of 2025, according to the Federal Reserve. Most of the people running for Senate are worth considerably more than that.
Two incumbents — Senator Pete Ricketts of Nebraska, a Republican, and Senator Mark Warner of Virginia, a Democrat — have nine-figure household net worths.
The candidates’ wealth comes from all kinds of places. Dozens have business interests; 26 of them, or their spouses, own property that generates income. The wife of Representative Kevin Hern of Oklahoma, the Republican nominee for Senate there, owns at least one airplane, and a hangar to go with it. Senator Mike Rounds of South Dakota is an investor in hotels. Senator Cindy Hyde-Smith of Mississippi has cows.
There are limits to what financial disclosure forms tell us. Candidates report the value of their assets and liabilities in huge ranges, not hard figures. And they don’t have to report homes that don’t generate income. But even the minimum possible net worth for most candidates makes them richer than your average American family.
Strikingly, just two Senate candidates themselves have the financial baggage weighing down many Americans: student loans. They are Charles Booker, the Democratic nominee in Kentucky, and Justin Murphy, the Republican nominee in New Jersey.
When wealth is political
Running for office while wealthy is not necessarily a bad look to voters. George Washington was fabulously rich. President Trump has long used an image of wealth and business success to burnish his political appeal.
But this year, some Democrats running for the Senate are seeking to turn their opponents’ personal wealth into a political liability, while campaigning on their own modest means.
* An ad from James Talarico, the Democratic nominee in Texas, highlights the vast real estate portfolio of his Republican rival, Ken Paxton. “Vote for James Talarico,” the ad says. “He has one house.”
* In Iowa, an ad for the Democratic nominee, Josh Turek, promises that he won’t be another millionaire in the Senate. “I was a kid wearing Goodwill hand-me-downs, with the wrong color lunch ticket,” Turek says in the spot, adding, “It’s families like mine who pay the price for Trump’s health care cuts.”
Overall, there appears to be a partisan tilt when it comes to wealth: Of the 32 candidates whose disclosures establish them as millionaires, nearly three-quarters are Republicans.
At least two candidates have a reported household net worth of over $100 million.
One Republican；One Democrat
At least seven other candidates have a reported household net worth of over $10 million.
Six Republicans；One Democrat
At least 23 other candidates have a reported household net worth of over $1 million.
Sixteen Republicans；Seven Democrat
Credit...Source: U.S. Senate Office of Public Records; Clerk of the U.S. House of Representatives | By Malika Khurana
You’re reading the On Politics newsletter. It's a pivotal moment for American politics. Join us for 2026 and beyond.
See more of our coverage in your search results. Add The New York Times as a preferred source on Google
本文於 修改第 1 次
|
|
星鏈協助美國執行外交政策 -- Erin Banco/Joey Roulette
|
|
|
推薦1 |
|
|
|
請參考：
* 什麼是星鏈 Starlink？成千上萬顆低軌衛星布局的背後 (2022/08/02)
* Starlink
Exclusive-US has for years asked Musk to alter Starlink service in Ukraine, Middle East, sources say
Erin Banco/Joey Roulette, 10/24/26
WASHINGTON, Oct 23 (Reuters) - Well before the throttling this month of Ukraine's military access to Elon Musk's satellite communications system, the Biden and Trump administrations had several times asked SpaceX to turn its Starlink service on or off in various countries, according to six former senior US officials familiar with the matter.
During the presidency of Joe Biden, the requests included switching off the service to prevent Iranian proxy militias in Yemen and Lebanon from using Starlink to communicate, and activating the service to provide internet access inside Iran and in Ukraine to support its military, said four of the former officials.
Similarly, President Donald Trump's administration asked Musk, who is CEO of SpaceX, to make the service available in Iran following US-Israeli strikes in 2025 and 2026, in hopes it would bolster internet access and communications for anti-government protesters, a former senior Trump official and a person familiar with the matter told Reuters.
All of the people spoke on condition of anonymity. The previous US requests about Starlink access are being reported here for the first time.
The recent blowup over restrictions to Ukraine's use of SpaceX satellite services has raised questions about the ties between the US government and Musk, whose company owns systems vital to the US military and to US allies.
The Biden-era and Trump requests to Musk show a close relationship in which US administrations rely to an unprecedented degree on a private-sector company to help implement foreign policy.
The recent limits on Ukraine, despite being a US ally, have also rattled officials in Europe, some of whom argue that Europe must develop its own military satellite communications capabilities because no viable short-term alternative currently exists.
STARSHIELD RESTRICTIONS HOBBLE UKRAINE MILITARY
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy said last week that his country's access to Starshield, the military version of the Starlink system, had been intentionally limited, interfering with the performance of the country's military drones. He also said the speeds were reduced for Starlink, which Ukraine uses for some military activities including defense against Russian missile attacks.
Reuters has reported that the order to throttle Starshield came from inside the White House. The Trump administration has acknowledged the slowdown but has not said whether it gave the order.
The White House, contacted for comment, referred Reuters to Trump's remarks on Friday, when he said he had not spoken with Musk about Starlink access issues for Ukraine and that "if there is a problem, I'll get it straightened out."
Halyna Yusypiuk, a spokesperson for the Ukrainian embassy in Washington, said Ukraine's priority is "to have the service restored to normal speed as soon as possible, as the lives of our people depend on it."
SpaceX did not respond to requests for comment, although Musk said in a social media post earlier this week: "Starshield systems are owned and controlled by the US government. Any limits on speed or usage are decided by the US military and ultimately (by the president of the United States)."
Democratic US Representative Jason Crow called on Friday for clarity about the recent changes to Ukraine's satellite service, saying there are risks to the US dependence on SpaceX.
"Unelected billionaires and private corporations should not decide what is in the best interest of America's national security," Crow said.
For Ukraine, the Starlink internet service has become the lifeblood of frontline communication between units, who say there is currently no rival to the capabilities of SpaceX's products.
Starshield receivers, largely impervious to radio jamming, are used as onboard guidance systems and to provide links to a remote pilot for Ukrainian drones, including deep behind Russian lines inside Ukraine.
MUSK'S INFLUENCE RAISES UNCERTAINTY
Musk's role as the strong-willed CEO of a company with outsized influence over US national security has at times raised questions over who is making decisions about SpaceX's satellite services.
The SpaceX CEO is "supposed to be a business executive, with government contracts, and he's essentially making huge foreign policy decisions," said Armand Musey, president of Summit Ridge Group, a satellite industry consultancy.
"He's sufficiently ambiguous of a person that you don't know if his decisions are sort of his personal quirks, or it's because there's an influence elsewhere that's impacting him," Musey said.
In previous years, Musk has moved to limit Ukraine's access to Starlink. In 2022, according to Reuters reporting, Musk ordered SpaceX personnel to cut Starlink coverage in areas Ukraine was trying to retake, a move that surprised White House officials.
Musk has said publicly that he refused a 2022 Ukrainian request to activate his satellite network in Crimea's port city of Sevastopol to aid an attack on Russia's fleet there, saying he feared complicity in a major act of war.
The Biden administration at times relied on Musk to help implement policy, five of the former officials said.
Biden officials coordinated with SpaceX to thwart US adversaries by cutting the service, and to help allies by expanding Starlink's availability, they said.
They added that discussions between the government and SpaceX, which usually included Pentagon and White House officials, often focused on preventing groups such as the Iranian-linked Houthis in Yemen and Hezbollah in Lebanon from using Starlink terminals.
Biden officials several times shared intelligence with SpaceX that indicated that the Houthis and Hezbollah were using diverted Starlink terminals — hardware that made its way to the militants through intermediaries.
In October 2023, during fighting between Israel and Hezbollah militants in southern Lebanon, intelligence officials told the White House that individuals linked to Hezbollah could have gained access to Starlink terminals. Officials had similar concerns about the Houthis in Yemen in 2024 during a US air campaign against the Iran-linked group, five of the officials said.
In both cases, the administration contacted SpaceX and asked it to identify the terminals and shut them off. At least some of the terminals were deactivated, said two of the officials.
In a 2024 submission to the US Commerce Department's Bureau of Industry and Security, SpaceX said it works closely with US government agencies to secure export authorizations where required and to safeguard technology in support of US national security objectives and foreign policy goals.
Soon after Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022, Biden officials pushed SpaceX to expand Starlink use for the Ukrainian military, said two of the former officials.
In a separate instance, the Biden administration asked SpaceX to turn on Starlink in Iran during a protest movement launched in September 2022 after the death of Mahsa Amini, an Iranian arrested for not wearing her hijab properly, according to one of the former officials.
Starlink terminals were moved into the country with the help of the administration, said the official, who declined to say how many were transferred.
The Trump administration took a similar step earlier this year and discussed with Musk and SpaceX getting Starlink terminals into Iran and activated following US-Israeli strikes in the country in June 2025 and again in February 2026, a former senior Trump official and a person familiar with the matter told Reuters.
Neither the Trump administration nor SpaceX has publicly confirmed that those terminals were turned on. The Wall Street Journal reported in February that the US government had sent thousands of Starlink terminals into Iran.
Iran's delegation to the UN did not respond to a request for comment.
(Reporting by Erin Banco and Phil Stewart; Editing by Don Durfee and Edmund Klamann)
本文於 修改第 1 次
|
|
川普意圖干預期中選的陰影 – Noah Robertson
|
|
|
推薦1 |
|
|
|
U.S. officials privately advise states fearing Trump election meddling
Their private efforts have reached governors, election stewards and lawmakers from both parties who are increasingly alarmed that the administration may interfere in the midterms.
Noah Robertson, 10/20/26
A small group of U.S. national security officials has been discreetly advising state governments and congressional lawmakers on how to prepare for the possibility that the Trump administration will attempt to interfere in November’s midterm elections, according to people involved in the effort.
The group includes about 10 current and former officials with experience in the Defense Department, some of whom have previously focused on countering authoritarianism abroad.
Their efforts are motivated not by political bias, they say, but a growing sense of alarm that President Donald Trump will harm American democracy by undermining the integrity of the vote to keep the Republican Party in power.
Over the past several months, the group has consulted with officials from 10 states, including governors, election officials and members of the House and Senate from both political parties who share a fear of federal intervention, two people involved in the effort said.
The effort, which has not been previously reported, focuses on states and jurisdictions where tightly contested races will determine control of Congress for the remainder of Trump’s presidency. Members of the group remain in contact with congressional staffs, and at least one state has continued to meet with them as it works to address potential vulnerabilities.
“All of them have said we’re concerned but we don’t know what to do,” one member of the group said of its meetings with lawmakers.
“The outcome that we hope for is that states would be prepared for any contingencies should they arise,” the person continued.
This report is based on interviews, conducted over several months, with two officials involved in the effort. They spoke on the condition of anonymity and that the lawmakers and state leaders with whom the group has met not be identified either, for fear of retaliation. The Washington Post also reviewed some of the documents the group prepared for its meetings.
Trump has long claimed that a “deep state” of government officials is working to undermine his presidency. Since returning to office, he has undertaken an expansive effort to fire career civil servants and solicit political loyalty from the bureaucracy.
Lauren Bis, a White House spokesperson, dismissed the group’s concerns and blamed Democrats for not supporting stricter election laws.
The Trump administration, she said in a statement, “is taking decisive action to protect our elections including prosecuting election crimes, strengthening election infrastructure security, and protecting vulnerable voters from fraud and coercion.”
The president, Bis added, “is making clear that anyone who illegally votes in our elections will be held accountable.”
In their discussions ahead of the midterms, the national security officials have detailed ways the Trump administration could use its federal powers to sway the upcoming vote, covering categories that include legal and illegal activity. Among their concerns are that the administration could deploy troops or immigration agents to polling stations or seek to nullify results based on claims of voter fraud.
Their meetings with lawmakers have mainly focused on raising awareness, especially among Republicans, of the potential for interference and on counseling them to be prepared to publicly oppose any such efforts. With state governments, they’ve focused more on how to harden election protocols that could be exploited by the federal government, the two members of the group said.
Their warnings are based on personal analysis of the administration’s activities and public statements made by the president and his allies — not access to specific government intelligence or information to which they have access because of their positions within federal agencies, members of the group said. They described the meetings as a way to help state and federal officials secure the election and emphasized that their work has occurred outside of their official capacity as government employees.
Still, their efforts indicate an extraordinary level of concern that Trump may use his authority to influence the election or challenge the results, similar to his extended campaign to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election that culminated with a raid on the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021.
Trump’s approval rating is at record lows only weeks ahead of the Nov. 3 midterms, with voters frustrated about the cost of living and the war in Iran. Democrats appear likely to flip the House and possibly the Senate, and have vowed to intensify oversight of the administration if they regain power.
Election officials, including some Republicans, have decried efforts by the Trump administration to assert federal control over a process that the Constitution entrusts to the states. Some GOP-led states, such as Utah, have refused to comply with the administration’s efforts to access their voter rolls.
“The threats that we’re getting now are mostly from our own government,” Utah Lt. Gov. Deidre Henderson told The Post earlier this month.
In January, the FBI raided an election office in Fulton County, Georgia, and seized voting materials in an investigation tied to Trump’s debunked claims of voter fraud in the 2020 election. Trump told the New York Times in an interview earlier this year that he regretted not having the National Guard seize voting machines during that race.
As he has campaigned on behalf of Republicans, Trump has repeated his claims about the 2020 election and that Democrats are attempting mass voter fraud ahead of the midterms. In October, a group of nongovernmental organizations sued the administration, alleging that it unlawfully collected voting data from 47 states.
Throughout the year, he has unsuccessfully urged Congress to pass an election security bill — the SAVE America Act — that would give the federal government more authority over the voting process. The GOP-controlled Senate has not done so, as passing the bill would require ending the chamber’s 60-vote threshold known as the filibuster.
Trump and some of his top Cabinet officials also have declined to rule out the possibility that they will send members of the military or immigration agents to polling stations, alarming Democrats.
During a combative Senate Armed Services Committee hearing in late April, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth was asked whether he would refuse a presidential order to deploy troops to the polls or to collect voting machines. He dismissed the question, posed by Sen. Elissa Slotkin (D-Michigan), as a “hypothetical.”
When the committee’s Republican chairman, Sen. Roger Wicker (Mississippi), urged Hegseth to provide a response, the secretary said, “I’ve never been ordered to do anything illegal, and I won’t.”
In August, Gen. Dan Caine, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, wrote to Slotkin and said that there were no plans to deploy troops to the polls or seize voting records.
The Pentagon did not respond to a request for comment.
In September, Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin declined to rule out the possibility of deploying immigration agents to the polls. Speaking to reporters, Mullin said that they would appear only if there were “specific threats” and that such agents wouldn’t “patrol” voting sites.
A spokesperson for the Department of Homeland Security said that Immigration and Customs Enforcement “is not planning operations targeting polling locations” and would only do so if an “active public safety threat endangered a polling location.”
At other times, Trump and other senior officials have attempted to use the powers of their office to sway voters to support Republicans. The president has promised voters a $5,000 reward if the GOP maintains its majority in Congress, and he has used taxpayer money to air campaign-style ads ahead of the midterms.
The precautions some states are taking against potential federal interference in the midterms signal a radical departure from the threats that state governments normally focus on in an election year. Foreign actors such as China and Russia have long sought to influence or disrupt U.S. elections, and continue to do so ahead of the November midterms, the U.S. intelligence community has assessed.
Tammy Patrick, the chief program officer at the National Association of Election Officials, said that over the past year the possibility of federal interference has become the dominant concern of election officials she has spoken to around the country.
State and local officials, for example, have been rehearsing how to respond if a federal agent appears at a polling place to compel access to ballots or voting machines, she said.
Other officials, Patrick said, have been concerned about moves the Trump administration has already taken.
Since returning to office, Trump has pressured states, such as Indiana and Texas, to redraw their congressional maps to favor Republicans. His administration has also asked the Supreme Court to limit the availability of mail-in voting, a request the court has rejected.
“All of these things,” Patrick said, “are being done in the open.”
Patrick Marley contributed to this report.
Noah Robertson joined the Washington Post in 2025, where he covers the core national security committees in Congress. He previously covered the Pentagon and American politics from gun control to policing. follow on X@noahjrobertson
本文於 修改第 1 次
|
|
美國2026期中選10/20民調 -- Andrew Romano
|
|
|
推薦1 |
|
|
|
請參考：
* Nate Silver Makes Huge Call in Must-Win MAGA State (10/31)
* Democrats to Gain 24 House Seats, 6 in Senate as Sabato Center Projects 'Blue Wave' (10/30)
* Who is Dan Osborn? Meet the Nebraska independent who could decide which party controls the Senate (10/22)
* Ohio governor’s race in uproar over ad featuring Democrat’s estranged mother (10/21)
* ‘A warning sign for polling’: Why one GOP pollster thinks a blue wave may fall short
立此存照，選後比對。
The 2026 midterms are 2 weeks away. Which party has a better chance of winning? Here's what the latest polls say.
Trump's approval rating is going down. Democrats' lead on the generic ballot is going up. Could this be a "wave" election?
Andrew Romano, 10/20/26
The 2026 midterm elections are just two weeks away. So where do things stand — nationwide — in the race to control Congress? Which party has a better chance of, you know, winning? To get a sense of that, it helps to geek out over some cold, hard data.
The usual caveats apply, of course. Polls aren't predictions; they're momentary snapshots of public opinion. Big events can, and often do, change the course of elections.
Yet the stakes in November couldn't be higher, especially for President Trump, who has enjoyed complete Republican control of Congress for the first half of his second term. Flipping the House would give Democrats the power to block the president's agenda, investigate his administration and even impeach him (again); flipping the Senate would allow them to stymie his Supreme Court nominees too.
The state-by-state midterm landscape is finally taking shape — and a few clear polling trends are emerging. Here are the numbers to watch as Election Day nears.
The generic congressional ballot
Every pollster asks a version of the same question: If an election for U.S. Congress were held today, which party's candidate would you vote for in your district? In fact, this particular polling prompt is so pervasive, it's known as the "generic ballot" (at least among politics nerds).
You obviously can't divine the outcome of an entire midterm election from a single question that flattens 435 House contests into a binary choice between "the Democrat" and "the Republican." But the generic ballot can suggest which direction voters are heading.
History is helpful here, courtesy of the RealClear Politics polling average:
* At this point in 2022 — after more than a year and a half of Democratic President Joe Biden and Democratic majorities in the House and Senate — Republicans had a small but significant lead (2.4 percentage points) on the generic ballot. Two weeks later, the GOP translated its final polling lead of 3 percentage points into nine seats — enough to flip the House.
* At this point in 2018 — with Trump as president and Republican majorities in the House and Senate — Democrats were leading by an average of 7.7 points on the generic ballot. Two weeks later, they picked up 41 seats and flipped the House.
* Polarization wasn't as extreme in 2014 and 2010, the two midterms under Democratic President Barack Obama; minds weren't made up quite so early. But two weeks out, voters had clearly broken against Democrats. In 2014, a final Republican polling lead of 2.4 points translated into a net gain of 13 seats in the House; in 2010, those numbers were 9.4 points and 63 seats, respectively.
So what does that mean for 2026? Historically speaking, a president's party almost always loses seats when voters return to the polls to judge his first two years in office. Sometimes, the backlash is so pervasive that the president's party loses pretty much every close-ish contest — a phenomenon known as a "wave" election.
Right now, Democrats have a wave-sized lead on the generic ballot — about 9 percentage points, on average — and it has been steadily growing over the last month.
Democrats might not reprise 2018 and flip 41 House seats again in November, in part because red-state Republican lawmakers have recently redrawn congressional maps across the South to benefit their party in ways that blue-state Democrats have been unable to keep up with. But they only need to pick up three seats to win back the House.
Advantage? Democrats.
12 specific Senate races
National dynamics tend to define the composition of the incoming House. But Senate contests are quirkier — more state-specific and personality-driven. Democrats currently hold 47 Senate seats; they'd need 51 to control the chamber. (A 50-50 split would give Vice President JD Vance the tiebreaking vote). Polls suggest that flipping four Republican seats is very possible. In the states where Dems are playing defense — Michigan, Georgia, New Hampshire — their leads are solidifying; meanwhile, red states such as Iowa, Kansas, Nebraska and South Carolina seem increasingly competitive. Here are the 12 races to follow:
Maine (Republican seat)
Republican Susan Collins (incumbent)
Democrat Troy Jackson
What the latest polls say: Jackson, who replaced Graham Platner, the Democrats' previous scandal-plagued nominee, tends to lead Collins by anywhere from 2 to 4 percentage points. One recent poll shows a tie.
Michigan (Democratic seat)
Republican Mike Rogers (former member of Congress)
Democrat Abdul El-Sayed (public-health epidemiologist and former Wayne County, Mich. health director)
What the latest polls say: Twenty polls have been conducted over the last month. Eighteen of them showed El-Sayed in the lead, by anywhere from 1 to 7 percentage points.
Ohio (Republican seat)
Republican Jon Husted (incumbent)
Democrat Sherrod Brown (former senator)
What the latest polls say: All but one poll conducted over the last month shows Brown leading Husted, with margins ranging from 1 to 8 percentage points.
Georgia (Democratic seat)
Democrat Jon Ossoff (incumbent)
Republican Mike Collins (member of Congress)
What the latest polls say: Ossoff holds a solid lead over Collins, with October polls putting him ahead by an average of 8 percentage points.
North Carolina (Republican seat)
Republican Michael Whatley (former Republican National Committee chairman)
Democrat Roy Cooper (former governor)
What the latest polls say: Cooper leads by nearly 10 points, on average. The most recent survey showed him ahead by 14.
New Hampshire (Democratic seat)
Republican John E. Sununu (former U.S. senator)
Democrat Chris Pappas (four-term U.S. representative)
What the latest polls say: Pappas and Sununu were previously trading leads in polls in the race to replace retiring Democratic Sen. Jeanne Shaheen. But Pappas appears to have opened a substantial lead — average margin: 7 percentage points — over the last month.
Alaska (Republican seat)
Republican Dan Sullivan (incumbent)
Democrat Mary Peltola (former member of Congress)
What the latest polls say: Surveys conducted in October show Peltola leading by anywhere from 2 to 7 percentage points. But some September polls showed a tie, or Sullivan slightly ahead.
Iowa (Republican seat)
Republican Ashley Hinson (member of Congress)
Democrat Josh Turek (state legislator and former Paralympic athlete)
What the latest polls say: Hinson and Turek have traded small leads in surveys released since Iowa's June 2 primaries.
Texas (Republican seat)
Republican Ken Paxton (state attorney general)
Democrat James Talarico (state legislator)
What the latest polls say: Nearly every poll conducted over the summer has shown Talarico leading Paxton, though the margins are small — between 1 and 6 points.
Nebraska (Republican seat)
Republican Pete Ricketts (incumbent and former governor)
Independent Dan Osborn (veteran and former union leader with Democratic support)
What the latest polls say: Surveys are few and far between. But the most recent results suggest Osborn could be competitive.
Kansas (Republican seat)
Republican Roger Marshall (incumbent)
Democrat Adam Hamilton (Methodist pastor who previously considered an independent run)
What the latest polls say: Marshall leads by 1 point in the most recent sounding — but that is the only survey conducted over the last month that shows him ahead. The rest (save one tie) give Hamilton a slight edge (between 1 and 5 percentage points).
South Carolina (Republican seat)
Republican Darline Graham (incumbent, appointed to replace her brother Lindsey Graham after his death in July)
Democrat Annie Andrews (pediatrcian and former U.S. House candidate)
What the latest polls say: Graham holds a narrow lead in recent surveys. But it is small enough — between 1 and 3 percentage points — that Democrats are now targeting South Carolina as well.
Advantage? Democrats. They've been consistently gaining ground over the last month, to the point where they are now favored to flip the Senate — unless the polls are wrong.
Trump's approval rating — especially on affordability
To one degree or another, midterm elections are always referendums on how the president is performing. So Trump is the final piece of the puzzle.
At the moment, that's unfortunate news for Republicans on Capitol Hill and those looking to join them.
According to the data journalists at Silver Bulletin, 60% of Americans, on average, currently disapprove of how Trump is handling his job vs. 38% who approve. That puts the president's net disapproval rating at 22%.
Again, history can provide perspective. In mid-September 2018, Trump was about 12 points "underwater"; Republicans went on to lose 41 seats that November.
Trump is earning even lower marks on voters' top 2026 issue: the cost of living. Shortly after he returned to office, roughly equal numbers of Americans approved and disapproved of how the president was handling inflation. But today, 73% disapprove and 24% approve. That's a 49-point gap.
In comparison, Biden's approval rating on inflation was rarely underwater by more than 30 points during his presidency — a period that coincided with the economic shocks of COVID-19 and ended with him choosing not to stand for reelection.
Advantage? Democrats.
本文於 修改第 6 次
|
|
白宮發言人上任5天被解職 -- Shawn McCreesh等
|
|
|
推薦1 |
|
|
|
請參考(視頻)：
* Press Secretary Katie Zacharia Briefs Members of the Media (10/13/26)
Katie Zacharia Is Ousted After 5 Days as White House Press Secretary
Her abrupt departure came after she was shadowed by questions about how she had presented her legal career and handled her first press briefing.
Shawn McCreesh/Tyler Pager/Hamed Aleaziz, 10/16/26
President Trump’s new press secretary, Katie Zacharia, was forced out of her role Friday after five days on the job, a rare reversal by the White House that capped a week of upheaval.
Ms. Zacharia, who had gained Mr. Trump’s attention as a conservative commentator, had gotten off to a shaky start with her first and only press briefing on Tuesday. She largely read off a script and ended questioning after just five and a half minutes. That was followed by an onslaught of headlines about whether she had misrepresented herself as a lawyer — the president called her “an attorney” — despite failing her bar exam.
Subsequent interviews she gave in the media, in which she tried to defend herself by pointing out how unprepared she had been to go before the Washington press corps, also went poorly.
Finally, after days of unrelenting press coverage, the Trump administration decided on Friday afternoon to do something it almost never does: It folded.
Mr. Trump was walking across the South Lawn to depart for a midterm rally in Georgia when he stopped to talk to reporters, telling them how he’d just encouraged his press secretary to “reconsider” her new job.
“Honestly, if I were you, I’d reconsider,” he told the reporters, recounting his conversation with her. “Katie, do you need this? I don’t think you need this.”
Three people familiar with the matter, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to describe internal discussions, said Ms. Zacharia was ousted from her role as press secretary.
The president told reporters that Ms. Zacharia might continue to work for him “in some form, but maybe a more pleasant form.”
Later Friday, Steven Cheung, the White House communications director, said that Ms. Zacharia would be “transitioning into a new role that will be announced at a later date.”
Ms. Zacharia, in her own social media post late on Friday, wrote that it “was an honor to work for” Mr. Trump.
The president, she added, “is a kind, wonderful, gracious, thoughtful, enthusiastic, and hardworking man. I wish more Americans appreciated him. No one will ever make America great the way he has and continues to.”
Ms. Zacharia had just started on Monday, and hadn’t even moved to Washington yet.
It was last Friday that the president offered her the job. A little-known, unpaid Fox News commentator with whom many in the White House were unfamiliar, she was a surprise pick. While Ms. Zacharia did have the support of Natalie Harp, the powerful West Wing aide who rarely leaves the president’s side, others in the building believed her debut had been a disaster.
She was not a deft communicator.
She had represented herself as a lawyer in the news media, but when asked repeatedly by a New York Times reporter on the South Lawn of the White House to say in which state she had passed a bar exam, she twice replied, “When I moved to China.” She later told The Times that she had simply misheard the question — even though the president had repeated the reporter’s question to her while standing feet away.
The end was nigh after she appeared on Fox News on Thursday night to be interviewed by the president’s friend Sean Hannity, who asked her a few tough questions and treated her with rare skepticism.
The reception she got on Friday morning on “Fox and Friends” wasn’t exactly friendly, either.
“Do you wish you would have disclosed to the president about the bar and not passing the bar?” one of the hosts, Lawrence Jones, asked her.
“Well, Lawrence,” Ms. Zacharia responded, “those questions weren’t asked.” On Wednesday, Mr. Cheung had posted that “up and down the White House, everyone has been thoroughly impressed with Katie in just a few short days on the job.”
“At the end of this second term, she’ll be remembered as one of the all-time greats,” he wrote.
She may be remembered as having had what seems to be the shortest tenure in the history of the White House press secretary job: five days and one briefing.
In Mr. Trump’s first term, Anthony Scaramucci was fired as the White House communications director (a different role from press secretary) just 10 days after he was hired.
After news of Ms. Zacharia’s ouster broke, Mr. Scaramucci posted on X: “Records are made to be broken. But I take no pleasure in other people’s pain.”
The ousting of the administration’s top spokeswoman was the culmination of a week of remarkable turmoil inside Trumpworld.
Kimberly Guilfoyle, the ambassador to Greece, was fired on television on Tuesday (during Ms. Zacharia’s only briefing). The president spent time in the Oval Office trying to get to the bottom of a vicious fight between two of his loyalists, Richard Grenell and Alina Habba Mildon.
Paolo Zampolli, a longtime Trump confidant who claimed to have introduced the president to his wife, was pushed out at the State Department after one of his internecine feuds spilled into the press. And the daughter of Susie Wiles, the White House chief of staff, and others in her circle, came under scrutiny for their moneymaking overseas.
Shawn McCreesh is a White House reporter for The Times covering the Trump administration.
Tyler Pager is a White House correspondent for The Times, covering President Trump and his administration.
Hamed Aleaziz covers the Department of Homeland Security and immigration policy for The Times.
A version of this article appears in print on Oct. 17, 2026, Section A, Page 1 of the New York edition with the headline: Trump Fires Press Officer After 5 Days.
See more on: Donald Trump, U.S. Politics
The Latest on the Trump Administration
* Ex-F.B.I. Employees Sue: Nine people who were fired earlier this year for having worked on an investigation of Donald Trump sued the administration, saying Kash Patel, the bureau’s director, praised some of them privately before terminating them.
* A Bitter White House Dispute: Two Trump allies — Alina Habba Mildon and Richard Grenell — are locked in a raging dispute that has its roots in the battle for a share of the spoils in Venezuela.
* Trump Escalates Attacks on News Gathering: Trump said government sources who reveal information about military plans should be shot, during a grievance-filled speech at a political rally in Arizona.
* Disappearing Women: In Trump’s second term, those heading for the exits from his administration, voluntarily or involuntarily, are female officials.
* National Guard in D.C.: After thousands of troops deployed by the president have patrolled Washington for more than a year, a federal appeals court interrogated whether the deployment could continue indefinitely.
* Stoking Nuclear Fears: For more than a decade, conservative activists that include some top Trump officials have held that a single atomic bomb could, without killing Americans directly, lay waste to the country — a claim that built fervor for war with Iran.
How We Report on the Trump Administration
Hundreds of readers asked about our coverage of the president. Times editors and reporters responded to some of the most common questions.
本文於 修改第 1 次
|
|
美國電視公司聯合抵制白宮 -- Le Monde
|
|
|
推薦1 |
|
|
|
請參考：
* Judge blocks Trump's ban and says CNN, MS NOW and Politico must have White House access restored (09/24)
* Why Pathological Trump Just Made a Major Blunder: Political Guru William Vaillancourt, The Daily Beast Podcast (09/21)
US networks including Fox News halt Trump pool coverage over White House ban
In solidarity with CNN, major US broadcasters ABC, CBS, Fox and NBC announced the suspension of their TV pool coverage of President Donald Trump on Monday.
Le Monde with AFP, 09/21/26
Major American television networks on Monday, September 21, suspended their involvement in a rotation of broadcasters covering President Donald Trump, as three leading news outlets went to court over being banned from the White House.
Broadcasters CNN and MS NOW, along with news outlet Politico, filed suit after Trump last week ordered them to be barred from the presidential complex. "This ban could not be a more direct assault on the First Amendment nor a more blatant violation of our most fundamental constitutional principles," the organizations said in a court filing.
Shortly afterward, the five major US broadcasters said they were halting "pool" coverage of the White House in solidarity with CNN. The news outlet had been scheduled to serve Monday as the White House TV pool, a rotating assignment in which a broadcaster films on behalf of all television outlets for the day.
"The public has a vital interest in receiving accurate, independent information about its government. No administration should restrict a news organization because it objects to its reporting," ABC, CBS, CNN, Fox and NBC said in a statement.
The boycott means there will be no pooled coverage of Trump's travel to the United Nations General Assembly in New York on Monday, where he is due to meet a series of world leaders.
Trump was unrepentant, with the 80-year-old Republican branding the media a "cancer" and a threat to national security. "The White House is not instituting an assault on the Free Press, something which I cherish," Trump said on his Truth Social network. "It is instituting an assault on the FAKE NEWS, something that has grown like Cancer in our beloved United States of America."
'Threatens press freedom'
Trump announced the ban on Friday in a major escalation of his years-long assault on the US media, especially on outlets that report critically on him and his administration. Journalists from CNN, MS NOW and Politico were denied access to the White House grounds on Saturday and had their passes confiscated.
The outlets said the White House revoked their journalists' credentials "without notice or process" because it "objected to our reporting." "Left unchallenged, this threatens press freedom and the public's right to independent journalism free from government interference," they said in their joint statement.
Their lawsuit calls for the immediate overturning of the ban and a ruling that it violates the First Amendment of the US Constitution, which upholds the right to free speech.
Trump has not detailed what prompted the ban, but said in response to a question from an AFP reporter in the Oval Office on Friday that it was "really just cumulative stories over the last two years." "They want to try and diminish the Republicans and a Republican administration," Trump added.
Trump warned Friday that other outlets could face a similar fate, without saying which.
The billionaire former reality TV star has long attacked media outlets that have aired critical coverage of his campaigns and administrations, repeatedly blasting the press as the "enemy of the people."
Through both terms in office he has claimed journalists have failed to show sufficient appreciation for his accomplishments. Trump has also stood out in presidential history for routinely insulting journalists he doesn't like both in person and on social media.
相關報導
Why is press freedom deteriorating around the world?
本文於 修改第 3 次
|
|
|
本城市首頁
看回應文章
等級：8
