EXPOSED: Trump Polls Not What They Seem

Is this a flashback of 2016 election polls? May not be what they seem. Keeping you informed and engaged, now more than ever, this is Sekulow. We want to hear from you. Share and post your comments or call 1-800-684-3110. And now your host, Logan Sekulow. Welcome to Sekulow, this is Logan Sekulow. Will Haynes is joining me in studio at as well. Phone lines are open for you at 1-800-684-3110 if you want to have your voice heard on the air. We're going to be here a little bit later from some of our ACLJ team, C.C.

Isle and Harry Hutchinson. It's going to be a packed show, but we are discussing first and foremost the new polls that have come out and some of the concerns that are mainly coming from Democrats that these polls may be a bit misleading. I'm sure they're having flashbacks, as I said, of 2016. We have John Fetterman saying polling has been seriously damaged since 2016, and that's one of the truths. Is it going to be tough in Pennsylvania?

And that's absolutely the truth. We also are seeing reports that what they're quote unquote calling the Sun Belt today, which is some of the big swing states, you have Trump leading in those while you have a national poll that has Harris taking a pretty significant lead. So we are going to discuss all of that, but what it means and what it means for the future of polling and what we're going to see in polling in the future. That's right, and I think where some of this concern from Democrats comes is that in the last two elections, both 2016 and 2016, 2020, the polls under polled President Trump, regardless of the outcome of the election. He fared better on Election Day than the polls had him doing. And what you're seeing now is when you look at these razor thin margins in place like Pennsylvania, where they have Vice President Harris only up.7. But with the last four polls that have come out, Trump is up one. There's a tie. Trump is up two.

There's another tie. So when you start to look at this landscape and you think about Hillary Clinton being up 8% in the polls in Pennsylvania ahead of Election Day, and then Harris being up only.7, it's starting to give Democrats real concern that there's a false sense of security that, oh, you know, she got through the convention. She got through the debate and we've seen her polls elevate when in reality, their concern that President Trump will do as he's done in the previous two election cycles. And outperform the polling numbers. And when it's a razor thin margin, that leads to potentially a landslide for President Trump. Yeah, we live in a weird world where I think the polling system is probably completely broken.

Will sent me a pretty interesting article over the weekend about how some new firms are starting to implement AI technology into their polls and how they predicted some elections within a few hundred votes using AI. I think that's what's going to come out of this. It's sort of like the debates they needed a bit of a restructuring. They're not going to cut it. And I think we got to be smart about this and go into this election knowing that it's going to be a nail biter.

It is going to be razor thin. However, you want to cut it because razor thin, as we said, if it's just one or two or 3%, maybe a 5% victory for either side would be probably considered a blowout. I feel like it's been that way really since George W. Bush, like since the second George W. Bush election is once you start winning by a handful of percent is when it's considered a blowout. Maybe you could say that for Obama as well, where it just ends very abruptly, very quickly. And still those were within you're still talking about 45 to 55% of the country voting the other way.

That's right. And really, because our media landscape, though, has fixated so much on national polling and the difference between a one candidate and the other in a national poll, which is not how our Constitution has an election set up. So really, when you start to look at the swing states, and yes, it still will be very thin, but you winning by a few thousand votes in several different states could lead to a landslide victory in the Electoral College, which just an insurmountable number for the other side. So you want to know more about the Electoral College and maybe you need that little education.

We did a number of years ago now on our kids channel, Bald Beagle, an introduction to your children on how the Electoral College works. But you know what? It's probably a good refresher for you as well. So you can find that. Hey, look how quick they pulled up that graphic that was added. Oh, good job. You can find that at Bald Beagle or on our YouTube channel. That's pretty cool. Thanks for doing that.

You should take a look at those videos. That being said, we are going to take your phone calls at 1-800-684-3110. And once again, up until this Friday, we got a deadline. Now, this Friday, all brand new ACLJ champions, your first donation is matched with someone that gives on a recurring basis. So do it today. There's a deadline now.

Your first gift is doubled. ACLJ.org. And again, phone lines are open for you at 1-800-684-3110. Put in the comments where you're watching from.

I'd love to read it. Be right back. Welcome back to Secula. I know a bunch of you are just joining us right now. We can see those numbers spike on YouTube and on Rumble.

So welcome to the broadcast. We will discuss a bit of the underreporting is what the concern is right now of the polls that would show that Vice President Harris was in the lead. You have Democrats who are kind of starting to sort of freak out a bit about that.

What do you think about the polls and the nature of polling in general right now? Give me a call. We've got a bunch of lines open. So if you want to call in, this is a great time to do it. 1-800-684-3110. That's 1-800-684-3110 to have your voice heard on the air. I think we should hear from Jon Fetterman. Will, why don't you set this up?

That's right. So as we mentioned, there are senators and this is the Hill has even reported that there are senators that are very concerned on the Democrat side that people within their party are going to become complacent or think that the polls are showing a resounding victory for Kamala Harris. Their concern is going to be very similar to 2016 and into some degrees 2020 where President Trump was undercounted by the pollsters. The support for him was undercounted, not by on purpose, but just a flaw in the model and the polling as in this day we're in today. With President Trump also, I think that they know that a lot of people are not going to be as open with a pollster because they know they don't know who's on the other phone or the phone line. They don't know what they're actually doing.

I've been asked many times and I honestly don't trust where my data is going. So I largely ignore it. But yeah, we should hear from Jon Fetterman. That's right. So this is something that Senator Fetterman was saying about even his home state of Pennsylvania, one that is one of the deciding states of this election. Let's play bite 14. And I also want people to understand, you know, and it's not science, but there is there's energy and there's kinds of anger on the ground in Pennsylvania and people are very committed and strong.

Trump is going to be strong. And that's we have to respect that you don't can't even understand it. And it's not like a science that can explain it. But but you have to just know that it's real. Yeah. You have to know it's real that you actually have potential for any of these states to go that way. There was even an unnamed or a senator that requested anonymity who said that both Clinton and Biden were doing better in the polls against Trump in 2016 and 2020 than Harris is performing right now.

Right. So when you have that data in front of you, we're only 42 days now out. I think early voting has as it started. There are there are many states where some sort of some form of early voting is started, whether it be even in Pennsylvania, people are starting to be able to request mail in ballots.

There's other states. I know North Carolina has some early type of voting that has started some other states as well. Now, we are only going to see that ramp up the closer we get to this election day of November 5th. So we're already in this election season, as it were. You are seeing the the Harris campaign still push for another debate.

That's another sign that the people within her party don't think that she's winning by at least by a comfortable margin, maybe even at all. If they had the performance they say they had at the first debate and then are asking for another, normally the person who feels like they're losing is the one that wants another opportunity to put themselves as a contrast to their candidate. Yeah, of course, she agreed to do a CNN debate and declined the Fox News debate. President Trump said, I'm not debating again.

So I really don't think it's going to happen. I think that was one and done is there is a vice Presidential debate coming up soon. There is a Presidential debate October 10th, and there's also news that there are talks of them having a final push for votes on primetime on CBS's 60 Minutes, which still pulls a lot of ratings like their their season kickoff, their first episode of this season had 11 million viewers tune in, which seems shocking that 11 million people are still tuning into 60 Minutes for a not necessarily a big headline show.

It's not one that was like widely talked about. But now they're talking about an hour long interview with each candidate aired back to back on CBS in the days leading up to the election. We'll see if that pans out. We know CBS, according to the reporting, is in talks with both campaigns to do this. I think they would not do it if it were just one of the candidates agreeing to it because of equal equal time and things of that nature right up before an election. But we will see if that pans out.

That would be an interesting issue that could throw another primetime large viewership event right before an election. I want to encourage you to call in as well. We were inundated with phone calls and some of them just didn't stay on hold as we were trying to get through them. So give us a call back. 1-800-684-3110. There are a few lines still open. 1-800-684-3110. I just want to clarify the vice Presidential debate is actually going to be happening next Tuesday, October 1st.

So just a little bit of a clarification there. Let's go ahead and take a phone call. Let's go to Rachel, who's calling in New York on Line 1. Rachel, watch it on YouTube, which we appreciate. If you're on YouTube and you're brand new, I encourage you to subscribe. Rachel, you're on the air.

Hi, and thanks for your work. I just have a quick question. Who are they polling and how big is the group that they're polling? Yeah, I think it depends on the actual polls. But Will, you're talking about a few thousand people.

That's right. So now this is the political nerd and statistics nerd in me. I didn't even ask, is Will going to know this information?

I knew he would. But I historically have been fascinated by polls and I love the science and the methodology behind them. But I will admit in years leading up that the polls are not as accurate because of the nature of the world. But yeah, so the accuracy of the poll, Rachel, is determined by how big the sample size is. And these are data scientists that perform this.

These companies specialize in it. So they don't want it to be wrong. They're making their money in their name based off it being right.

If it's continually wrong, they become completely irrelevant. For instance, like a Marist poll that came out in the state of Pennsylvania, it has 1476 likely voters. And that margin of error number you hear, which is like in this case 3.2 percent, that's based off of the sample size. So when you're looking at statistics and how big of a poll is, you can gauge roughly based off of how large your sample size is, how accurate it's going to be. And there is ways to look at charts and know that the margin of error for something like this would be 3.2 percent. So that one has Trump and Harris in Pennsylvania at a tie with a margin of error of 3.2 percent.

That means that Trump could be up three points or Harris could be up three points. It's still, that's a pretty accurate poll with a large sample size and it's still a wide gap. That's why these are razor thin, because you're never going to know until you have the poll that ultimately matters is the Election Day poll, the actual one where your vote counts. So this margin of error three percent could be a runaway in Pennsylvania for Trump or Harris. It all depends on who shows up and votes, but who they're calling, once again, the ability to get quality polls has declined in the years post landline.

And now even in a world where if you see a number that you don't know who it is, the odds of you picking it up on your cell phone are very low. So they have to spend a lot of money of continually going through valid phone numbers, finding likely voters, and then finding people to pick up. And then also having to base the people that do pick up and take their poll. If it's only one demographic of people, whether it be, you know, senior citizens that are on landlines or people with cell phones that aren't quite a voting age or may not be voting, they have to adjust their polling methodology to try to make it accurate. It is all an art and a science and once again, is not ever 100 percent accurate.

That's why there's even a built in margin of error. But I do think as we go along, the ability for people to poll a group of people to get a really good, strong indication of where we are is declining every single time a poll is taken. Yeah, you sent me an article over the weekend and we talked about it a little bit in the first segment about how artificial intelligence is going to be starting to use in polling and how it's already done. And in some instances, it's gotten within a few hundred votes that's been able to take the data, taking what people are talking about on social media in certain areas. They're able to really, in matter of moments, and then you said like under a minute, create this new kind of polling data. I think by the time we get to the next general election, so in four more years, that is going to be your primary source.

That's how they're going to break things down. And we'll really know on a national level if that kind of new polling can be accurate. I think that there's probably more likely than not that it is going to be more accurate just based on the way that data can be mined in real time. Well, and a lot of that is getting kind of the sentiment of areas based off what's being reported, what's being online. But I think there's also an issue there that will be argued and debated over these next years as that rises. Is that true polling or is that a form of election interference? Is it utilizing something and reporting what's seen or is it going to be used as a bludgeon by a political party to try and coerce people to think they're believing something?

Or is it going to be a way just to rally a base and say, hey, look, the computers don't lie? I think that's where we're going to get into a new frontier, as it were, in the polling and political reporting landscape over the next few years. Well, yeah, no matter what we're talking about on this show, I want to encourage you to support people that are behind the scenes that are continuing this fight, whether that's in the law or whether that is in the media. So right now, our fight to protect life, religious freedom continues on multiple fronts. You're going to hear about that coming up in the next segment. We're going to talk about how the ACLJ is out there right now, whether we're defending Israel, whether we're defending Christians on death row in Pakistan, whether representing. You're going to hear about Operation Rescue, the pro-life group, and how they were being targeted by the U.S. Army and just sent a demand letter to Ashley Furniture after they started forcing an employee to skip church on Sunday to work. We're going to talk about that coming up a little bit later. And again, if you want to be an ACLJ champion, this is a great time to do it, because now until Friday, your first gift is doubled.

It is matched by another ACLJ champion. We'll be right back. Welcome back to Secula. We are continuing to take your phone calls. Again, keep calling 1-800-684-3110. We're trying to get as many up as possible. You know, it takes time. Sometimes we lose people. So right now there's a few lines open at 1-800-684-3110.

I did want to move just for a moment. We'll get back to the polls. Some of the work the ACLJ is doing. You may have seen in the break, if you're watching on YouTube or Rumble, the work that we are doing right now, actively supporting pro-life groups. You've heard about this, whether what we're doing in Massachusetts or now what we're doing to combat the labeling of pro-life groups within the U.S. Army as terrorist organizations.

You're talking about kind of the mainstream pro-life groups with Operation Rescue. Will, why don't you give us a little brief background. We can hear a clip.

And then CeCe Hiles joining us in studio to really break it down. That's right. We heard about this several weeks ago, that there was a training presentation used on counter-terrorism threats. This was at Fort Liberty, formerly Fort Bragg in North Carolina. And this slide specifically talked about, under terrorist groups, was talking about organizations like Operation Rescue or National Right to Life.

Or if you had a Choose Life license plate for your state. And that the activities of these groups were things like sidewalk counseling. If you're watching right now, this is the screenshot that someone took and leaked of this sort of PowerPoint style presentation. And again, you can see terrorist groups at the top, National Right to Life, Operation Rescue. And of course, that pro-life license plate, which I don't know if you've met most people with a pro-life license plate.

They're not exactly the most hostile group. Right. Yeah. And so we we saw this report. We jumped on it immediately. We've had a long relationship with Troy Newman and Operation Rescue from the founding of ACLJ. And we represent Operation Rescue in this as we're trying to get to the bottom of and see what we can do to push back against the military labeling pro-life groups or even pro-life individuals as potential domestic terrorists. And there is good movement on this. And one thing is that members of Congress have also noticed this. And this is a clip from a hearing at the House Armed Services Committee just at the end of last week.

It didn't get a lot of news. This isn't something that's going to make headlines everywhere, but it's important for you to hear. This is Chairman Jim Banks of that committee talking to Lieutenant General Patrick Matlock from the Department of Defense.

Let's go ahead and play Byte 2. So the follow up to that is, has anyone been held accountable for it? This is the United States Army.

This is a training that went on since 2017. You're acknowledging that you all missed it. Any accountability at all? Chairman Banks, in the conduct of the investigation after it was completed, the commander directed corrective actions, which have all been completed. Accountability? You're the United States Army. Has anyone been held accountable for it? And has the commander further delegated responsibility for any additional actions to the garrison commander? How about the soldier who created the training to begin with? Has he been held accountable?

The individual who created the training has received corrective training, has been retrained as a trainer, and continues to perform. Corrective training, but accountability. Chairman, I'm not going to talk about specific accountability actions because those actions reside.

Why not? You're the United States Army. And you're acknowledging that mistakes were made, but has anyone been held accountable for that mistake? Again, Chairman, I'm not going to describe specific actions taken because those actions reside with the chain of command, and it's our policy not to discuss those.

Action taking place. Cece, I want to get your response to that, and also what the ACLJ is doing. I'm going to interpret that as no. No accountability has happened for that. And further on in that hearing, what is also disconcerting is that he basically said, according to Representative Mills, that they have no idea whether it's going on in other bases or locations in the Army, and they have no idea whether it's continuing now or not. What we do know is that at least 10,000 soldiers at Fort Liberty received this training that says if you are pro-life, basically just a general swath of if you are pro-life, if you believe in the sanctity of life, if you engage in sidewalk counseling, if you have a choose life license plate, that you are a terrorist.

That is what they are calling you, a terrorist, and our military is being trained on this. And yet when we have a hearing and you have the Army's deputy chief of staff sitting there and testifying, he cannot say that any corrective action, that anybody's been held accountable for this, only that there has been so-called corrective action taken and retrained. There needs to be accountability for what is going on.

The fact that they have literally, and I said this before, about half of Americans say that they are pro-life. For the DOD, the Department of Defense, and the Army to be training these people that half of Americans are terrorists because we believe in the sanctity of life is atrocious. Yeah, we found out about it just because of that leaked image that came out, and this has been going on for years. So it took someone brave enough to finally take a picture, leak it out, and say this is what's happening here, because if not, we would have never known, and it was going on, like I said, for years and years and years. And, of course, one of the big labels is Operation Rescue, and we're representing them. Right, and the whistleblower has said after he brought this to everyone's attention, he's had calls from bases all over the country saying, yes, they did indeed receive the same kind of training. So hopefully our FOIA that we filed immediately when we got news of this will help uncover really what's going on in the military.

You can understand there's a chain of command. They don't want to speak up. They don't want to cause a ruckus related to this, especially if it's not an issue that they're willing to sacrifice for, because you know there could be also a very big negative reaction from the U.S. Army if you bring this stuff up.

But someone took the right way to go at it. That's right, and as we mentioned before, we are representing Operation Rescue. We've already sent a FOIA and also a demand letter to the base to try to get more information to get them to stop using this. As far as we know that this training and as the military brass that spoke at the hearing on late last week have mentioned that they are no longer using it, the problem is we don't know where else something like this is being used and how there is a continued targeting of pro-life Americans at a time, one, where it's a very big issue in our country, where we know that the real targets of terroristic activity many times are crisis pregnancy or pregnancy resource centers. We've seen that in the aftermath of Roe v. Wade being overturned.

And really the audacity that the Army would label them as domestic terrorists has to be stopped. Yeah, absolutely. We're going to be getting back also to the conversation about the polling, so if you're just tuning in, I know a lot of you are right now, stay tuned. We're going to discuss that in the next segment before we wrap up this half hour of Sekulow.

We do have a second half hour, so if you don't get us on your local radio station, make sure you're watching us anyway on YouTube, on Rumble, on all the different outlets. You can go to ACLJ.org to find it. Maybe quickly though, Cece, we only have a minute here. The FOIA situation, which is the Freedom of Information Act request, why is that important and what is that? People that don't know, we kind of just spit it out because we hear it all the time, but people probably are just being exposed to this concept. Yeah, Freedom of Information requests, we have the right to get the information that is spoken through emails or any kind of memos in our government. And so we are able to request what was going on, what's the background. We want to know who was talking to who, where did this come from, and we'll get that from the FOIA request.

Yeah, there actually will be some transparency. Now sometimes that takes a long time and it takes a lot of work, and that's why our ACLJ team is on it. You need to be a part of it right now as we go into this break, a very short break, less than a minute. I'm going to encourage you, go to ACLJ.org, become an ACLJ champion today, whether that's supporting our incredible crew here who puts on this broadcast, or it's supporting our fights and our efforts in the law. We're defending Israel, we're defending Christians, your pro-life views, everything, and we are going to discuss coming up in the next segment more about this sort of polling anomaly that's happening right now.

Go to ACLJ.org, your first gift is doubled, second half hour starts in under a minute. Stay tuned, click that like, share, we'll be right back. Keeping you informed and engaged, now more than ever, this is Sekulow. And now your host, Logan Sekulow. Welcome back to Sekulow. If you're just joining us right now, we are talking about sort of the breaking news that came out this morning of sort of the changing in the polls that's happening right now and why some Democrats are concerned that these polls are not accurate, as you've seen Harris take a lead nationally, a significant lead, a lead by multiple percentage points, but why you also see President Trump starting to kind of inch ahead in some of the key battleground states, which we obviously know is really what's important in terms of winning an election. And we have this great concern, whether it's coming out of Georgia or Pennsylvania, to really continue to get out the vote, probably from both sides, but really from the Democrat side, as they are concerned that things are not quite how they seem.

That's right, and I think part of it is good strategy. It is interesting when you're seeing some senators try to remain anonymous. I understand those like Senator Fetterman or Senator Warnock that are mentioned in this Hill article that want to be on the record as trying to say, hey, it may not be as clean of a sweep as the pollsters may like it to seem like it's going to be, you still got to fight hard.

I understand that as a tactic as well of trying to say, look, play like you're behind so that you can win and make sure you don't get complacent. But it is interesting when you start getting senators that don't want to be on the record, that want to be anonymous, that does show that there is a actual fear, not just a strategy fear to say, hey, you better go vote, that they are actually thinking, look, this is razor thin if it's anything like 2016 or even 2020 because of where the polls were in those elections and how President Trump fared in those elections versus the polling, it would not be a Kamala Harris victory if the history repeats itself from the last two polling cycles and election cycles. Yeah, Senator Warnock of Georgia, obviously a big swing state, said we know this election is going to be close. It's going to be close to the battleground states, including Georgia.

That's why we're doing everything to make sure Georgia stays in our column. He's a Democrat. The only poll that really matters, October 5th, he put really it's impossible to know who's ahead with the current margin of error. Let's go ahead and take some phone calls. Let's go to Ronald who's calling in South Carolina, watching on Rumble, one of our favorite free speech platforms. Ronald, you're on the air.

Thank you very much. Yes, my concern is the fact that it seems to be the liberals who are pulling on a smoke and mirror to try to almost convince everyone that, hey, our candidate, our liberal side is actually ahead and nobody should be concerned about it. But I just see that it should not be a seesaw battle. It should be a runaway, blow the doors off race to the front for Trump because we've seen the administration and how they've faltered and how they have ruined the economy and ruined America.

It's a no brainer what they should do, but they're not going to do it because all the misinformation that has come out there. Ronald, they certainly have been distancing themselves from the Biden administration. Of course, she is the vice President of the Biden administration, but you even had Tim Walz say, we can't take another four years of this over the weekend.

And when you hear something like that, you are like, but you're in control. How is that happening? But you are right in terms of manipulating the polls. I'm not so sure about that because I don't know if, like Will said, if you want to be someone who has this big lead, because then it will maybe you go, oh, I'm not motivated to go vote because it's a landslide. It's going to happen. I think a lot of the concern of what happened the last time was based on that.

That's right. And I do think also to Ronald's point about the smoke and mirrors, when they use those phrases in their campaign about like, you know, we can't have another four years of this, et cetera, et cetera. They also have cover from the media. We've seen that in the way that the debate was performed, not fact checking Kamala Harris on very blatant mistruths and then trying to fact check literally every word that came out of President Trump's mouth. But you also have to think that now that you're in the general election push this post Labor Day, a lot of people that are now engaged are what they call low information voters. They don't follow politics day to day. They don't even really follow what the administration that's in power does day to day. So a line like we can't take another four years of this may play really well to a low information voter, that it resonates because they think, ah, Trump was President. We got to go forward.

They're very smart politically, but that's why free speech has to win out and you have to tell people here's reality. We've got Harry Hutchinson joining us in the next segment, so stay tuned for that. We do have a few phone lines open still. If you're on hold already, stay on hold. We'll get to your 1-800-684-3110, 1-800-684-3110. I'd love to hear from you and your thoughts on these polls. We'll be right back.

Welcome back to Secular. We are, again, taking your phone calls at 1-800-684-3110. I like to take as many of those in our final segment, and that's coming up next.

So just about 10 minutes, so stay on hold if you're on hold and get in line right now because I'll take as many of them as possible. Harry Hutchinson is joining us in studio right now. Well, there is a lot more we can kind of deep dive on these polls because of some of the more recent developments. That's right, and I think the reason that some of these senators are concerned about the polling numbers under polling Trump is because of some of the real-world events that have been happening in the political sphere over the last couple weeks. We had Professor Hutchinson on last week to talk about the Teamsters Union deciding for the first time since 1996 to not endorse a candidate. They have been a reliable endorsement for Democrats for almost the entirety of their endorsing career, as it were, with some notable exceptions being President Reagan and H.W.

Bush in his first term. But Professor Hutchinson, what we're now seeing with the concern about polling in swing states, places like Michigan, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, big labor union states in the Rust Belt, you've been kind of tracking since that polling has come out as well as the non-endorsement by the Teamsters and their public polling within their own unions showing wide support for President Trump. What are you seeing as far as these private sector unions and what used to be a reliably Democrat vote kind of shifting a little? Well, essentially the fundamental question is whether or not blue-collar workers, working-class workers, are better off today than they were three and a half years ago.

That question came up at least tangentially in this month's Presidential debate. Kamala Harris ducked the question. But blue-collar workers are answering the question.

They have seen real wages decline, whereas under Trump real wages rose by a roughly 15 percent. Meanwhile, Kamala Harris is supporting a fracking ban in Pennsylvania, although she denies it. She supports green energy, and the green energy mandate has adversely affected the automobile industry.

Why? Because demand for electric vehicles is declining, leading to layoffs. And then you have the Teamsters non-endorsement of the Democrats, in part because almost 60 percent of Teamsters workers support Donald Trump.

They recognize what many economists have recognized for the last three or four years. The Biden administration has delivered inflation, the tripling of mortgage rates, the rise in food prices. And so many Americans are worse off. Consequently, blue-collar workers are shifting away from the Democrats. And the Democrats should not be surprised. Their policies are indeed working to their disadvantage. And they're certainly not working for the union.

I mean, I think that's something that should not be really undercut of how important that was. The fact that, for the last 20-plus years, there's been an endorsement of a Democrat President by the unions, by the Teamsters. And this is the first time in decades where they've said, we're not going to get involved because, like you said, our numbers are split. And really, when you look at it, the numbers were leading to Trump. Not something you usually expect from a Republican. Not exactly the most pro-union, typically. But you also have Donald Trump, a very different candidate, one that's been working in New York and working with unions his entire life and clearly connected in a different way. And like you said, they've seen how things have changed the last few years.

Absolutely. And if you look at the Trump administration, what did they do with respect to foreign imports? The Trump administration imposed tariffs, yet real wages rose for working-class Americans, contrary to the claims of Kamala Harris. Now, one of the things that I would say on behalf of Kamala Harris is that she doesn't understand economics, number one. And number two, she has an inability, a distinct inability to explain economics to working-class Americans. And she talks about our ambitions and our aspirations, and Americans are optimistic. But what is she going to do to deliver a cut in egg prices, in food prices, in gasoline prices? Meanwhile, her energy policies, for instance, on fracking, she wants to ban fracking, although she now denies it. If the United States were energy independent, this would deliver real wage benefits to the American people.

She doesn't seem to understand it. Yeah, but of course, you did see it sort of erode in terms of the support of the unions. But hey, there was another endorsement, a big endorsement that came in for the Harris campaign, and that was from the IRS agent union. So Harry, how do you feel about that? What does that tell you?

Well, I think it says to most Americans that they should vote for the alternative candidate. Do you want to be audited? Keep in mind that the Biden administration has passed a bill increasing IRS agents by roughly 80,000. The Biden administration claims that they're going after billionaires. Well, guess what?

If we divided the number of billionaires into 80,000, this would mean that there would be approximately 2,000 to 5,000 agents per billionaire in the United States. So guess what? Those IRS auditors, they're going to go after middle class workers who are donating to a local charity, to a pro-life cause. And so at the end of the day, an endorsement from the IRS union, I think, is basically a signal to most rational Americans that they should vote for the alternative candidate. And Harry, this almost seems to give us your analysis of endorsements for this segment, but there is another interesting endorsement that has come out of an unlikely place, and this is for President Trump. Your background is in Michigan, you know the state and the politics there very well, but a mayor of a city, a Detroit suburb, has said that the right choice for this critical time is President Donald Trump. The anomaly of a mayor endorsing Trump is that this is an immigrant from Yemen who is the mayor of a city where they have the majority of their city council, I believe all of their city council, is Muslim. So not the typical demographic you would think would be a mayor of this city throwing his support behind President Trump in a critical swing state. You're absolutely correct, and the critical component, I think, of the mayor's decision in Hamtramck is Hamtramck is a working class city.

So the mayor of Hamtramck, he recognizes that Donald Trump has delivered benefits to working class Americans, while Kamala Harris is preparing policies that will deliver benefits to billionaires. Alright, hey, phone lines are open for you right now at 1-800-684-3110. When we get into the next segment, I want to take your phone calls. We've heard from Harry Hutchinson, we've heard from C.C.

Heil, our incredible team here. Now, it's important to hear from you. What do you think about this? Obviously, we're still discussing the polls, the recent shift in polls, the sort of Democrat panic from those polls, saying, hey, don't believe what you're reading, we're actually maybe behind.

What do you think about that? How do you feel about polling in this year when we are, what, 45-ish days away from the election? We found out the exact day. I think it's somewhere around there, around 45 days. Now, not very long, less than two months away from election day. So I encourage you right now, 44, 44 days.

That's pretty wild. Give us a call. 1-800-684-3110. Got three lines open right now for you.

1-800-684-3110. Also, no matter what we're discussing, whether it is the election, whether it's election integrity, whether it is our incredible broadcast team here working nonstop to produce this incredible broadcast, whether we are defending Israel, whether we are fighting for the rights of pro-life organizations in the courtroom or here in the media, we need you and we need your support. We're not supported by major sponsors. We're not supported by any other way. We're supported by ACLJ donors and ACLJ champions.

And a champion is just someone who says, hey, I'm dedicated to giving each and every month on a recurring basis. You can set it and forget it. Of course, you can cancel it at any time, but we encourage you to do that. Your donations are tax deductible. And what's very cool right now, until the end of this week, the first donation made. So you go up there and you set up your recurring basis.

You become an ACLJ champion. Maybe you've been thinking about it and over 21,000 of you have. You set up that first donation, say it's 50 bucks. Well, the first donation that goes through, there's someone else ready to match that $50 and it makes it effectively $100.

So do that right now and you don't do $50, you do $5 and it becomes $10. It's still, I encourage you to support the ACLJ, be an ACLJ champion of life, liberty and freedom. Again, we have a lot going on. We're going to discuss more tomorrow about some of the new work the ACLJ is doing to support Christian workers in America.

Those who want to practice their faith openly and want to be treated with respect. And we are currently working with major organizations to make sure that happens. We're talking about Walmart.

We're talking about some of the biggest brands in America to make sure your rights as Christians are protected. So I encourage you right now, become an ACLJ champion, one of our recurring donors today. Two lines still open. So give me a call.

I encourage you to do that at 1-800-684-3110. If you're watching on YouTube and you're brand new to the broadcast, I'm going to ask you to hit that subscribe button. If you're not new, hit that like, that little thumbs up. I know that really does help us. It helps get the word out about independent media like ours.

It's putting out new and different kind of broadcasts that are breaking from traditional norms. Hit that thumbs up. Hit that subscribe whether you're on Rumble, on YouTube, on Facebook or on X or on ACLJ.org. We'll be right back with your calls.

All right. We always want to hear from you as we head towards the end of the broadcast. So let's kick this off. Let's go to Tim, who's calling in Texas on line one. Tim, you're on the air.

Last week on Gutfeld, President Trump, which by the way, I thought was extremely relaxed and one of the best interviews I've ever seen. I was shocked to see that the polling of Christians, basically born again, evangelical Christians, while they poll really well, they don't go and vote. And I wondered if this is the research that you see as well and if there's a way that we can improve the messaging that Christians can't just sit on their hands anymore. Yeah. I mean, I think that's something we've been engaged in for a long time.

So you've got to get activated. You got to get motivated regardless of where you land politically that, you know, be encouraged to get out and vote. Whether if in this look, this broadcast reaches probably a majority evangelical audience still. And I want to encourage people for sure to get engaged in their local elections, get engaged in obviously the Presidential elections. Do I think that it's a little disheartening for Christians and sometimes?

Sure. Do I think the church is much more split than it once was in terms of engaging, not necessarily in politics, but engaging in culture? Yeah, I think that there's a nerves that goes on within the church. I think also, again, with these polling, I think what you're seeing is a lot of Christians and a lot of people in general just not wanting to engage in the polls.

They may be getting out there and voting, but they just don't know where their information is going. I know for me, whenever I get a text or an email or even a cold call saying, hey, we want to do a research poll with you right now, which happens quite a bit. I almost always hang up, ignore, do that because it always feels like that this is a push poll, this is going from somewhere else. I don't know who this source is. We live in a time where your information can be used against you very easily.

So I don't do it. So, Tim, I think there's some of that as well. But I do encourage people to get engaged in their elections, get engaged in there, especially in the local side of what's happening. You may be disenfranchised by both Trump and Harris and go, well, why do I even want to get out there and vote? But if you really look at the issues, you'll know where to land and also get engaged in your local.

And I also think to Tim's point, though, that's been a concern that that is a base you need to activate for decades, our entire life. I mean, the entire reason organizations like the Christian Coalition were founded was to try to engage Christians in the political process and to vote. Because many times you can see an issue where a Christian voter may be like, I'm not putting all my chips in the stack of needing the government to provide for me, which I completely understand and agree with, that God is the one that is my ultimate authority and that will take care of me. But it's also the converse of that, that we have great liberty in this country and the First Amendment protects our speech, our religion, our right to associate, things of that nature that it can almost be, well, I have the First Amendment. I can engage in my faith and my life and my family and those around me, but not understanding the ways that things like we see at this military base where they're training members of the armed services that your religious conviction that life begins at conception and that we must protect life could get you labeled by this government and our US military as a potential terrorist.

Those are the reasons that Christians need to be engaged in the political process because while our right to worship as we please may be protected by the Constitution, don't believe for a minute that the nefarious corners of this government aren't looking for ways to take away the way you practice your faith. Absolutely. We've got a call related to that. Let's go to Bill who's calling in Wyoming on Line 3. Bill, you're on the air.

Hi, thanks for taking my call. I served in the military, okay, and I among others have wound up being in a position of being, let's say, the odd man out when they assembled a project to be done. And what would happen was that the supervisor would come along and say, hey, look, we've got this situation here where we need somebody to cover it. We'll train you, we'll get you to work in it and take care of it. So as far as I'm concerned, this general, he is part of the training command and he should have sent out an order and said, look, remove this instructor from his position, train him in another place where he can be more effective.

That would take care of the problem as far as I'm concerned. Bill, there's actually more concerning sound. We don't have time to play it, but I'll read you a little excerpt where Chairman Banks presses that lieutenant general even further and asks, has any of the 10,000 soldiers that were misinformed that if you're pro-life or have a pro-life license plate, you're a potential terrorist, have they been told they've been misinformed? His response to the chairman was, in our investigation, based off surveys that we did with the soldiers, none of them, they did not have a misperception about the nature of those organizations. That wasn't the question that was asked by the chairman. He said, did you tell them they were misinformed?

And he responds with, no, they have not specifically been told that they were misinformed. So this isn't over. We're going to keep fighting for our client, Operation Rescue, and we're also going to keep pushing against the military to say, look, you're not done. This isn't just something you can sweep under the rug by saying we're not doing it anymore. Yeah, when you're labeling someone a terrorist, it's a bit different than just even saying, hey, these could be, it's not even saying radicals, it's saying the word terrorists.

That's what that graphic showed. Let's go ahead and continue on. Let's go to Michael who's calling in Florida on Line 2.

Michael, you're on. Gentlemen, I understand that polling and political season is pretty fluid. However, I think because the candidates, the choice is really stark in between A and B. But when it comes to polling, and call me a cynic, or at very least a skeptic, is there one or two polling charts that you would at least feel reasonably? Michael, I don't know about specific polling charts, but there are some that create averages. Well, that's why like Real Clear Politics, they do an average of the polls. Honestly, when you look back at even the last election, the most accurate polls missed it by 2%. So that's still a margin of error, and they can claim that, look, we put in the margin of error. But yeah, there is not a single poll that anyone should look at and be like, that's the one. That one nailed it, because typically, they don't. So you look at these aggregate polls, or even people that do analysis of polls, Nate Silver has for a long time been kind of the superstar of that.

But he gets bashed by all sides. But I think that really, at the end of the day, you shouldn't believe the polls at all. You should vote your convictions, and go and show up and tell your friends to show up and go vote for who you believe should be the best person to lead the country. And for your Congresspeople, your secretaries of state, we know how they've been meddling in these elections recently by trying to get people on and off ballots. You have that ability in this country to affect change and to talk to people. Do it while you can. All right, hey, let's quickly take John in Texas.

John, you got like 20 seconds because we are running out of time. Go ahead, though. Primarily, I was talking about the Presidential debate.

Why would he weaken himself by not accepting the challenge with Kamala? Rather, put her on the defensive by saying, look, you pick the network CNN, fine. I'll pick the moderators. Let her say why she won't do it.

I'm only cutting you off, John, because we're running out of time. It's an interesting idea. Unfortunately, that's not really how it works, and it's not how it's going to happen. She turned down a Fox News debate. He was offered a CNN debate. It's just very clear.

The handwriting is on the wall of why they want to do it in certain ways. And unfortunately, I think you had one debate. I don't believe you're going to get another. We're only, you know, 44 days out.

And one President of Biden lost so badly, he dropped out. So thank you, John. Thanks to everyone who called in. Thanks to everyone who's watching online. If you're new, like I said, subscribe.

We do this show each and every day, live from noon to 1 p.m. Eastern time. You can work your way back from there. Support the work of the ACLJ. Become an ACLJ champion today. Go to ACLJ.org. We will talk to you tomorrow.