Summer scorcher: Extreme heat hits Midwest, South before moving to Northeast
ABC News
(NEW YORK) — Extreme heat is gripping the Midwest and the South on Tuesday before moving into the Northeast on Wednesday.
Record-high temperatures were shattered across the Midwest on Monday, including in Waterloo, Iowa, which reached a scorching 98 degrees.
On Tuesday, 14 states from Iowa to New York are on alert for dangerous heat.
In Detroit, public school students are being released three hours early on Tuesday due to the heat.
The heat index — what temperature it feels like with humidity — is forecast to soar Tuesday to 110 degrees in Chicago; 101 degrees in Indianapolis and Nashville, Tennessee; 100 in Louisville, Kentucky; and 98 in Pittsburgh.
On Wednesday, the heat will spread into the Northeast.
Washington, D.C., could reach a record high of 99 degrees with a heat index of 104 degrees. The heat index could reach 105 degrees in Philadelphia and 99 in New York City.
On Thursday, the record heat will end for the Midwest and the Northeast, but will continue for the South.
Actual temperatures of 101 degrees and 97 degrees are forecast for Nashville and Atlanta, respectively.
There are hundreds of deaths each year in the U.S. due to excessive heat, according to CDC WONDER, an online database, and scientists caution that the actual number of heat-related deaths is likely higher.
Last year marked the most heat-related deaths in the U.S. on record, according to JAMA, a peer-reviewed medical journal published by the American Medical Association.
Republican presidential nominee, former U.S. President Donald Trump, speaks at a rally at the Brick Breeden Fieldhouse at Montana State University on August 9, 2024, in Bozeman, Montana. (Michael Ciaglo/Getty Images)
(WASHINGTON) — Former President Donald Trump focused partly on the economy during a speech in North Carolina on Wednesday as his campaign works to reset his close fight against Vice President Kamala Harris.
Trump advocated mostly for broad reforms, though, while offering little in the way of specifics and he went off on familiar tangents, including hurling repeated insults at Harris.
“Now this is a little bit different day,” Trump said as he began. “We’re talking about a thing called the economy. They wanted to do a speech on the economy. A lot of people are very devastated by what’s happened with inflation and all of the other things. So, we’re doing this as an intellectual speech. You’re all intellectuals today.”
Proposals he made included directing Cabinet secretaries and agencies to work to “defeat inflation,” getting rid of job regulations that he said were costing jobs, and highlighting his call for “no tax on tips” and eliminating taxes on Social Security benefits for seniors. He also repeated “drill, baby, drill” as his key solution to solving economic issues, accusing Democrats of using the environment to stop the oil and gas industry.
“Inflation is destroying our country. It’s destroying our families. We will target everything from car affordability to housing affordability to insurance costs to supply chain issues … to the price of prescription drugs, I will instruct my Cabinet that I expect results within the first 100 days, or much sooner than that,” Trump said.
The economy has been one of the Trump campaign’s central election issues this cycle — the former president often spending considerable time discussing inflation, gas prices and the job market. His speech on Wednesday — specifically his attacks on the Biden-Harris administration — included falsehoods as he painted a better situation of the U.S. economy during his administration over the current one.
Trump falsely claimed that when he left office the economy was surging when in fact the unemployment rate was at 6.4% in January 2021. Now, it’s much lower at 4.3%.
He also said inflation has never been as high as it was under President Joe Biden; however, the annual inflation rate peaked at 9% in June 2022 under Biden, and it reached 15% in April 1980. Now, it’s at 2.9%.
Attacking Harris, Trump branded her as a complainer and argued that the policies she’s currently advocating for shouldn’t be taken seriously because she would have already accomplished them as vice president.
“Kamala has declared that tackling inflation will be a day one priority … But day one for Kamala was three and a half years ago. Why hasn’t she done it?” Trump said.
After Harris recently advocated for the same no tax on tips policy Trump had announced earlier in the summer, the Trump campaign called Harris “Copy Cat Kamala,” and Trump on stage said it was evidence that she would copy all of his economic policies.
“When Kamala lays out her fake economic plans this week, it will probably be a copy of my plan, because basically, that’s what she does,” he said ahead of Harris’s economic plan rollout set for Friday.
“She’s doing a plan. You know she’s going to announce it this week. Maybe she’s, she’s waiting for me to announce it so she can copy it,” he said.
“During what was billed as a speech about his economic vision, Donald Trump said he’s ‘not sure the economy is the most important topic’ – because when you’re running to slash taxes for rich donors and corporations it’s easy not to care about the working families and middle class Americans who get hurt as a result,” Harris campaign spokesperson Ammar Moussa said in a statement shared with ABC News.
Doug Mills/The New York Times/Bloomberg via Getty Images
(WASHINGTON) — Voters across the country tuned in to the ABC News presidential debate on Tuesday night to see Vice President Kamala Harris and former President Donald Trump discuss issues and share their visions for the country.
Many were looking to see how Harris defined herself on the debate stage, especially given that she entered the race relatively late as a presidential candidate.
Some undecided or formerly undecided voters spoke with ABC News both before and after the debate.
Before the debate, they shared what they were hoping to see — and after, if they thought Harris made the case for herself as a presidential candidate as well as their thoughts a potential second debate between Trump and Harris. These voters also previously spoke with ABC News earlier in the election cycle, including before President Joe Biden dropped out of the race.
Patrick O’Rourke, a retired scientist and independent voter from Georgia, said ahead of the debate that he did not trust Harris to be a “unifier” for the country.
“If I can force myself to vote for VP Harris, it will be with the hope of [split-party control between the presidency and Congress] … I hope for a president who can respect the constitution and earn the respect of our country,” he told ABC News by text.
At 10:09 p.m. ET, as the debate was still on air, he texted ABC News that he had turned off the debate.
“Former President Trump has forced me into voting for VP Harris,” he said. The reasons: because of how Trump discussed Ashli Babbit — a Trump supporter who was fatally shot during the Jan. 6, 2021, attacks on the U.S. Capitol — whom the former president said “was shot by an out-of-control police officer;” and after Trump promoted being endorsed by Hungarian leader Viktor Orban, who is considered an authoritarian leader.
That doesn’t mean he thinks Harris made a strong positive case or defined herself enough, though.
Asked how he felt about her performance, O’Rourke said, “Still don’t know who she is other than not Donald Trump. Right now, that’s enough.”
Many voters feel they could benefit from more information about Harris and her platforms. A recent New York Times/Siena College poll found that 28% of likely voters said they feel they need to still learn more about Harris, while only 9% of likely voters felt that way about Trump.
O’Rourke said on Wednesday morning that he’s also not interested in another debate.
“One is enough for this cycle. I do not need to see another debate … I don’t need the candidates telling me what the other one’s policies are,” O’Rourke said.
But he said he’d like to see interviews with the candidates where they talk about economic policy, foreign affairs and civil justice priorities.
Rebecca Bakker, a registered nursing professor who lives near Grand Rapids, Michigan, told ABC News by text ahead of the debate that she was still undecided — although she had said beforehand she was not supporting Trump.
She was hoping to hear Harris “drill down on a clear economic message,” as well as clarity from her on how she would solve foreign policy and border issues.
Bakker told ABC News after the debate that the showing solidified her decision to not vote for Trump, who did not come across to her as “presidential” or as outlining clear policies.
“I think Harris did a great job to bait him so he [would] unravel during the debate and this worked to her advantage,” she said by text, but she felt Harris was still a bit “murky” on how her positions on some issues have changed.
“I remain undecided- she didn’t sway me enough (yet) to vote for her but for sure [Trump] swayed me enough NOT to vote for him,” Bakker wrote.
Bakker said she would like another debate to see if either candidate “reframes their narrative to address specifics on policies without ‘one of them’ losing focus and returning to childish behavior,” she wrote, adding she wants to see Harris discuss the economy and border issues more directly.
“So far, I don’t have a clear idea of her plan to address these areas.”
Karen Hughes, an independent voter and retired parole and probation specialist from Nevada, had previously been undecided but had decided to begrudgingly vote for Biden before he left the race in July. Ahead of the debate, Hughes told ABC News by text she was “hoping to see some policy discussions tonight. I’m interested in hearing Trump’s (final) position on abortion, and Harris’s explanation for why she won’t ban fracking.”
The debate affirmed her choice to vote for Harris, Hughes said on Wednesday, as she felt Harris “presents as competent, positive, and very sure of herself. I felt she knew exactly to get into Trump’s head and he fell for it every time,” Hughes said — although she said she felt Harris was still unclear about the shift in her position on fracking. Hughes also criticized Trump’s invocation of “wild conspiracy theories.”
But she’s not looking for another debate: “I think this one was good enough.”
Ian Mackintosh, a voter from Pennsylvania who lives in the Pittsburgh area, also said he hoped ahead of the debate to hear about policy. On Wednesday, he told ABC News by text, “Honestly, I thought it was a complete waste of 90 minutes. If anything, it moved me away from both candidates.”
While he said he understands the challenges of going in depth on complex policy stances in two minutes, it “could have been more substantial” with “less baiting and intentionally riling up the other candidate.”
Mackintosh said he is also disillusioned by Harris’ stance on Israel and Gaza, which he feels is the same as Biden’s.
He said he would not be interested in watching a second debate, and added, “After last night’s debacle I will probably only vote down-ballot.”
Brendan Fitzsimmons, a physician from Wyoming who is a Republican but does not support Trump, told ABC News by text before the debate that he did not expect much from the candidates, “although I would enjoy it if there is a lot of entertainment to it,” he said.
Fitzsimmons admitted that going into the debate, he didn’t feel sold on Harris: “I think she’ll be a terrible president, but I hope she wins,” calling her the “lesser of two evils.”
The morning after the debate, Fitzsimmons said the night changed how he was feeling about Harris.
“I enjoyed the debate and I thought they were both fairly strong, but all in all, Harris was stronger and won the debate and I think showed to a lot of people that she can be president … I am very concerned about foreign affairs, and I think she may be OK in that way,” he told ABC News by text.
Matthew Labkovski, a Republican voter from Florida who supported former United Nations ambassador Nikki Haley during the Republican presidential primaries, told ABC News by text before the debate that he hoped to see the candidates discuss policy, and not engage in personal attacks. He said Tuesday evening that he was currently not planning on voting for president.
After the debate, Labkovski said on Wednesday, “I think it actually convinced me not to vote for Donald Trump. All I saw was fear mongering from him and what seemed to be a stretching of the truth,” he said, particularly when it came to Trump’s false claims about abortion and about a false conspiracy theory over immigrants eating pets.
“I am still not convinced though with Harris, as I didn’t get enough policy with her in this debate. To be honest, I would love another debate to see if I was actually comfortable in voting for her,” he said.
Labkovski also criticized Harris’ laughter during the debate, saying that he wished she had remained more even-keeled.
He added that he would have liked her to discuss how she would implement the policies she was talking about.
“How is she going to fight inflation? How is she going to bring peace? That’s what I was hoping the debate would bring … I needed more from her to actually sway from not voting in the presidential slot.”
