Election 2024 updates: Beshear says Vance ‘ain’t from Appalachia’ at Harris event
(WASHINGTON) — Vice President Kamala Harris wrapped up what has been a whirlwind week in the presidential race with her campaign saying Sunday it has raised more than $200 million in less than a week.
Here’s how the news is developing:
On Thursday night, Harris met with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and took the lead in addressing the public about their discussions.
Harris has secured commitments from enough delegates to become the presumptive nominee if they all honor their commitment when voting, according to ABC News reporting.
5:28 PM EDT Gov. Andy Beshear rallies for Harris in Atlanta, calls out JD Vance
Kentucky Gov. Andy Beshear spoke on Sunday at the opening of Kamala Harris’ campaign office in Forsyth County, Georgia.
The possible VP pick for Harris has been an effective surrogate for the vice president’s White House bid over the weekend, coming to the metro Atlanta event fresh off of a stump in Iowa on Saturday night.
The red-state governor introduced himself to the Southern audience on Sunday while boosting Harris’ candidacy and taking a number of swipes at Trump’s Vice Presidential pick, JD Vance.
“Are you ready to beat Donald Trump? Are you ready to beat JD Vance? Are you ready to elect Kamala Harris president of the United States of America” Beshear asked the crowd, adding, “Let’s win this race,”
“Let me tell you just a bit about myself,” Beshear said. “I’m a proud pro-union governor. I’m a proud pro-choice governor. I am a proud pro-public education governor. I am a proud pro-diversity governor and I’m a proud Harris for president governor,” he added.
Calling out Vance, Beshear said, “Just let me be clear. JD Vance ain’t from Kentucky. He ain’t from Appalachia. And he ain’t gonna be the vice president of the United States.”
-ABC News’ Isabella Murray
2:18 PM EDT Former Vice President Al Gore endorses Kamala Harris
Former Vice President Al Gore endorsed Vice President Kamala Harris on Sunday.
“As a prosecutor, [Kamala Harris] took on Big Oil companies — and won. As [VP], she cast the tie-breaking vote to pass the most significant investment in climate solutions in history, the Inflation Reduction Act. That’s the kind of climate champion we need in the White House,” he wrote on X.
“With so much at stake in this year’s election — from strengthening democracy in the US and abroad, to expanding opportunity for the American people, to accelerating climate action — I’m proud to endorse Kamala Harris for President,” he added.
-ABC News’ Oren Oppenheim
July 28, 2024, 10:42 AM EDT Vance says Trump ‘doesn’t care’ about his past criticism
During a quick stop at a diner in Minnesota on Sunday morning, Sen. JD Vance on Sunday spoke about his past criticisms of former President Donald Trump.
When asked by ABC News if he and Trump have talked about his past criticism of the former president, Vance said yes, adding that Trump “doesn’t care about what I said eight years ago.”
“I mean, look, President Trump and I have talked a lot about this,” Vance said. “In fact, I sometimes joke that I wish that he had the memory of Joe Biden, because he’s got a memory like a steel trap, and he certainly remembers criticisms that people have made.”
“But this is where the media, I think, really misses Trump — Donald Trump accepts that people can change their mind, and you ask, ‘Why did I change my mind on Donald Trump?’ Because his agenda made people’s lives better,” Vance said.
“This whole thing is not about red team versus blue team or winning an election for its own sake. It’s about getting a chance to govern so that you can bring down the cost of groceries, close that border and stop the fentanyl coming across our country for four years,” Vance continued, saying he was “wrong” about Trump.
“He did a better job of that than anybody that I’ve ever seen as president in my lifetime. So I changed my mind, because he did a good job. And that’s what you do when people do a good job and you’re wrong. I’ve talked to President Trump a lot about it, but look, he, I mean, he just, he doesn’t… He doesn’t care about what I said eight years ago. He cares about whether we together [and] can govern the country successful.”
When asked again if the two have talked about the subject, specifically in the last week since his comments have resurfaced, Vance admitted that they haven’t spoken about it and their conversations have focused on the race ahead.
-ABC News’ Kelsey Walsh, Soorin Kim and Hannah Demissie
(WASHINGTON) — Attorney General Merrick Garland announced a sweeping crackdown Wednesday on dueling efforts by the Russian government to influence the upcoming 2024 election through covert networks aimed at spreading disinformation to American voters.
For months, the Biden administration has been publicly warning of Russia’s efforts to influence Americans through disinformation and propaganda to sow distrust in the election.
In a meeting Wednesday at the Justice Department, Garland and FBI Director Christopher Wray highlighted both foreign and domestic incidents of attempts to influence voters, as well as pervasive and growing threats against those who administer elections.
“The Justice Department will not tolerate attempts by an authoritarian regime to exploit our country’s free exchange of ideas in order to covertly further its own propaganda efforts, and our investigation into this matter remains ongoing,” Garland said.
The Justice Department alleged that two employees of Russia Today, or RT — a Russian state-controlled media outlet, implemented a nearly $10 million scheme “to fund and direct a Tennessee-based company to publish and disseminate content deemed favorable to the Russian government.”
To carry this out, the attorney general said the two employees — 31-year-old Kostiantyn Kalashnikov, also known as Kostya, and Elena Afanasyeva, 27 — allegedly directed the company to contract with social media influencers to amplify Russian propaganda.
“The company never disclosed to the influencers or to their millions of followers its ties to RT and the Russian government. Instead, the defendants and the company claimed that the company was sponsored by a private investor, but that private investor was a fictitious persona,” Garland said.
Russian entities also created fake websites to allegedly further influence the election, officials said.
“RT has used people living and working inside the U.S. to facilitate contracts with American media figures to create and disseminate Russian propaganda here. The content was pitched as legitimate independent news when, in fact, much of it was created in Russia by RT employees who work for the Russian government,” Wray said. “The second operation reveals even more malign activities by companies working under the direction and control of the Russian government, companies that created media websites to trick Americans into unwittingly consuming Russian propaganda.”
Deputy Attorney General Lisa Monaco said they will continue to investigate election threats without fear or favor.
“Russia remains a predominant foreign threat to our elections, and as the intelligence community has publicly reported, and as I have previously warned, Iran also is accelerating its efforts to influence our elections, including the presidential election,” Monaco said.
Wray also delivered a blunt message for Iran and China when asked what the bureau’s response would be to those who intend to meddle in the presidential election: “Knock it off.”
The attorney general said Russia is using new techniques Russia such as artificial intelligence and other cyber techniques.
“They’re now using bot farms in a way that was not possible before, and therefore it’s a bigger threat than it ever was before. I would just say that [the] reality is that Russia has meddled in our society and tried to sow discord for decades,” Garland said.
The DOJ also announced that it’s targeting a Russian disinformation campaign referred to as “Doppelganger.”
The DOJ has seized 32 internet domains it claims have been used by the Russian government and government-sponsored actors to allegedly engage in the Doppelganger influence campaign by spreading propaganda intended to reduce international support for Ukraine, bolster support for pro-Russian policies and influence American voters, according to newly unsealed court records.
Garland on Wednesday also highlighted domestic efforts to threaten election officials around the country.
Since March, the Election Threats Task Force has participated in more than 25 engagements, trainings and tabletop exercises, including both with law enforcement partners and partners in the election community, the attorney general said.
Over the next several weeks, task force representatives will be on the ground meeting with election workers and, in early November, both in advance of and after Election Day, the FBI will host federal partners at its headquarters command center to address events, issues and potential crimes related to the elections in real time, Garland said.
“Election officials and administrators do not need to navigate this threat environment alone,” he added.
CNN first reported news of the expected law enforcement actions.
In a statement Wednesday, Secretary of State Antony Blinken outlined the steps the State Department said it’s taking to “counter Kremlin-backed media outlets’ malicious operations seeking to influence or interfere in the 2024 U.S. elections.”
The measures include introducing a new visa restriction policy to penalize adversaries, designating RT’s parent company and subsidiaries as entities controlled by a foreign government, and offering cash rewards for information on the Russian intelligence-linked hacking group RaHDit under its “Rewards for Justice” program.
“Today’s announcement highlights the lengths some foreign governments go to undermine American democratic institutions. But these foreign governments should also know that we will not tolerate foreign malign actors intentionally interfering and undermining free and fair elections,” Blinken said.
In addition, the Treasury Department’s Office of Foreign Assets Control said Wednesday that it’s designating 10 individuals — including several RT employees — and two entities as part of the U.S. response to “Moscow’s malign influence efforts targeting the 2024 U.S. presidential election.”
The head of a “hacktivist” group RaHDit and two associates were also part of Wednesday’s sanctions, the Treasury Department said in a statement.
ABC News’ Shannon Kingston and Molly Nagle contributed to this report.
(MADISON, WI) — A Democratic Party staffer has filed a complaint with the Wisconsin Elections Commission saying that the Green Party, which had achieved ballot access in the key battleground state this past year, should not be on the ballot.
In the complaint, Democratic National Committee Deputy Operations Director in Wisconsin David Strange alleges that the Green Party does not have anyone who would be allowed by state law to be a nominator for the Green Party’s presidential electors — meaning they cannot give a valid list of presidential electors, voiding their eligibility on the ticket.
It could make a difference if the Green Party can’t appear on the ballot in Wisconsin, a crucial battleground state that both Vice President Kamala Harris and former President Donald Trump will look to win in November. Jill Stein is expected to become the party’s formal nominee at its virtual convention, which began Thursday, and will be announcing her running mate on Friday.
In the complaint, Strange writes that Wisconsin law requires the people nominating electors to be the political party’s state legislative candidates or legislators of the party. There are no Green Party legislators in Wisconsin.
“The August 13, 2024 primary was the last opportunity for [Wisconsin Green Party] to nominate a candidate for Wisconsin Senate or Assembly before the 2024 general election. But, WGP failed to nominate any candidates for Wisconsin Senate or Assembly, and a sufficient number of electors did not nominate a candidate by writing in any WGP candidate for Wisconsin Senate or Assembly,” Strange wrote in the complaint.
The complaint was first reported by the Associated Press and was provided to ABC News by the DNC. It has also since been posted on the Wisconsin Elections Commission website, which logs every complaint filed with that body.
“We take the nomination process for President and Vice President very seriously and believe every candidate should follow the rules,” senior adviser to the DNC Adrienne Watson said in a statement to ABC News.
“Because the Wisconsin Green Party hasn’t fielded candidates for legislative or statewide office and doesn’t have any current incumbent legislative or statewide office holders, it cannot nominate candidates and should not be on the ballot in November.”
ABC News reached out to the Wisconsin Elections Commission for more details about its timeline for making a decision about the complaint, but didn’t hear back by the time this story was published.
Jason Call, campaign manager for Stein’s campaign, told ABC News by email, “This is a fishing expedition conjured up by the DNC, and is in line with their statements back in March that they will hire an army of lawyers and infiltrators to find any angle of attack to prevent Green Party ballot access.”
Call said that the campaign “absolutely will be hiring counsel to defend our ballot line in Wisconsin.”
The national Green Party, when contacted for comment, deferred to Stein’s campaign.
The Green Party has ballot access in at least 20 states, according to ABC News’s current reporting, and both the party and Stein herself have been filing to get on the ballot in others.
The DNC, state Democratic parties and Democratic-aligned groups have separately filed various challenges or complaints across the country challenging ballot access petitions from some independent or third-party candidates such as Stein, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., and Cornel West. The challenges allege either missteps, fraudulent actions or legal reasons that should disqualify those candidates from getting on the ballot.
The campaigns have denied allegations of misconduct and have said they should legally qualify for the ballot.
The Nevada Democratic Party filed a lawsuit in June to the Green Party’s ballot access filing in Nevada, which a judge has since dismissed, the Nevada Independent reported on Monday.
Stein, a physician and environmentalist, has campaigned on climate issues, a “Green New Deal,” and housing and workers’ rights; she has also been sharply critical of President Joe Biden on the Israel-Hamas war.
She has pushed back in the past against claims that her campaign could be seen as a “spoiler” for either major party candidate — allegations she also faced in 2016 during a previous presidential run.
In an interview in June, Stein told ABC News, “Just because the two major parties have thrown workers under the bus; have really made a mess out of our climate; and embroiled us in endless wars that are endangering the whole world … Just because those two parties have basically overseen that process of screwing the American electorate. I don’t think that entitles them to your vote.”
Americans broadly pick Kamala Harris as the winner of last week’s widely watched presidential debate – yet neither she nor Donald Trump moved the needle in terms of trust on the issues, ratings of the candidates’ personal attributes or vote preferences in the 2024 election.
Even Taylor Swift shows little impact: Just 6% in the latest ABC News/Ipsos poll say the pop star singer-songwriter’s endorsement of Harris makes them more likely to vote for her; 13%, instead, say it makes them less likely to support her, with 81% saying it makes no difference. Those responding negatively are overwhelmingly Trump supporters, according to the poll.
Americans by 58-36% say Harris won the debate – a reversal from the Biden-Trump match in June, which Trump was seen as winning by 66-28%. Biden’s performance intensified questions about his cognitive health, precipitating his departure from the race.
The poll of 3,276 adults, produced for ABC by Langer Research Associates with fieldwork by Ipsos, finds that Harris did firm up some of her personal appeal: Thirty-seven percent say the debate made them feel more favorably toward her, vs. 23% less favorably. There was no such benefit for Trump: People by nearly 2-1 say the debate made them see him less favorably.
The benefit for Harris occurred almost exclusively in her base, potentially helping her turnout efforts. Sixty-nine percent of Democrats and Democratic-leaning Independents say the debate made them see her more favorably. Only half as many Republicans and GOP-leaning Independents, 34%, say the debate made them see Trump more favorably. One factor may be that Harris, a walk-on candidate, has had less public exposure until now.
The poll also finds a slight dip in the share of Trump supporters who back him strongly – 56%, vs. 60% at the end of August. Sixty-two percent of Harris’ supporters now are strongly behind her, the first meaningful difference in strong support between the two.
That said, Trump shows an advantage in another gauge: while 42% call him too conservative, 47% call Harris too liberal, one of his debate themes.
Preferences
Vote preferences haven’t moved meaningfully. This poll finds the race at 51-46%, Harris-Trump, among all adults; 51-47% among registered voters; and 52-46% among likely voters. Each is within a percentage point of its pre-debate level in ABC/Ipsos polling.
Results are essentially identical when including third-party or Independent candidates Chase Oliver, Jill Stein and Cornel West; they get at most 1% support apiece. State-to-state ballot access for these candidates is a work in progress; ABC News estimates that as of now Oliver likely is on the ballot in about 36 states, Stein in about 27 and West in about 15.
It’s important to note that this poll measures preferences nationally, an effort to better understand how all Americans are coming to their choices in the presidential election. It doesn’t assess the contest at the state level, which determines the winner of the Electoral College.
The absence of movement in vote preferences, despite a 22-point tilt to Harris as having won the debate, marks the sharply polarized nature of the electorate. Almost everyone has a preference between Harris or Trump, and among those who do, few say they’d even consider the other. This is especially true among likely voters, with just 3% potentially persuadable to switch.
Another result also shows the entrenched divisions in attitudes. Seventy-three percent of Trump’s supporters say they’ve backed him all year. Of the rest, 17% were undecided at some point but settled on Trump; just 9% moved to Trump from another candidate – mostly, other Republicans or the former Independent candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr. Barely 2% of Trump’s supporters came to him after previously preferring Harris or Biden.
It’s similar on Harris’ side of the ledger. Two-thirds of her supporters say they’ve been with her since she got into the race. A quarter were undecided at some point. Just 2% of Harris supporters have moved to her from Trump.
Movable voters can matter – as everyone matters – in a tight race. But these results suggest that the biggest pickings for Trump and Harris alike are in motivating turnout among their existing support groups.
Groups
Harris leads Trump by nine points among women while running virtually even with him among men, and by a slight nine points among 18- to 29-year-olds, entirely due to her support from women that age. She improves among young adults who are more likely to vote.
While younger women are important to Harris, the Swift endorsement doesn’t show a positive impact even in this group. Eight percent of women younger than 30 say the endorsement makes them more likely to support Harris, while 13% say it makes them less likely to do so. Most, 78%, say it makes no difference.
Her position among suburban women, an often-watched group, is similar to her support among women overall. More tellingly, she’s +12 points among independents, often a swing voter group in presidential elections.
Trump, for his part, leads by a vast 79-18% among white evangelical Protestants, with this core GOP group seemingly unfazed by his layered position on abortion. He’s roughly on par with past performance, having won white evangelical Protestants by 74-25% in 2020 and 81-16% in 2016.
In other groups, Trump leads by 12 points among white people, growing to 28 points among those who don’t have a four-year college degree, a mainstay of his support. Despite suggestions that he’s denigrated the military, he leads by 29 points among veterans, 63-34%.
Voters
Many of these results – but not all – hold steady when moving from the general public (relevant because there’s still time to register) to registered voters and then to likely voters. But there are a few notable exceptions.
Harris advances from +9 points among all adults aged 18-29 to +19 points among those identified as likely voters. This is fueled by young women, a cornerstone group in her campaign: Harris goes from +23 points among all women under 30 to +38 points among those likely to vote.
There’s a stark contrast with men aged 18-29 who are likely to vote: Just 51% in this group back Harris, with virtually as many, 48%, for Trump.
Trump, for his part, remains closer than usual to Harris among Hispanic people, now trailing her by 17 points among those who are likely voters. That’s better than usual for Trump compared with past elections: Biden won Hispanic people by 33 points in 2020; Hillary Clinton won them by 40 points in 2016, per ABC News exit polls.
Issues and attributes
While overall vote preferences are stable, so are views on issues and attributes. The economy and inflation continue to dominate as the top issues in the election, and Trump leads by 7 points in trust to handle each of them.
In the next most important issues, Harris responds with a 7-point lead on “protecting American democracy” and a 9-point lead on handling health care. The two remain evenly matched on crime and safety.
It’s clear, too, why Trump keeps doubling down on immigration as an issue: He leads Harris by 10 points in trust to handle it. She leads him by 14 points on abortion and by 16 points on handling race relations, although both rate lower in importance.
There are differences among groups in issue importance. In notable gender gaps, women are 14 points more apt than men to cite abortion as a top issue in their vote, 68% vs. 54% – a difference that holds regardless of age. Women also are 11 points more likely than men to cite health care as a top issue, 82 vs. 71%. Still, the economy and inflation top the issues list among women and men alike.
Harris’ best results vs. Trump continue to be on personal attributes, explaining her effort to lean in on this domain. She leads him by 32 points in having the physical health it takes to serve effectively, 17 points in honesty and trustworthiness, 10 points in mental sharpness, 10 points in understanding the problems of people like you and 7 points in better representing your personal values. All, again, are essentially the same as they were before the debate.
Overall favorability also is essentially unchanged: Forty-seven percent have a favorable impression of Harris, vs. 35% for Trump. Still, they’re close in being seen as qualified for office – Harris by 53%, Trump by 49%. The difference widens, however, among independents; 56% see Harris as qualified vs. 48% who say the same of Trump.
Debate
Lastly, on the debate, it’s notable that 95% of Democrats say Harris won, while fewer Republicans, 75%, say Trump won. (Among independents, 61% pick Harris.) Similarly, among Trump’s own supporters, 78% say he won the debate, while among people backing Harris, 97% give her the win. (These results include people who initially called the debate a tie, then leaned toward Harris or Trump as the winner.)
While 58% overall say Harris won, this rises to 64% of those who watched all or some of the debate. That reflects the fact that Harris supporters are 8 points more likely than Trump supporters to have watched. Harris supporters are even more apt to have read, watched or listened to follow-up news coverage or commentary about the debate – 75% have done so, vs. 59% of those who support Trump.
Methodology
This ABC News/Ipsos poll was conducted online via the probability-based Ipsos KnowledgePanel® Sept. 11-13, 2024, in English and Spanish, among a random national sample of 3,276 adults. Partisan divisions are 29-29-30%, Democrats-Republicans-independents. Results have a margin of sampling error of 2 percentage points, including the design effect, for the full sample. Sample sizes are 2,772 for registered voters and 2,196 for likely voters, with a 2-point error margin for each. Sampling error is not the only source of differences in polls.
The survey was produced for ABC News by Langer Research Associates, with sampling and data collection by Ipsos. See details on the ABC News survey methodology here.