2024 showdown: Biden faces bigger polling deficit now than Obama did in 2011
Amid a spate of polls suggesting President Biden trails former President Donald Trump in a likely 2024 election rematch, the Biden campaign and Democratic allies point back nearly a dozen years. That’s when former President Barack Obama – with Biden as his running mate – won re-election to a second term in the White House in 2012 despite polls a year earlier predicting a ballot box defeat for the incumbent. “Predictions more than a year out tend to look a little different a year later,” Biden campaign spokesperson Kevin Munoz said earlier this month. “Don’t take our word for it: Gallup predicted an eight point loss for President Obama only for him to win handedly a year later,” Munoz added. HEAD HERE TO CHECK OUT THE LATEST FOX NEWS 2024 POLLING And Biden campaign manager Julie Chavez Rodriquez wrote in a recent fundraising email that “the year is 2011. It’s one-year out from Election Day, and the New York Times has just put out polling showing President Obama trailing significantly in battleground states.” But a trip down memory lane reminds us that while Obama was saddled in late 2011 with unfavorable polling a year before his re-election, his standing was not as troublesome as the deficits Biden currently faces. THE FINAL COUNTDOWN: TRUMP REMAINS COMMANDING FRONT RUNNER 50 DAYS BEFORE START OF GOP PRESIDENTIAL NOMINATING CALENDAR Obama mostly maintained a slight polling advantage over eventual 2012 GOP nominee Mitt Romney. A Fox News poll from early December 2011 indicated the incumbent with a 44%-42% edge over Romney, after trailing the then-former Massachusetts governor by two points in a November survey. And Obama topped another top contender for the 2012 Republican presidential nomination – former House Speaker Newt Gingrich – by five and six points in the November and December 2011 Fox News polls. Fast-forward a dozen years and Biden trails Trump – the commanding front-runner for the 2024 GOP presidential nomination as he makes his third straight White House bid – by four points. The same Fox News national poll, conducted Nov. 10-13, suggests the president down by five points to Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis and trailing by 12 points to former ambassador and former South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley, in hypothetical 2024 general election showdowns. The president’s approval rating is also deeper underwater than Obama’s was a dozen years ago. Biden’s approval rating, which has been in negative territory for over two years, stood at 40%-59% in the latest Fox News poll. Obama stood at 42%-48% in the Fox News November 2011 poll, and at 44%-51% in the survey a month later. The new Fox News poll, and surveys from other organizations, also point to high disapproval ratings for Biden among key groups that traditionally support Democrats. Veteran Republican pollster Neil Newhouse noted that polls “aren’t necessarily predictive a year out.” “But that doesn’t mean you ignore these polls and they [Biden’s campaign] do so at their own risk,” he emphasized. Newhouse, the lead pollster on Romney’s 2012 presidential campaign, argued that “Joe Biden is not the campaigner and communicator that Barack Obama was. The Obama folks had the full resources of a strong candidate at their disposal and I don’t think the Biden campaign does.” Obama’s polling woes in 2011 came the year after Democrats were trounced in the 2010 midterm elections. The Biden campaign notes that twelve years later, the current Democratic president and his party are coming off ballot box successes in the 2022 midterms, as well as this month’s off-year elections. Get the latest updates from the 2024 campaign trail, exclusive interviews and more at our Fox News Digital election hub.
WATCH: Biden shifts blame away from administration after admitting prices ‘still too high’
President Biden attempted to shift blame away from his administration for the state of consumer prices on Monday after admitting they were “still too high.” His comments came during a speech on the supply chain issues facing the U.S. after days of his administration taking a victory lap for lower Thanksgiving meal prices, as a percentage, stemming largely from higher household earnings rather than an actual large scale reduction in the cost of groceries. “Wages for working families have gone up while inflation has come down 65%, giving families a little more money in their pockets, a little more breathing room this holiday season,” Biden said. “But we know that prices are still too high for too many things, that times are still too tough for too many families. We’ve made progress, but we have more work to do.” WATCH: BIDEN OFFICIAL BUTCHERS POPULAR PHRASE COINED BY RONALD REAGAN ABOUT GOVERNMENT’S ROLE IN EVERYDAY LIFE “Let me be clear: Any corporation that’s not brought their prices back down even as inflation has come down, even as supply chains have been rebuilt, it’s time to stop the price gouging. Give the American consumer a break,” he added. Biden also repeated his administration’s talking point that the cost of making a Thanksgiving meal this year was the “fourth cheapest ever on record,” despite the cost of the meal being 30% higher than in 2020 and 25% higher than in 2019, according to the American Farm Bureau, which has tracked costs associated with the holiday since 1986. The claim is true considering the slight reduction in the cost of certain common Thanksgiving meal items, including the turkey, along with higher household earnings, but misleading when compared to costs in previous years. WATCH: JEAN-PIERRE GIVES TERSE RESPONSE WHEN QUESTIONED ON POSSIBLE STAFF SHAKEUP AMID BIDEN POLLING CRISIS Biden’s call for companies to lower prices following years of record-high inflation under his administration echoes the tongue lashing he gave oil companies last year amid the then-record-high gas prices plaguing American families. “We haven’t seen the lower prices reflected at the pump though. Meanwhile, oil and gas companies are still making record profits, billions of dollars in profits,” Biden said at a meeting with the White House Competition Council in Sep. 2022. “My message is simple. To the companies running gas stations and setting those prices at the pump: Bring down prices you’re charging at the pump to reflect the price you’re paying for the product. Do it now,” he added.
Kamala Harris touts White House record at Latino event ahead of 2024
The vice president’s Houston visit comes as the Biden campaign works to shore up Latino support ahead of a potential rematch against former President Donald Trump next year.
Supreme Court compels depositions for Arizona Republican leaders in voting law dispute
A Monday decision from the U.S. Supreme Court compels Arizona’s top Republican leaders to sit for depositions in an ongoing federal lawsuit concerning state voting rights. In their brief order, the justices refused to block the testimony from Arizona House Speaker Ben Toma and Arizona Senate President Warren Petersen – both Republicans – where they must explain, under oath, why they supported state laws requiring proof of citizenship to vote. Civil rights groups have argued that those laws, passed last year, are racially discriminatory. The Biden administration has also filed a separate lawsuit. Toma and Petersen, meanwhile, have defended the laws from legal challenges after the state’s governor and attorney general refused to do so. A federal district court judge ordered Toma and Petersen to sit for depositions explaining their reasons for defending the law. THE FINAL COUNTDOWN: TRUMP HOLDS COMMANDING LEAD OVER DESANTIS, HALEY, WITH 50 DAYS UNTIL IOWA CAUCUSES The court’s decision on Monday effectively rejects claims from Toma and Petersen that a deposition would violate legislative privilege – meaning that lawmakers are shielded from criminal and civil liability. The GOP lawmakers had filed an emergency request with the court. A federal judge tossed out the state laws in September on the grounds that federal laws control proof-of-citizenship mandates. The case has not gone into effect or to trial, but it could potentially have significant ramifications in a swing state going into the 2024 presidential election. The lawsuits included a coalition of civil, political, and voting groups including Mi Familia Vota, Living United for Change in Arizona, the national and state Democratic Party, and three other individuals. Fox News’ Shannon Bream and Bill Mears contributed to this report.
Third time the charm: Will George Santos survive the latest move to oust him from the House?
Rep. George Santos, R-N.Y., has survived two other efforts to oust him from Congress in recent weeks. But the third time may be the charm for lawmakers who believe Santos is unfit to serve. The House likely votes in the coming days on a measure to expel Santos for his myriad of alleged misdeeds, campaign finance abuses and generally, contriving an entire, faux life story and lying his way into a seat in the House of Representatives. The House sidetracked two previous efforts to expel Santos – never directly casting a ballot on his worthiness to be a House member. Those who opposed the plan to expel Santos weren’t defending him. They just noted that a court has never convicted Santos of alleged wrongdoing. Prior to Thanksgiving, the House Ethics Committee hadn’t completed its investigation into the conduct of Santos. SANTOS ACCUSES COLLEAGUES OF VOTING HUNGOVER, SLEEPING AROUND IN PROFANITY-LADEN TIRADE AGAINST ETHICS REPORT Article I, Section 5 of the Constitution grants each body of Congress authority to have the ultimate authority of who gets sworn-in, determine its own rules of proceedings, mete out discipline and “with the Concurrence of two thirds, expel a Member.” Expulsions are extremely rare in the House. The two-thirds threshold is steep. The worst thing to happen to those pushing to give Santos the boot would be to have a failed expulsion vote. A majority certainly may have wanted to expel Santos. But the House needs two-thirds to do so. That’s 290 yeas needed to expel if all current 434 members cast ballots. Just hours into the job, House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., expressed concern about providing Santos “due process.” Lawmakers were mindful of the precedent set to expel other lawmakers. In 1861, the House voted to expel late Reps. John Bullock Clark, D-Mo., John William Reid, D-Mo., and Henry Cornelius Bennett, D-Ky., for siding with the Confederacy during the Civil War. The House voted to expel former Rep. Ozzie Myers, D-Penn., after he was convicted of taking bribes as part of an FBI sting in 1980. Lawmakers expelled late Rep. Jim Traficant, D-Ohio, in 2002. A court found Traficant guilty of conspiracy, fraud and tax evasion charges. So, the House has expelled a grand total of five lawmakers in history. And Santos didn’t associate with the Confederacy (as far as we know). Santos faces a litany of criminal charges. But his trial doesn’t start until February. Therefore, is the bar high enough for expulsion? MIKE JOHNSON ON THE CLOCK We’ll know in a few days. The House Ethics Committee published an incriminating report at the conclusion of its inquiry into Santos just before Thanksgiving. Within hours, House Ethics Committee Chairman Michael Guest, R-Miss., announced he would introduce a resolution to expel Santos. The lack of an Ethics Committee report gave lawmakers pause – as well as a fig leaf to hide behind – to hold off on expelling Santos. That may not be the case now. And as always, it’s about the math. The House leadership brass may want to make sure it has the votes to expel Santos before calling this vote. As bad as a failed expulsion vote would have been before, the damage would be exponentially worse if the body stumbled to toss Santos after the Ethics Committee report. Note that previous resolutions to expel Santos – and even censure Rep. Rashida Tlaib, D-Mich. – were what the House terms as “privileged” resolutions. Lawmakers craft a privileged resolution such as one for expulsion in a way that it advances to the front of the legislative line. The House must consider a privileged resolution immediately or within two legislative days. But heretofore, Guest introduced his measure in a way that is NOT privileged. It isn’t automatically in the queue to come up when lawmakers return to Capitol Hill. Moreover, House Majority Leader Steve Scalise, R-La., did not post anything about expulsion for Santos on the official House docket late last week. This may be a safety valve for leaders on both sides to make sure they have the votes to actually expel Santos, if and when Guest’s plan comes to the floor. This could also give Santos a chance to resign ahead of time. If lawmakers dither with pulling the trigger on Santos, one wonders if Santos might even draft his own expulsion resolution, make it privileged, and dare the House to expel him. Former House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, would occasionally summon lawmakers to his office and beseech them to resign when their conduct ran afoul of acceptable standards. In fact, Boehner and other House Speakers often didn’t have to plead with offending members. Expectations were implied. Lawmakers who strayed from the straight and narrow knew what they had to do. THE DIVIDE: HOW A PROTEST OVER ISRAEL EXPOSED A SERIOUS RIFT IN THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY Late last week, Santos took to X, the social media platform formerly known as Twitter, to rant about his potential expulsion. “I know I’m going to get expelled when this expulsion resolution goes to the floor,” declared Santos, characterizing himself as the “Mary Magdalene of the United States Congress.” Santos claims that the House is populated “by felons galore” and lawmakers “with all sorts of sheisty backgrounds.” Santos also said that his time in Congress should be “done when I say it’s done. When I want it to be done. Not when they want it to be done.” Santos contends he won’t resign from Congress. However, the New York Republican did reverse himself, announcing he would not stand for re-election. Santos also announced a press conference on the steps of the Capitol at 8 am et on Thursday. Santos can’t just summon the press to the Capitol steps if he’s no longer a member by that point. But the House schedule is far from clear at this writing. A removal of Santos will drop the GOP majority to 220 Republicans compared to 213 Democrats. That means Republicans can only lose three votes on their side and
California GOP Rep. David Valadao’s office vandalized by anti-Israel protestors
A California congressman is the latest victim of antisemitism attacks happening across the country as Rep. David Valadao’s (R-Calif.) Hanford office was vandalized Monday morning, according to a post on X from Rep. Valadao. Rep. Valadao posted a photo of his Hanford office Monday afternoon covered in “Murdered by Israel” posters and fake blood. “This morning, my Hanford office was vandalized by anti-Israel protestors. I strongly support the right to peaceful protest, but violence and vandalism are never acceptable. In a democracy, harassment and intimidation is not how you make your voice heard,” Rep. Valadao posted. Valadao’s office tells Fox News Digital the vandalism happened at their Hanford office just shortly before staff arrived Monday morning. NYC MAYOR ERIC ADAMS BLASTS STUDENTS’ ‘VILE SHOW OF ANTISEMITISM’ THAT FORCED TEACHER TO HIDE IN OFFICE “Our office has filed the proper reports with local law enforcement and Capitol Police. We hope to see those responsible held accountable to the fullest extent of the law,” Valadao’s office said. Valadao continued his post by calling out the protesters and denouncing their claims. MISS UNIVERSE JUDGE HIT WITH DEATH THREATS AFTER DEBATE AGAINST PALESTINIAN ACTIVIST: ‘YOU WILL BE KILLED’ “If these protestors truly cared about Palestinian children they would also support the eradication of Hamas terrorists, who are actively using Palestinian hospitals and schools as cover for their military operations and putting thousands of Palestinian civilians at risk,” Valadao posted. Valadao finished his post by stating that his office would remain open and accessible by appointment.
Pennsylvania to require written, verbal consent for pelvic, rectal exams by med students
A new Pennsylvania law will require doctors to get a patient’s verbal and written consent before medical students can perform pelvic or rectal exams on someone who receives anesthesia. At a press conference Monday, supporters touted the recently enacted legislation, which goes into effect in January. Tracking how often medical students are asked to perform pelvic, rectal or prostate exams on anesthetized patients is difficult, but concern about the procedures has led to a broad national effort to require informed consent for the procedures. At least 20 states have similar measures, with Colorado advancing some of the most extensive legislation so far. PENNSYLVANIA DEMOCRAT JACK STOLLSTEIMER ENTERS 2024 RACE FOR ATTORNEY GENERAL Often, patient paperwork contains broad consent for a range of procedures that might be medically necessary while someone is anesthetized. But the documents can also include consent for educational purposes, allowing students to conduct medically unnecessary exams as part of their training. Some doctors have called the legislative effort governmental overreach that will diminish trust. Supporters say the laws increase transparency and protect medical students from being made to conduct exams without informed consent. “If a coherent person declines a pelvic, prostate or rectal exam, one would not be performed. Their response would not be open to interpretation,” said Rep. Liz Hanbidge, D-Montgomery, a primary sponsor of the Pennsylvania legislation. “Unconscious persons should never be viewed as merely an object for learning.” South Philadelphia resident Keren Sofer approached her legislator in 2019 after she believed an exam was performed on her without consent. “Every single person, every time I shared my experience, were shocked because they too thought that being treated with dignity, respect and transparency in a medical facility — and especially when under anesthesia — was a given,” she said Monday. The law will impose at least a $1,000 penalty for violations by health care providers. If a student in a training program conducts an exam without consent, the health care provider will be held liable, according to the legislation.
WATCH: Biden official butchers popular phrase coined by Ronald Reagan about government’s role in everyday life
A senior Biden administration official was caught on camera butchering a popular phrase coined by the late former President Ronald Reagan about the federal government’s role in the everyday lives of Americans. “As, I think it was President Reagan said, ‘We’re from the government. We’re here to help,’” Education Secretary Miguel Cardona told those gathered at the Western Governors Association Winter Meeting in Jackson Hole, Wyoming on Monday. The context of his comments centered on the federal government working with state governors on funding priorities related to education, but were drastically different from what Reagan actually said in his often cited quote, which he first uttered during a news conference on Aug.12, 1986. WATCH: JEAN-PIERRE GIVES TERSE RESPONSE WHEN QUESTIONED ON POSSIBLE STAFF SHAKEUP AMID BIDEN POLLING CRISIS “The nine most terrifying words in the English language are: I’m from the government, and I’m here to help,” Reagan said. According to the Ronald Reagan Presidential Foundation & Institute, the former president’s comments referred “to how the government tends to be inefficient, to such a degree that instead of helping, it often causes harm instead.” BIDEN CHALLENGER GOES ALL IN ON PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGN, WON’T RUN FOR RE-ELECTION TO CONGRESS “This view expresses the need for a more diminutive form of government where an individual or organization can complete an activity more effectively than the whole government,” it added, a stark contrast from the point Cardona appeared to be making. Fox News Digital has reached out to Cardona for comment.
White House scraps Christmas fireplace stockings after Biden acknowledges grandchild for first time
The White House is opting to ditch the annual Christmas tradition of hanging stockings for President Biden’s grandchildren, a move that allows it to avoid devoting a decoration for the president’s seventh grandchild, who he only recently acknowledged for the first time. In a ceremony Monday afternoon, first lady Jill Biden unveiled the White House’s 2023 Christmas decorations, which included various themed trees, rooms and displays. However, in a departure from the 2021 and 2022 displays, the fireplace in the White House State Dining Room was decorated without any stockings and, instead, with garland and toy soldier robots, The New York Post reported. “The holidays offer a time for reflection and a break from our hurried lives, a season to be fully present with our friends and our families,” Jill Biden remarked Monday. “It’s also a season of gratitude.” The first lady described the decorations in the White House State Dining Room as bringing the “magic wonder and the joy of the holidays” all together in a recreation of Santa’s workshop. She failed, though, to mention that the Christmas stockings would be removed from the room’s fireplace this year. FORMER TOP UKRAINE PROSECUTOR COMES OUT SWINGING AGAINST JOE AND HUNTER BIDEN: EXCLUSIVE INTERVIEW The decision to forego stockings for the Bidens’ grandchildren comes four months after Biden first acknowledged his seventh grandchild, Navy Joan Roberts, for the first time in July. Navy, who is five-years-old, is the daughter of Biden’s son Hunter and ex-stripper Lunden Roberts. “Our son Hunter and Navy’s mother, Lunden, are working together to foster a relationship that is in the best interests of their daughter, preserving her privacy as much as possible going forward,” Biden said in a statement to Fox News Digital on July 28. “This is not a political issue, it’s a family matter. Jill and I only want what is best for all of our grandchildren, including Navy.” DEVON ARCHER ‘ABSOLUTELY’ REVEALED SMOKING GUN ABOUT BIDENS, SAYS REP PAT FALLON That statement came after years of Biden ignoring the fact that he had seven grandchildren, instead referring to his “six grandchildren.” At a White House “take your child to work day” event in April, Biden again claimed to have just six grandchildren. “I have six grandchildren, and I’m crazy about them. And I speak to them every single day. Not a joke,” he said. Hunter Biden had long denied being Navy Joan’s father, but a 2019 DNA test proved otherwise. He has since fought to lower child support payments. Navy Joan was born in August 2018, and Roberts filed a paternity suit in May 2019. Both parties agreed to temporary child support following the DNA test results. Hunter Biden and Roberts reached an agreement to settle their paternity and child support suit in March 2020, according to the Democrat-Gazette. The case was then reopened after he requested changes to the child support payments. In June, Hunter settled his Arkansas child support case with Navy Joan’s mother. A court filing showed Hunter agreed to give his daughter some of his paintings, and the child’s mother agreed to withdraw her counterclaim to change their child’s last name to “Biden.” The White House didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment. Fox News Digital reporter Joe Schoffstall contributed to this report.
Top Mississippi Democrat gets 2 years probation in tax case
A longtime Mississippi lawmaker was sentenced Monday to two years of probation and has already paid nearly $85,000 in restitution, months after he pleaded guilty to a federal charge of willfully making a false statement on a tax return. Democratic Rep. Earle Banks of Jackson was sentenced Monday by U.S. District Judge Carlton Reeves. Banks’ conviction does not prevent him from continuing to serve at the state Capitol and he intends to remain in office, according to his attorney Rob McDuff. Banks, 69, is a funeral director and attorney. He has been in the House since 1993. POT DISPENSARY OWNER SUES MISSISSIPPI OVER ADVERTISING BAN, CLAIMS FIRST AMENDMENT VIOLATION When he pleaded guilty in May, Banks admitted failing to report more than $500,000 of income from the 2018 sale of real estate that had been in his family for many years, McDuff said. A federal charging document showed Banks claimed adjusted gross income of $38,237, even though he knew he had received more than $500,000 from the sale of real estate. FORMER MS EMPLOYEE FILES WHISTLEBLOWER LAWSUIT SEEKING $382 MILLION AFTER FUNDS MISUSED Banks has paid restitution of $84,766, McDuff said Monday. Banks could have faced up to three years in prison for the guilty plea. Conviction of many felony charges disqualifies people from holding public offices in Mississippi, but convictions for manslaughter or violating federal tax laws do not prevent people from seeking or holding office, including a legislative seat. Banks was unopposed for reelection this year in House District 67, which is entirely in Hinds County. He ran unsuccessfully for a Mississippi Supreme Court seat in 2012.