Vance says ‘no’ Trump didn’t lose the 2020 election
Meg Oliphant / Stringer/Getty Images
(Williamsport, Pennsylvania) — In his most direct answer yet of this election cycle, GOP vice presidential nominee Sen. JD Vance said he does not believe former President Donald Trump lost the 2020 election.
Vance’s response occurred when a reporter asked, “What message do you think it sends to Independent voters when you do not directly answer the question, ‘Did Donald Trump lose in 2020?'”
“On the election of 2020, I’ve answered this question directly a million times. No, I think there are serious problems in 2020 so did Donald Trump lose the election? Not by the words that I would use,” Vance said.
“But look, I really couldn’t care less if you agree or disagree with me on this issue.”
In a recently resurfaced clip from Spectrum News 1 in 2022, Vance said, “Yeah, I do,” when asked if he believed the 2020 election was stolen.
President Joe Biden defeated former President Donald Trump in the 2020 election by more than 7 million votes.
Vance’s response comes after weeks of being asked by reporters if the former president lost the 2020 election.
This past Sunday in his interview with ABC’s Martha Raddatz, Vance continued to dodge directly answering if Trump lost the 2020 election.
“Martha, you’ve you asked this question. I’ve been asked this question 10 times in the past couple of weeks. Of course, Donald Trump and I believe there were problems in 2020,” Vance said.
Pressed again by Raddatz, Vance replied, “I’ve said repeatedly I think the 2020 election had problems. You want to say rigged? You want to say he won? Use whatever vocabulary term you want.”
Taking questions from reporters at a campaign event in Williamsport, Pennsylvania, ABC News asked the Ohio Senator if he was concerned about election misinformation could impact this election cycle, Vance said he was concerned.
“I talk to people every now and then who will come up to me and say, ‘Well, you know, there are too many problems out there. We don’t trust the people who are going to count our ballots, and you know, so I’m not going to get out there and vote.’ That’s the exact opposite attitude you should be taking,” Vance said.
Trying to ease those who might have doubts about the election, Vance said that those who will be working the polls on election day are the same people in their community.
“Here’s something else that I think people don’t realize is, if you’re a local voter in a place like Williamsport, the people who are counting your ballots are often your neighbors. And again, it’s the local elections, and especially in our small and rural areas, it’s your neighbors who are counting these votes, it’s your neighbors who are counting these ballots.”
Participants in the annual Christmas Parade march down Main Street, December 1, 2023, in Rio Grande City, Starr County, Texas. The vast majority of rural Starr County, which follows the Rio Grande River border with Mexico, is Mexican American, and Spanish is the most commonly spoken first language. The area is a center for migrants crossing into the United States, but many residents have family on both sides of the border and cross legally on a regular basis. (Andrew Lichtenstein/ Getty Images)
(RIO GRANDE CITY, TX) — Starr County, Texas, voted predominantly Republican this month — for the first time in 100 years.
Home to some 75,000 residents across about 1,200 square miles, it has a relatively small footprint, in a state where everything is glorified for its bigness.
But it’s been making an outsized impression in national politics. Even after its historic flip from blue to red, a century in the making, it’s continued to garner headlines.
Last week, Texas Land Commissioner Dawn Buckingham offered up 1,402 acres of Starr County to facilitate President-elect Donald Trump’s mass deportation plans.
In a letter to Trump dated Nov. 19, Buckingham said she’s offering the land, located along the border of Mexico, “to be used to construct deportation facilities.”
She has also proposed alternative uses for it, including as a site for detention centers.
“Now it’s essentially farmland, so it’s flat, it’s easy to build on. We can very easily put a detention center on there — a holding place as we get these criminals out of our country,” Buckingham said in a recent interview with Fox News.
The land, which Buckingham declared property of the state in 2023, adds to another parcel previously owned by the Texas General Land Office, bringing the southern border acreage that it controls in Starr County up to 4,000.
ABC News’ Mireya Villarreal visited Starr County to ask residents what issues and values most influenced them to vote for Republican candidates this year, instead of upholding their century-long blue streak.
“The economy is just driving, I think, everybody crazy,” said Becky Garza, the owner of Texas Cafe in Rio Grande City, the largest city in Starr County.
She explained that she used to complain about buying a box of eggs for $10, and now they’re $20.
“If things don’t get better, I might have to either cut staff, cut hours, or I’m going to start with cutting hours and then from there work it, maybe cut down, maybe cut the menu, you know, to keep the place open, you know, because I don’t want to lose my my customers,” Garza said.
And she doesn’t think she’s the only one who’s making those kinds of hard decisions, she told ABC News.
Jaime Escobar, the mayor of neighboring Roma, another city of Starr County, agrees. He suggested that residents are more influenced by the local economy than what’s being said in Washington, D.C.
“We no longer want to be considered just a poor community because we’re rich culturally,” he told ABC News. “We’re proud of our Mexican-American heritage, but we don’t — no longer want to be dependent just on the government.”
But with D.C. being invited into their backyard, it’s bound to bring the topic of migration and deportation to the forefront — even for those who may not have prioritized the issue during the election cycle.
Asked about how people might respond to a detention facility in nearby Starr County, Escobar said, “People don’t want families to be torn apart. That’s the last thing we want.”
“But at the same time,” he added, “we hope that Trump and his administration do the right thing and focus on the criminal element first, and then see how in the meantime, we’ll see how the policies can be implemented in a better way.”
Buckingham, on the other hand, believes that “folks who live down on the border feel really abandoned by those open border policies.”
She told ABC News, “They feel like it’s directly harming their communities, both their safety and their prosperity.”
In the same interview this week with ABC News, Buckingham also said that she would “absolutely” offer up even more of Texas, the way that she did Starr County.
“I have 13 million acres. If any of them can be of help in this process, we’re happy to have that discussion,” Buckingham said.
Trump has said he would carry out his mass deportation plans — a top campaign promise — by declaring a national emergency and using “military assets” to deport migrants currently living in the U.S. without legal permission.
He backed up his commitment with the choice of several immigration hard-liners to join his administration, including South Dakota Gov. Kristi Noem for secretary of homeland security and former director of Immigration and Customs Enforcement Tom Homan as “border czar.” Both picks require Senate confirmation.
But with an estimated 11 million people presumed to be living in the U.S. without legal immigration status, the promises have raised questions of both feasibility and cost.
Removing them could cost billions of dollars per year, according to estimates from the American Immigration Council.
And while Republican-friendly areas of Texas might feel compelled to support the effort, other southern border states, like Arizona and California, have already expressed their disinterest.
Arizona Gov. Katie Hobbs told ABC News Live last week that she would not use state police or the National Guard to help with mass deportation.
“We will not be participating in misguided efforts that harm our communities,” she said.
(NEW YORK) — In recent campaign speeches, former President Donald Trump has repeatedly floated an eye-catching idea: the elimination of individual income taxes.
The proposal follows a string of other tax cuts put forward by Trump, including the removal of taxes on car-loan payments, social security benefits and servers’ tips. But a potential elimination of personal income taxes for all Americans goes much further.
When podcast host Joe Rogan asked Trump last week whether he was serious about the new plan, Trump said, “Yeah, sure, why not?”
The U.S. would pay for the lost tax revenue with far-reaching tariffs, Trump said.
“We will not allow the enemy to come in and take our jobs and take our factories and take our workers and take our families, unless they pay a big price — and the big price is tariffs,” Trump added.
The individual income tax currently accounts for roughly half of the $5 trillion in revenue that the federal government brings in each year.
It is unclear whether Trump’s proposal would also include the elimination of payroll taxes and corporate income taxes. Those duties account for another 40% of U.S. tax revenue, according to the Tax Policy Center.
“Even in its smallest form, it would be a pretty substantial change from current policy,” Marc Goldwein, senior vice president and senior policy director at the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, told ABC News.
But he acknowledged that the details about how that proposal would actually work have been scarce. “We don’t have a full proposal,” Goldwein said.
In response to ABC News’ request for comment, the Trump campaign referenced the tax cuts enacted during his first term. But the campaign did not comment directly on his newer proposal of eliminating the individual income tax.
“President Trump passed the largest tax CUTS for working families in history and will make them permanent when he is back in the White House in addition to ending taxes on tips for service workers and ending taxes on Social Security for our seniors,” Karoline Leavitt, national press secretary for the Trump campaign, told ABC News.
It would be all but impossible to make up for the lost revenue with increased tariffs, experts told ABC News.
On the campaign trail, Trump has promised a sharp escalation of tariffs during his first term. He has proposed tariffs of between 60% and 100% on Chinese goods.
Envisioning a far-reaching policy, Trump has proposed a tax of between 10% and 20% on all imported products. Earlier this month, he told the audience at the Economic Club of Chicago that such a tariff could reach as high as 50%.
Last year, the U.S. imported about $3.8 trillion worth of goods, the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis found. To generate the same amount of revenue currently brought in by the individual income tax, a tariff would have needed to be set at about 70%, Alan Auerbach, a law professor at the University of California, Berkeley, who focuses on tax policy, told ABC News.
However, a tariff of such magnitude would significantly reduce U.S. trade, slashing the total amount of imported goods and, in turn, reducing tax revenue.
“It wouldn’t be feasible,” Auerbach said.
Erica York, a senior economist and research director at the Tax Foundation, echoed that view. “It’s mathematically impossible,” York said.
Replacing the individual income tax with tariffs would also shift a greater share of the tax burden onto low- and middle-income households, experts said.
The top 50% of earners accounted for nearly 98% of all federal income taxes in 2021, according to the Tax Foundation. The bottom 50%, in turn, made up about 2% of income tax payments.
Higher tariffs are widely expected to raise prices of consumer goods, since foreign producers typically pass the cost of higher taxes onto customers. As a result, the costs of higher tariffs would fall evenly across U.S. households, since all Americans purchase consumer goods.
In some cases, low- and middle-income earners would pay a higher proportion of the cost burden, since consumer spending often makes up a higher share of their overall budget than it does for their well-off counterparts, Goldwein said.
“Tariffs are at best a flat tax and more likely a regressive one,” Goldwein added.
Trump would have some latitude in setting and implementing tariffs, experts previously told ABC News.
But his proposal to eliminate the personal income tax would require support from both houses of Congress.
“Trump can’t just eliminate the individual income tax,” York said. But, she added, Trump may seek to negotiate tax cuts in 2025, when many of the provisions associated with his signature tax reform law are set to expire.
“Trump could possibly negotiate further tax cuts to be added to those,” York said. “But I don’t see a situation where Congress would align with this swap between the income tax and tariffs.”
(CHICAGO) — Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson is on the defensive after all seven members of the Chicago Board of Education announced their resignations Friday, an unprecedented moment in the city’s history, in protest of a $300 million loan Johnson proposed to fund teachers’ contracts and pensions.
The Chicago City Council called a special meeting for Wednesday afternoon to address the crisis, and to hear testimony from the former school board members who resigned, all of whom were hand-picked by Mayor Johnson just last year.
For months, board members for Chicago Public Schools (CPS) – the country’s fourth-largest public school system – had been under pressure by Johnson to fire CPS CEO Pedro Martinez, who was appointed in 2021 by Johnson’s predecessor, former Mayor Lori Lightfoot, for his objection to Johnson’s proposed $300 million short-term, high-interest loan to pay for the first year of the Chicago Teaches Union’s (CTU) contract. Martinez and the school board pushed back against Johnson, saying the extra borrowing would worsen the city’s already significant debt burden.
In an op-ed in the Chicago Tribune last month, Martinez said Johnson subsequently demanded his resignation, which he also refused, saying it would cause disruption during current union negotiations. Martinez added that the extra borrowing was fiscally irresponsible.
“I remain against exorbitant, short-term borrowing, a past practice that generated negative bond ratings for CPS,” Martinez wrote, in part, adding that repaying the bond and its debt service would “take away dollars from the classroom – all of which means that future generations of Chicago’s children and taxpayers will ultimately pay the price.”
The CPS board ended up passing a school budget without Johnson’s desired pension payment. The school system faces a nearly $1 billion shortfall in 2025, Martinez announced in August .
A former Cook County commissioner, Johnson worked as an organizer for the CTU beginning in 2011 and helped organize the 2012 teachers strike. Illinois State Board of Elections records show that the CTU contributed more than $2.3 million to his 2023 mayoral campaign. Johnson also received nearly $2.2 million from the American Federation of Teachers and nearly $1 million from the Illinois Federation of Teachers.
Alderman Gilbert Villegas accused Johnson of “wanting to take care of his former employer” by forcing the resignations of the board amid contract negotiations with the union. “The mayor was elected to serve the whole city, not serve the CTU,” he said.
“We agree we want to make sure CPS teachers have a fair contract, but we also want to make sure taxpayers have fair contract. Right now, the mayor has the thumb on the scale and it’s not right,” Villegas told ABC News.
Spokespersons for Johnson, the Chicago Teachers Union, and Chicago Public Schools did not respond to ABC News requests for comment.
At a press conference Monday, Johnson attacked his critics, whom he compared to supporters of slavery.
“The so-called fiscally responsible stewards are making the same argument [as] when our people wanted to be liberated and emancipated in this country,” Johnson said. “The argument was you can’t free Black people because it would be too expensive. They said that it would be fiscally irresponsible for this country to liberate Black people.”
Johnson also announced six new appointees to the board Monday, saying he would name a seventh at a later date. Under state law, the appointees aren’t required to be vetted by the city council, although Villegas said that “in the spirit of transparency and collaboration,” councilmembers ought to have the opportunity to ask them questions.
Villegas is a member of the city’s progressive caucus, which initially supported Johnson’s agenda. In an unprecedented show of unity, most of that caucus joined 41 other council members from across the political divide in signing a public letter dated Oct. 5 that said the mass resignations of the Board of Education’s former members bring “further instability to our school district” and are deserving of a public hearing.
Johnson indicated Tuesday that he would not send his new appointees to Wednesday’s meeting, saying in part that “every single mayor in the history of Chicago has had the authority to appoint board members to multiple boards. Guess who still has that authority? This mayor does.”
The CPS funding crisis is also alarming Chicago’s business community. This week, the Chicagoland Chamber of Commerce and the Civic Committee of the Commercial Club of Chicago released a joint statement saying their concerns over Johnson’s push for extra borrowing and the Board of Education resignations have “escalated” their concerns about Johnson’s actions, and further said that the quality and stability of Chicago Public Schools is directly tied to “the success of Chicago businesses of every size and the long-term economic future of our city.”
The statement also called for the school board to “keep CEO Martinez in his place,” and to “reject the misguided proposal to borrow more money, and work with all parties to bring transparency and long-term fiscal stability and quality education to the school system.”
