All Those Other Trump Voters: How Do We See Trump Voters Beyond the MAGA Crowd?
American Eclectic posts articles twice a month, on the 1st and 15th. This is the third year of publication; previously published articles can be found on my site.
October 1, 2024
In 1970, a movie had someone who sounded much like the stereotypical Trump voter as the main character. The movie Joe starred Peter Boyle and introduced Susan Sarandon in her first role. Joe was a typical movie version of a blue-collar worker and constantly expressed his hatred of African Americans, repeatedly using the N-word in the movie. In addition, he hated “liberals” and expressed that point of view in no uncertain terms. Since this was 1970 and reflected how many Americans saw the 1960s, Joe’s hatred was directed at hippies. In the ending scene, Joe and his upper-class companion, who killed his daughter’s boyfriend, who was also her deal dealer, arrive at a commune in upstate New York, and Joe starts shooting indiscriminately. In the mayhem, his companion shoots and kills his daughter, who was among those people unfortunate enough to be there.
Peter Boyle saw audiences cheer the violence at the movie's end, which affected him. A New York Times article that discussed the movie stated:
American civilians fought in the streets over the war in Indochina. Although no movie captured this conflict better than ''Joe,'' the scenario was conceived the previous summer. Norman Wexler, a 42-year-old Harvard-educated advertising executive and unproduced playwright, was inspired by Vice President Spiro T. Agnew's ''silent majority'' rhetoric, and a New York magazine article on the murder of an upper-middle class girl who had taken up with an East Village drug dealer, to write a movie treatment in which a pair of World War II veterans, one a disgruntled worker and the other the well-to-do father of a wanton hippie, wreak bloody vengeance on the younger generation.
The article then added:
Joe expressed sentiments that no American politician -- not even George Wallace -- had the nerve to articulate, at least in public.
Richard Nixon elevated the expression “silent majority” to new heights, and the label was seen as a patriotic reaction for Americans who felt a need to take back their country from a counterculture of hippies, anti-Vietnam War protesters, and race riots that they resented and feared.
Joe was a movie that reflected sentiments that were already there. Before the film was released, a group of construction workers and businessmen attacked protesters in a march in New York City who were protesting both the Vietnam War and the killing of four students and the wounding of nine at Kent State University who opposed Nixon’s expansion of the Vietnam War into Cambodia.
Soon after Joe became a financial hit, the first episode of All in the Family aired in January 1971. The main character, Archie Bunker (Carroll O’Connor), expressed many of the same sentiments as Joe, but in a more comical way since this was television. The cultural tensions were front and center, as most episodes focused on the ongoing conflict between Archie and his son-in-law, Michael (Rob Reiner), whom Archie called “Meathead” and who represented the counterculture Archie constantly railed against.
When it first aired, All in the Family had a warning label, which now seems odd. The disclaimer went:
The program you will see is ‘All in the Family.’ It seeks to throw a humorous spotlight on our frailties, prejudices and concerns. By making them a source of laughter, we hope to show — in a mature fashion — just how absurd they are.
Donald Trump’s MAGA followers (Make America Great Again) were there in Archie Bunker. Americans who feel alienated and frustrated because they cannot get ahead, blaming others as they struggle to make ends meet, have always been there. There is frustration with struggling to do your best and feeling that all you are doing is treading water. It is difficult to achieve financial success and reach a point where one does not have to worry about daily expenses, and that creates anxiety and fear for many of us. However, for some segments of the American population, their frustrations, fears, and worries are taken to heights that many Americans learn to deal with in less aggressive and threatening ways.
Few of us were born with a silver spoon in our mouths like Donald Trump, whose father gave him some $413 million. Trump said, “I built what I built myself.” Still, a New York Times investigation of Trump’s taxes stated, “Fred Trump wove a safety net that rescued his son from one bad bet after another” (see my “Voters Learning from Trump’s Four Court Cases: Beyond the Legal to the Political Awakening-Well Maybe”). In Trump’s debate with Kamala Harris, he stated:
I wasn't given $400 million. I wish I was. My father was a Brooklyn builder. Brooklyn, Queens. And a great father and I learned a lot from him. But I was given a fraction of that, a tiny fraction, and I built it into many, many billions of dollars. Many, many billions. And when people see it, they are even surprised.
Take him at his word and reduce the amount to any seven (or eight)-figure level, and you still realize that the silver spoon was very much there. The consummate New York City socialite, Trump has no connection to those who hang on to his frequent incoherent speeches. In many ways, Trump seems like an odd leader to awaken and lead this current counter-outrage movement.
However, putting aside the MAGA base that has always existed, we assume they will reappear at different times in America’s future; what we see with Trump and his voters goes beyond a MAGA base.
I was recently in a mall in Ohio, where a Trump paraphernalia store was selling T-shirts and everything else with Trump’s face on it—much of which I never see worn in public. Much of the merchandise contained the middle finger, or F**k, or S**t, or anything designed to be as offensive as possible. What I saw was a sub-culture among those who will vote for Trump. Many of Trump’s voters would feel more than uncomfortable wearing the T-shirts I saw.
In his debate with Harris, Trump stated:
I got almost 75 million votes. The most votes any sitting president has ever gotten. I was told if I got 63, which was what I got in 2016, you can't be beaten.
Trump received almost 75 million votes, but Joe Biden got 81 million. Of those 75 million votes, some are hard-core MAGA supporters, but most are not.
Whether Donald Trump or Kamala Harris will take the oath of office in January 2025 is still a toss-up. However, the vast majority of Trump voters who are not by any means MAGA followers will matter after the election.
Suppose Trump wins and begins to implement strange policies that appear to be motivated by his grievances toward any number of people. In that case, those non-MAGA Trump voters will matter.
Ricard Reeves was a well-respected journalist who wrote a book titled “American Journey: Traveling with Tocqueville in Search of Democracy in America,” in 1983. The book was based on a Public Broadcasting System (PBS) show titled American Journey. The book and show focused on what changed and did not change in America since Alexis de Tocqueville wrote his influential and insightful view of America when he visited our country in the 1830s (Democracy in America). Many politicians, scholars, and journalists have referred to Tocqueville and cited passages from his writing.
In his book, Reeves addressed countervailing forces against those that appear to become dominant. If he is president again, Trump will no doubt push policies beyond the norm—precisely what those are is challenging to define easily (partially because Trump rails against so many people and many things). Still, I suspect they will become apparent when Trump proceeds to force them. I guess that he would be under pressure to sign a national abortion ban, despite whatever he says now. If he did, Republicans in Congress would begin to hear the footsteps of their impending losses in the next Congressional elections, motivating them to confront Trump.
In the 2016 election, Hillary Clinton had a 14-point advantage among women voters over Trump, but in 2020, looking at suburban women voters, Biden won by 19 points over Trump. Suburban women were often seen as reliably Republican. Suburban women showed the shift that Reeves’s addressed regarding his countervailing power. As one woman stated heading into the 2018 Congressional elections, “Now I’m Democratic, I’ve never been before,” while another woman who expressed her sentiment also heading into the 2018 Congressional elections said, “[it felt like] waking from a political coma.” The suburban women's voter gap helped Biden in 2020, but it did not come out of nowhere; it was laid in the 2018 Congressional elections.
Trump may want to believe in the unitary theory of presidential power, raised during the George W. Bush Presidency, where the President has unbelievable power to do as they wish. How would Congress and court cases be filed to challenge Trump's authority, thereby throwing up roadblocks to Trump’s belief in his presidential power? Countervailing power is like a sleeping dog; it is best not to awaken it.
Those Trump voters who have little or nothing in common with the MAGA subset among Trump’s voters can become engaged and react. A poll from April 2023 found the MAGA movement to be very unpopular. The Black Lives Matter Movement had a positive rating of 38 percent and a negative one of 40 percent; the MAGA movement, however, had a favorable rating of 24 percent and a negative one of 45 percent.
There are Trump voters who hear him, and it is abstract talk, where some of what he says will be his administration’s policies but in ways that they assume will be normal to them. Trump and his proposed policies; his revenge aspirations are too removed from reality to be believed. I was in an RV park, and a gentleman in the place next to me saw I was having trouble unlocking my RV from my truck. He helped, and I was grateful, but as he walked away, he said, “Donald Trump will make everything better in America; just wait and see.” Trump wrote in his book The Art of the Deal, “I play to people’s fantasies. …People want to believe in something that is the biggest, greatest, and most spectacular.” Trump’s imagery overcomes any relationship to reality.
While this gentleman may buy into the majestic visions being spun, I suspect many of Trump’s voters are inclined to hear what he says but believe there would be a usual, reasonable approach to how he would carry out his policies. But how will Trump voters look at him once the majestic vision becomes policy? Interviews with Latino voters who say they will vote for Trump raise the issue that they hear what he is saying but interpret it differently than what he appears to be saying. One Latino supporting Trump said, “I don’t think he is going to start rounding up Mexicans or Venezuelans. He will just put in an effective plan to round up, corral, or target those people who really shouldn’t be here.” Yet the Republican platform statement refers to establishing a mass deportation plan for what is stated as the “migrant invasion.” The Haitian immigrants in Springfield, Ohio, where Trump sees dogs and cats on their menu, are here legally, yet he wants to deport them. Voting has consequences.
Moving from the imagery of extreme policy ideas to actual policies is a step most people do not think about. One study examining Sweden addressed when far-left or far-right political parties won elections and began implementing their policies. This study stated:
[W]hen a far-left, anti-capitalist party politician gets elected, support for a six hour workday falls by 2.7 percentage points. Mirroring these attitudinal changes, the far-right and far-left parties experience no incumbency advantage in the next election. Exploring possible mechanisms, we find evidence that when the anti-immigrant party wins a marginal seat, they experience higher levels of politician turnover before the next election and receive negative coverage in local newspapers. These findings demonstrate that political representation can cause an attitudinal backlash as fringe parties and their ideas are placed under closer scrutiny.
…We find clear evidence that public attitudes are affected by the election of an extreme party championing an issue. But the change is opposite the party’s policy position, indicating a backlash in voter attitudes.
How would the Latino Trump supporter quoted above react if Trump wins and moves toward a mass roundup of immigrants? First, since it is not clear where all these illegal immigrants are located, there would be a need for massive sweeps of businesses that are known or suspected of hiring immigrants. Then, would there be sweeps through Latino communities? Who exactly would be carrying out these sweeps? Somehow, local police might be nationalized by the Trump administration to carry out raids. The military and National Guard would participate, as Trump envisions this deportation process. Then, where would they be held, and under what conditions? Trump has indicated, in somehow vague ways, about deportation camps to keep those immigrants caught in his roundup. Would they have legal representation to distinguish different categories of illegal immigrants? Since we do not have a precise number of how many illegal immigrants are in America, maybe 10-15 million, then when do sweeps of businesses and communities stop, and Trump or those in his administration pushing this policy, this campaign, define the deportations at an end? Just think about the questions that must be asked to determine how to develop any effective policy.
Trump recently, in Pennsylvania, said, regarding allowing police to use indiscriminate violence to bring crime under control, “One rough hour, and I mean real rough, the word will get out, and it will end immediately. End immediately. You know, it'll end immediately.” This sounds like how he believes he can end the Ukraine War; one day, with him in the White House, the war ends, or let the police use indiscriminate violence, and crime will quickly end. With something such as allowing police to unleash some unbelievable level of violence, how would a broad cross-section of the public react as it was occurring or in its aftermath? Free from the constraints of civility and normalcy, Trump can make such statements, and one has to wonder about any number of questions. How would it occur? Would police in any city just be allowed to shoot or beat up anyone they suspected of doing anything? Unfortunately, anything in the abstract can sound pleasing to some people, even fantastic, but carrying out a policy differs significantly.
Trump is all about vision and the marvelous, which can sound pleasing to those wanting to hear his message, but suddenly, seeing people who are uprooted and harmed by any drastic deportation policy is something different. All those legal immigrants in Springfield, Ohio, would there be a mass roundup, and would they be transported on Army trucks to some location in New Mexico to be made ready for deportation? Or will they be issued summons that they must leave the country by a specific date, or will they be arrested? Imagine this roundup conjuring up memories of Japanese Americans in internment camps during the Second World War. Ohio might be a reliable Republican state in the 2024 election as it was in 2016 and 2020, but where would it be heading into the 2028 election?
When Trump became president in 2017, his team took over the Department of Energy (DOE) and had no idea how to understand precisely what this department did. As one author explained the DOE:
Roughly half of the DOE’s annual $30 billion budget is spent on maintaining and guarding our nuclear arsenal. Two billion of that goes to hunting down weapons-grade plutonium and uranium at loose in the world so it doesn’t fall into the hands of terrorists. In eight years alone-2010-2018- the DOE’s National Nuclear Security Administration collected enough material to make 160 nuclear bombs.
The Trump people who visited the DOE and planned to take over running it wanted the names of people who had attended any conferences on climate change so they could punish them for attending those conferences. It was luck, or maybe indifference, that the Trump people did not cause problems regarding nuclear safety issues.
The National Weather Service issues warnings of impending tornados; the average warning time is thirteen minutes before a tornado hits. One Congressman saw this agency as a waste of taxpayer money and felt AccuWeather was good enough: He never wondered where AccuWeather got its information. If Trump had his way as President, farmers would have become dependent on AccuWeather to get their weather reports, a commercial service they would need to pay for, rather than through a government agency providing free information. However, where would AccuWeather get its information if the National Weather Service was crippled by Trump and those working for him who saw it as just another tool of that entity, “Big Government,” or maybe the National Weather Service is part of that very vague “Deep State.”
During Trump’s final days in office in 2020, he issued an order to set up Schedule F to move an undetermined number of federal government employees into political appointee positions. Biden closed this idea down when he came into office. If he is back in the White House, Trump plans to restore this idea all over again.
Trump is trying to distance himself from the Heritage Foundation’s Project 2025. Still, his own Agenda 47 sounds much like Project 2025, which is to gut much of the federal government bureaucracy. Again, in the abstract, anything can sound like a good idea. Many voters hear the headlines and do not question the details. The policy director of the American Federal of Government Employees raised the issue of the implications of this plan to Americans:
The question is: do you want people with the skills, expertise and credentials to perform their jobs or do you want people who love Donald Trump? If that’s what the main factor is to get a job, you won’t have the same food safety, workplace safety, consumer product safety, mine safety, and clean air and water.
One source refers to a group of some 54,000 Trump loyalists ready to step in and, supposedly, take over jobs being done by people who were screened for the jobs they have through the Civil Service system. Another source refers to up to 20,000 “potential hires” ready to take over federal government jobs. I read these numbers and wondered who these people are and if there is some way they have been given some understanding of where they might work if they do move into federal government positions. I assume that the Heritage Foundation, as an outgrowth of Project 2025, has a listing of possible replacement government employees. One article says of the vision to carry out this replacement plan for government employees:
If Trump were to win, thousands of Trump-first loyalists would be ready for legal, judicial, defense, regulatory and domestic policy jobs. His inner circle plans to purge anyone viewed as hostile to the hard-edged, authoritarian-sounding plans [of Agenda 47].
Imagine some disaster somewhere, and suddenly, we are made aware that a Trump loyalist with little to no knowledge or training is in charge. Television news will have a field day, and Republicans in Congress will struggle to respond that they looked the other way as Trump changed the makeup of federal government employees. Is the idea that Trump loyalists will be allowed to take over non-essential government functions (I am not sure where the dividing line between essential and non-essential is exactly) so they will not screw things up too badly? Hopefully, there will be no pandemic, and Trump loyalists will not be somewhere near positions to address it. Trump’s handling of COVID has been described as “malpractice.” Preventable deaths are still an issue. In February 2020, Trump said, “It’s going to disappear. One day, it’s like a miracle, it will disappear.” Trump likes to blame China for the virus, and China has a lot to answer for regarding its lack of transparency about bringing the virus to the attention of other countries. Still, Trump’s indifference to addressing this pandemic matters too. He said, “We have it totally under control. It’s one person coming in from China, and we have it under control. It’s going to be just fine.” If Trump took a pandemic less as a serious concern and more of an insult to attention not being focused on him, why would he care who is placed in positions to administer a possible next pandemic?
The Biden administration has taken the threats aimed at government employees seriously. The Office of Personnel Management issued a rule preventing career government employees from being reclassified as Schedule F. The National Treasury Employees Union president said, “It will now be much harder for any president to arbitrarily remove the nonpartisan professionals who staff our federal agencies just to make room for hand-picked partisan loyalists.” That sounds good until it is challenged by a Trump administration executive order that aims to override this ruling, particularly if the Office of Personnel Management issues a new ruling under a Trump-appointed individual.
Elections have consequences, and I suspect that a second Trump administration might start by causing problems to various government agencies, bureaus, and departments most people pay no attention to. Then suddenly, they could begin to feel the adverse effects of the actions of Trump’s people and his policies and realize all that majestic talk about a better America was just that, talk but with harmful side effects.
When Richard Reeves wrote that countervailing forces could react to developed policies, he saw a dynamic in which people began to react to developments that affected them. Trump’s voters, not the MAGA subset, but ordinary people who do not attend his rallies and do not wear insulting T-shirts, can become a voice that politicians would begin to hear.
I have many friends who will vote for Trump. None of them are racists, or bigots, or wear MAGA hats. I have never seen a Trump bumper sticker on any of their cars. With the vast array of conspiracy theories that twirl around the Trump universe, I have never heard about any of this nonsense from any of these people. Yes, several believe there was a second shooter in the John F. Kennedy assassination. Still, when I raised the issue of John Kennedy, Jr. alive somewhere and waiting to come out of hiding to reveal somehow all the bad things about the “deep state,” all I got was a look of puzzlement (just one of those many conspiracy theories). They are normal, ordinary people; many expressed concerns about what they saw on January 6th when Trump supporters stormed the Capitol—none drove to Washington to be part of the crowd that stormed the Capitol. None of the people I know referred to the protestors and those who breached the Capitol as just there for “a normal tourist visit,” as one Republican congressman tried to paint that day. Imagine if Trump followed through on his talk that he might free those jailed because of January 6th (more than 150 have pleaded guilty). Suddenly, the majestic imagery becomes real. I talk with my friends who will vote for Trump even though they know I will not vote for him. We do not feel uncomfortable or feel tension when we get together. There are ways to hold conversations about complex issues and still like people who vote opposite each of our political leanings.
I suspect non-MAGA Trump voters would begin to develop very different views of Trump and maybe the Republicans they vote for if there are any number of violent situations regarding election workers during this election. Jordan Klepper does a series of funny interviews with Trump supporters, but these people sound more than somewhere well off-center and nothing like the people I am describing here. These friends are coherent, thoughtful, sympathetic, and concerned. Trump has his MAGA base, but he, as well as Republicans more broadly, need to pay heed to a different type of “silent majority” one that can begin to matter with the first Congressional elections in a new Trump presidency. Trump would have time to start to implement his revenge policies, but then all those non-MAGA voters might begin to awaken to the bad choice they made in voting for him. What happens as that non-MAGA voting bloc begins to have their concerns trickle up to Republicans in Congress? Elections alone do not settle issues; expect tension and turmoil to continue after this election, particularly as Republicans in Congress wonder if they can survive the 2026 Congressional elections.
Optimism is a beautiful thing and a hope for America. How will the country fare if Trump is back in the White House? Trump will not try to unite people; his revenge for losing in 2020 consumes him. Fox News, News Max, OAN, and a whole assortment of talk radio programs will paint much of what he does in ways only seen as in the country’s best interest. Think of all those talk radio shows where the host talking with Trump referred to him as “Mr. President” as though he is the President, and they assume the 2020 election was stolen from him. However, the normal would not be expected from Trump and would not be what is in the country’s best interest. Kevin Roberts, President of the Heritage Foundation, used “destruction” to define how he looks at the American government. How he looks at freedom sounds more like a rationalization for the ends justifies the means. Roberts said, “Our definition of ‘freedom’ is not the freedom to do whatever the heck we want, but the freedom to do what we ought.” Roberts is not Trump, but Roberts’ thinking and similar individuals, some of whom were in Trump’s administration when he was President, might matter significantly in a new Trump administration. One study of democracy concluded, “[D]emocracy lurches from one emergency to the next, often gasping to sustain itself. The dangers are invited and lurk continually below the surface.” Hope may lie with those Trump voters who held their noses when they voted for him because they wanted a more reasoned, well-balanced Republican as their party’s candidate to run for President.
Does Melania Trump Matter?
It was just something odd. On X, Melania Trump posted:
Why do I stand proudly behind my nude modeling work? The more pressing question is: Why has the media chosen to scrutinize my celebration of the human form in a fashion photo shoot?
She has a book titled Melania, which will be out soon, and I do not expect it to provide any great revelations about her marriage to The Donald—expect it to be a Big Nothing (a book review before even seeing it). Still, it is interesting how little a statement like this from a former First Lady and one who might, yet again, be the First Lady matters in no way to this election. Listening to a Republican woman say to me, “If I had her body, I’d flaunt it too,” gave some insight into how little Melania Trump matters. Contrast this post with Hillary Clinton, campaigning with her husband, Bill, in 1992, saying, “I suppose I could have stayed home and baked cookies and had teas.” There was an uproar over Clinton having a career as a woman. Melania Trump was discussing her career, which was an unusual one, but a career.
Notes
Bridget Bowman, “’MAGA movement’ widely unpopular, new poll finds,” NBC News (April 25, 2023): https:// www.nbcnews.com/meet-the-press/meetthepressblog/maga-movement-widely-unpopular-new-poll-finds-rcna81200
Jackie Calmes, “Calmes: Trump voters who disdain him say they like his policies. What in the world are they talking about?” Los Angeles Times (September 26, 2024): https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/calmes-trump-voters-who-disdain-him-say-they-like-his-policies-what-in-the-world-are-they-talking-about/ar-AA1rf4FG?ocid=msedgntp&pc=U531&cvid=8c6fb7751f044cb9a19697cd334d59b4&ei=58
Magnus Carlsson, Gordon Dahl, Dan-Olof Rooth, “Backlash in Policy Attitudes After the Election of Extreme Political Parties,” NBER Working Paper Series (April 2015): https://www.nber.org/system/files/working_papers/w21062/w21062.pdf
Joseph Cernik, “Travel America through Books: Insight and Hope,” The Artifice (October 2, 2020): https:// the-artifice.com/america-through-books/. I discuss the Reeves book in this article.
Chris Cilizza, “A Republican House member just described January 6 as a ‘normal tourist visit’,” CNN Politics (May 13, 2021): https://www.cnn.com/2021/05/13/politics/andrew-clyde-january-6-riot/index.html
Tim Dickinson, “Right-Wing Think Tank Leader Promises Revolution, Warns of ‘Bloodshed’,” RollingStone (July 3, 2024): https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/kevin-roberts-heritage-revolution-bloodshed-1235052706/
Zac Gershberg and Sean Illing, The Paradox of Democracy: Free Speech, Open Media, and Perilous Persuasion (Chicago, University of Chicago Press, 2022)
Steven Greenhouse, “Project 2025’s plan to gut civil service with mass firings: ‘It’s like the bad old days of King Henry VIII,” The Guardian (September 25, 2024): https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/sep/25/project-2025-trump-plan-fire-civil-service-employees?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other
J. Hoberman, “FILM; Off the Hippies: ‘Joe’ and the Chaotic Summer of ‘70,” New York Times (July 30, 2000): https:// www.nytimes.com/2000/07/30/movies/film-off-the-hippies-joe-and-the-chaotic-summer-of-70.html
Norman Lear-All in The Family Disclaimer, American Masters: https:// www.pbs.org/wnet/americanmasters/norman-lear-family-disclaimer/7668/
Michael Lewis, The Fifth Risk: Undoing Democracy (New York, Penguin Books, 2018)
Molly Hensley-Clancy, “Suburban Women Are Fed Up With The Republican Party and Could Drive A Blue Wave,” BuzzFeed.News (October 16, 2018)
Riley Hoffman, “READ: Harris-Trump presidential debate transcript,” ABC News (September 11, 2024): https// abc7ny.com/read-harris-trump-presidential-debate-transcript/15289001/
“New rule could make it much harder for Trump to overhaul federal workforce if he wins in November,” CBS News (April 4, 2024): https://www.cbsnews.com/news/trump-federal-workforce-overhaul-new-rule/
Flynn Nicholls, “Donald Trump’s Call for ‘Really Violent Day’ Compared to ‘The Purge,” Newsweek (September 30, 2024): https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/donald-trump-s-call-for-really-violent-day-compared-to-the-purge/ar-AA1rt9TV?ocid=BingNewsSerp
Jocelyn Noveck, “Women crucial to Biden’s win, even as gender gap held steady,” AP (November 16, 2020); https://apnews.com/article/election-2020-joe-biden-donald-trump-voting-rights-elections-84ef3db79532c0029894ff25a316370b
Jazmine Ulloa, “Latino Republicans and Independents Back Trump’s Deportation Plan, to a Point,” New York Times (July 16, 2024): https://www.nytimes.com/2024/07/16/us/politics/trump-latino-voters-deportation.html
Jim VandeHei, Mike Allen, “Behind the Curtain: Trump allies pre-screen loyalists for unprecedented power grab,” Axios (November 13, 2023): https://www.axios.com/2023/11/13/trump-loyalists-2024-presidential-election
Chris Vognar, “A Bigot Walks into A Bar: The Politics of Joe, 50 Years Later,” RobertEbert.com (December 4, 2000): https:// www.rogerebert.com/features/a-bigot-walks-into-a-bar-revisiting-1970s-joe
Erich Wagner, “Conservative Think Tanks Are Preparing a List of 20K Potential Political Appointees in Hopes of Reviving Schedule F,” Government Executive (April 24, 2023): https://www.govexec.com/workforce/2023/04/conservative-think-tanks-are-preparing-list-20k-potential-political-appointees-hopes-reviving-schedule-f/385545/
Danielle Zoellner, “Trump’s Covid legacy: 402,269 American dead after former president claimed virus will ‘disappear: https://Independent (January 21, 2021): https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/trump-covid-us-death-toll-coronavirus-b1790146.html