The chart below shows the share of the vote won by Trump in 2020 versus 2024 based on age, gender, and income. Assuming the exit poll is accurate, here are a few notable takeaways:
Hispanic voters - especially men - handed Trump the election. Trump made big advances with all Latinos, but the most shocking change was a full 55% of Latino men voted for him in 2024 versus 36% in 2020. Hispanic men are mostly interested in economic opportunity and getting ahead in life. They are also generally culturally conservative and they LOVE school choice. These results contradict the long-held myth that allowing in legal immigrants dooms the GOP.
Just as we predicted earlier this year, the cultural elite, the over-educated, and the wealthy have become the backbone of the liberal elites. The higher the income, the more likely they were to vote for Kamala. Our landmark study published with pollster Scott Rasmussen earlier this year was the first to expose how out of touch these wealthy elites are with the concerns and aspirations of middle-income/working-class America.
Although conservatives had hoped to make gains with black Americans, they didn't.
The Right slightly lost ground with seniors in 2024. The Medi-scare campaign apparently worked, even though it was the Left who used Medicare as a piggy bank in the "Inflation Reduction Act."
The gender gap was actually smaller than in 2020. Trump won a larger percentage of women voters this time. The abortion issue didn't show up.
2) Washington Post Defends Government Bloat and Waste
Leave it to the Washington Post to defend the bureaucratic flab in Washington:
Budget experts say the [efficiency] effort could prove hugely disruptive to workers and businesses that rely on certainty in federal regulation and spending... The panel's most immediate impact could be to demoralize the federal workforce and increase attrition, several critics said -- an outcome that could hinder critical government functions such as approving permits for businesses.
"It could be a very chaotic situation if they try to mass-nullify regulations," said Tobin Marcus, head of U.S. politics and policy at Wolfe Research, who advised the Obama administration. "Their 'move fast and break things' ethos suggests they'll do something sweeping. But, to me, creating multiple years of legal limbo for many industries is not a great recipe for driving business investment."
For the record: we are all for defunding and "breaking things" that don't work. And yes, a lot of “attrition” from the government is just what the doctor ordered.
3) Bank Regulators Give Themselves a Big Budget Increase
Speaking of government bloat and regulatory overkill... while DOGE is busy trying to eliminate it, the federal agencies haven't gotten the memo yet.
The OCC pays for almost all of its $1.2 billion annual budget and 3,500 employees by imposing "assessment fees" on the banks it regulates. And for next year, it wants a hefty 16% increase. Wait. We thought Biden conquered inflation!
Here's a synopsis of the self-serving proposal:
The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) today announced an increase in assessment rates for the 2025 calendar year. The increases are primarily targeted at large banks...
The OCC increased the rates in the general assessment fee schedule for assets above $40 billion by 16 percent to reflect the increased cost of supervising the largest institutions. The OCC increased all other rates in the general assessment fee schedule by 2.65 percent to account for inflation...
The 2025 assessment rates will provide the OCC with sufficient resources to recruit, train, and retain the talent and to update the agency's technology systems as necessary to perform its important mission to maintain the safety, soundness, and fairness of the federal banking system.
Hmm. So much for the new ethic of doing more with less. We'd prefer they do less for less.
Hopefully, Trump will put an end to this tax on banks, which will be paid by depositors and borrowers.
4) Must-See Prager U Video Makes the Case for Optional Personal Accounts for Social Security
UP’s Stephen Moore narrates the case for giving every young American the option of putting Social Security payroll tax dollars into personal accounts - much like 401k plans. This would allow every American worker to become a capitalist owner and democratize wealth. For the past 40 years, the left has argued these personal accounts are “too risky.”
No. If baby boomers had been permitted these accounts, the average worker would be receiving $8,000 a month rather than the paltry average of $1,900 a month. They would also be able to leave their children at least $1 million at death.
Social Security is a ripoff for today’s young workers – the worst investment they will ever make - and the Prager U video shows they deserve a better deal. Show this to your kids so we can end the world’s largest Ponzi scheme. Watch the video by clicking below!
We never solicit funds in the HOTLINE, which is designed to arm you with useful facts and information, not to be yet another hard sell fundraising pitch. We all get way too many of those every day. (And especially today!)
But if you would like to discuss becoming more actively involved with our organization, please email or call (609-462-4259) our grassroots outreach manager Zach Laba.
