PULSECAST: Your one-stop shop for 2024 presidential polling

Feeling overwhelmed by the endless stream of presidential polls? We've got you covered.

Stu and his team of fellow political wizzes created the Pulsecast in tandem with the Glenn Beck Program, a comprehensive view of national sentiment towards Donald Trump and Kamala Harris heading into November. They gather data from all major election polls so that you don't have to sift through individual polls to get the big picture of what's going on.

The Pulsecast doesn't cherry-pick unfavorable numbers for either Donald Trump or Kamala Harris. They're giving you the big picture, saving you a bunch of time, and effort. Think of it as your one-stop source for a complete polling picture, without the hassle of multiple clicks or biased sources.

Be sure to tune in to the Glenn Beck Program to catch Glenn and Stu's rundown of the daily Pulsecast, and check back in here for the most up-to-date Pulsecast on this page.

November 05, 2024

REMINDER: The PULSECAST attempts to put a finger on the pulse of what mainstream pollsters and data nerds are saying. It is not Glenn or Stu’s election prediction. Read more detail here.

November 04, 2024

REMINDER: The PULSECAST attempts to put a finger on the pulse of what mainstream pollsters and data nerds are saying. It is not Glenn or Stu’s election prediction. Read more detail here.

November 01, 2024

REMINDER: The PULSECAST attempts to put a finger on the pulse of what mainstream pollsters and data nerds are saying. It is not Glenn or Stu’s election prediction. Read more detail here.

October 31, 2024

REMINDER: The PULSECAST attempts to put a finger on the pulse of what mainstream pollsters and data nerds are saying. It is not Glenn or Stu’s election prediction. Read more detail here.

October 30, 2024

REMINDER: The PULSECAST attempts to put a finger on the pulse of what mainstream pollsters and data nerds are saying. It is not Glenn or Stu’s election prediction. Read more detail here.

October 29, 2024

REMINDER: The PULSECAST attempts to put a finger on the pulse of what mainstream pollsters and data nerds are saying. It is not Glenn or Stu’s election prediction. Read more detail here.

The presidential race has taken on four distinct phases since Kamala Harris entered the field. Initially, Harris experienced a surge in popularity, driven by the excitement of her campaign launch and early media enthusiasm. This "joy period" characterized August, with Harris emerging as a prominent figure in the polls, buoyed by positive coverage and events like her convention. However, as September began, the excitement started to fade, and reality set in. Voters began questioning whether Harris could truly handle the responsibilities of the presidency. By mid-September, her initial "joy bump" had faded, leaving her polling at a more level position.

Following the first debate, Harris regained momentum in late September, climbing to her highest point in the polls and capturing a slight lead. But as October progressed, the dynamic shifted yet again. Donald Trump began to surge, gradually moving from around 43% to approximately 54% in the polls, ultimately overtaking Harris. While this does not indicate a landslide in Trump’s favor, the momentum and gains he has made over October signal a notable shift in the race’s trajectory, making him a slight favorite over Harris as the month comes to a close.

October 28, 2024

REMINDER: The PULSECAST attempts to put a finger on the pulse of what mainstream pollsters and data nerds are saying. It is not Glenn or Stu’s election prediction. Read more detail here.

October 25, 2024

REMINDER: The PULSECAST attempts to put a finger on the pulse of what mainstream pollsters and data nerds are saying. It is not Glenn or Stu’s election prediction. Read more detail here.

October 24, 2024

REMINDER: The PULSECAST attempts to put a finger on the pulse of what mainstream pollsters and data nerds are saying. It is not Glenn or Stu’s election prediction. Read more detail here.

October 23, 2024

REMINDER: The PULSECAST attempts to put a finger on the pulse of what mainstream pollsters and data nerds are saying. It is not Glenn or Stu’s election prediction. Read more detail here.

October 22, 2024

REMINDER: The PULSECAST attempts to put a finger on the pulse of what mainstream pollsters and data nerds are saying. It is not Glenn or Stu’s election prediction. Read more detail here.

October 21, 2024

REMINDER: The PULSECAST attempts to put a finger on the pulse of what mainstream pollsters and data nerds are saying. It is not Glenn or Stu’s election prediction. Read more detail here.

In the arc of this presidential campaign, Kamala Harris initially saw a rise in polling numbers, peaking at around 55% after her announcement. Despite a brief lead for Donald Trump just before the debate, Harris bounced back, maintaining a favorable position through late September. However, in the past three weeks, Trump’s numbers have surged, completely erasing Harris' lead. As of now, Trump holds a 52.21percent chance of winning, compared to Harris’ 47.5 percent. This shift is significant because polling typically moves slowly and doesn’t often see such rapid changes.

Historically, polling has underestimated Donald Trump, both in 2016 and 2020. Despite his current lead, this remains a tight race, with recent polling giving him a slight edge. In both previous elections, particularly in key swing states like Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, and Michigan, the polls underestimated Trump’s support, raising the possibility that 2024 could follow a similar pattern. However, as it stands, the race is still considered a toss-up.

October 18, 2024

REMINDER: The PULSECAST attempts to put a finger on the pulse of what mainstream pollsters and data nerds are saying. It is not Glenn or Stu’s election prediction. Read more detail here.

October 17, 2024

REMINDER: The PULSECAST attempts to put a finger on the pulse of what mainstream pollsters and data nerds are saying. It is not Glenn or Stu’s election prediction. Read more detail here.

October 16, 2024

REMINDER: The PULSECAST attempts to put a finger on the pulse of what mainstream pollsters and data nerds are saying. It is not Glenn or Stu’s election prediction. Read more detail here.

October 15, 2024

REMINDER: The PULSECAST attempts to put a finger on the pulse of what mainstream pollsters and data nerds are saying. It is not Glenn or Stu’s election prediction. Read more detail here.

October 14, 2024

REMINDER: The PULSECAST attempts to put a finger on the pulse of what mainstream pollsters and data nerds are saying. It is not Glenn or Stu’s election prediction. Read more detail here.

October 11, 2024

REMINDER: The PULSECAST attempts to put a finger on the pulse of what mainstream pollsters and data nerds are saying. It is not Glenn or Stu’s election prediction. Read more detail here.


October 10, 2024

REMINDER: The PULSECAST attempts to put a finger on the pulse of what mainstream pollsters and data nerds are saying. It is not Glenn or Stu’s election prediction. Read more detail here.

Kamala Harris initially received a surge in media attention and positive coverage following her nomination, which boosted her polling numbers. However, this "boomlet" of support quickly faded as Donald Trump regained momentum, even overtaking Harris just before their first debate. Although the debate seemed to temporarily help Harris, lifting her numbers again, the impact was short-lived, and her advantage has since eroded. Polls now show a near-tie between the two candidates, with Trump once again gaining ground.

This shift in polling may also coincide with other significant events, including a hurricane response that has drawn criticism toward the Biden administration. If voters increasingly associate Harris with the perceived failures of the administration, this could further affect her standing. While it’s difficult to pinpoint one specific cause for these polling shifts, the fading of Harris's post-debate bump suggests her momentum may be weakening as Trump's numbers stabilize. Both candidates are now neck-and-neck, setting the stage for an unpredictable finish.

October 9, 2024

REMINDER: The PULSECAST attempts to put a finger on the pulse of what mainstream pollsters and data nerds are saying. It is not Glenn or Stu’s election prediction. Read more detail here.

October 8, 2024

REMINDER: The PULSECAST attempts to put a finger on the pulse of what mainstream pollsters and data nerds are saying. It is not Glenn or Stu’s election prediction. Read more detail here.

The 2024 presidential election continues to be a true toss-up. Just a couple of weeks ago, Kamala supporters could have pointed to a slight edge in her favor, but the race has since tightened significantly, with Trump holding nearly a 46% chance of winning and Harris at roughly 54 percent, according to our latest estimates. This slim margin shows just how close the race has become, essentially a coin flip.

Recent polls illustrate the unpredictable nature of the election. A New York Times poll has Harris leading by three points nationally, yet in the same poll, Trump is up by 13 points in Florida. It’s hard to reconcile such contradictory results, but they reflect the complexity and uncertainty of this race. Meanwhile, Harris's rhetoric doesn’t seem to be bridging the divide. Her recent comments comparing Trump supporters to the "basket of deplorables" narrative may further alienate a significant portion of the electorate. As we move deeper into the election season, it’s clear that anything can happen.

October 7, 2024

REMINDER: The PULSECAST attempts to put a finger on the pulse of what mainstream pollsters and data nerds are saying. It is not Glenn or Stu’s election prediction. Read more detail here.

Donald Trump has seen some improvement in recent polling. His chances have risen slightly, with current estimates giving him a 45.41 percentchance of winning—an increase from the previous week. Trump is also gaining favor in prediction markets, where bettors are giving him a 6-7 percent higher chance of victory compared to traditional polling averages and election models built by experts.

This discrepancy may be explained by the belief that Trump often outperforms his polling numbers, a pattern seen in both 2016 and 2020. While "shy Trump voters" were a significant factor in previous elections, there seems to be less of that effect this time around, with voters now more open about their support. It's also important to note that Trump is in a stronger position now than he was at similar points in his 2016 and 2020 campaigns, making the 2024 race particularly intense as polling models continue to evolve. If polling errors similar to 2020 occur, Trump could easily secure a win.

October 6, 2024

REMINDER: The PULSECAST attempts to put a finger on the pulse of what mainstream pollsters and data nerds are saying. It is not Glenn or Stu’s election prediction. Read more detail here.

No summary during the weekend.

October 5, 2024

REMINDER: The PULSECAST attempts to put a finger on the pulse of what mainstream pollsters and data nerds are saying. It is not Glenn or Stu’s election prediction. Read more detail here.

No summary during the weekend.

October 4, 2024

REMINDER: The PULSECAST attempts to put a finger on the pulse of what mainstream pollsters and data nerds are saying. It is not Glenn or Stu’s election prediction. Read more detail here.

Donald Trump currently holds a 44.03 percent chance of winning the 2024 election, a slight increase from yesterday. Despite the uptick, the race has remained fairly stable for over two weeks, with little movement on either side. While at first glance, it may seem like Kamala Harris has a more comfortable lead at 56 percent, the reality is that the margin between the two candidates is razor-thin.

This is essentially a toss-up. One could argue that Harris has a slight edge, but even that is debatable. The mainstream media might present this as her having the advantage, but in truth, the race is incredibly close. As it stands, this election could go either way.

October 03, 2024

REMINDER: The PULSECAST attempts to put a finger on the pulse of what mainstream pollsters and data nerds are saying. It is not Glenn or Stu’s election prediction. Read more detail here.

Right now, Donald Trump has a 43.84 percent chance of winning the election, with Kamala Harris at 56.16 percent. These numbers have been pretty stable for about two weeks. It might seem like Harris has a significant lead, but that’s not the case. This is essentially a toss-up, and the numbers aren’t predicting that Trump will lose by 13 points. They’re just saying there’s a slightly higher chance for Harris at this moment.

We’ll see if any major events like Hurricane Helene end up influencing the election and affecting the prospects of the candidates.

October 02, 2024

REMINDER: The PULSECAST attempts to put a finger on the pulse of what mainstream pollsters and data nerds are saying. It is not Glenn or Stu’s election prediction. Read more detail here.

The latest update before the presidential debate shows Donald Trump with a 44.09 percent chance of winning the election. This is a slight increase from the day before, but the race remains incredibly tight. In seven key swing states, Kamala Harris leads in Nevada by just 2.2 points, Wisconsin by 1.7, and Pennsylvania and Michigan by a razor-thin margin of 0.6. On the flip side, Trump leads in Arizona by 0.8, Georgia by 0.5, and North Carolina by a mere 0.2 points.

With margins this close, this election is shaping up to be one of the tightest races in modern history.

October 01, 2024

REMINDER: The PULSECAST attempts to put a finger on the pulse of what mainstream pollsters and data nerds are saying. It is not Glenn or Stu’s election prediction. Read more detail here.

No Pulsecast summary today.

September 30, 2024

REMINDER: The PULSECAST attempts to put a finger on the pulse of what mainstream pollsters and data nerds are saying. It is not Glenn or Stu’s election prediction. Read more detail here.

Recent polling data shows promising trends for Donald Trump in key battleground states like Pennsylvania and Arizona. However, Kamala Harris has gained ground in national polls, continuing the trend of Trump performing well in state-level polls while Harris leads nationally. According to current projections, Trump currently holds a 43.49 percent chance of winning the election, positioning him as a slight underdog, but it is still anyone's game in this razor-thin election.

The real surprise comes from a major shift in union support. In 1992, Bill Clinton led with union voters by 30 points, a margin that dropped to 19 points for Biden in 2020. Now, Kamala Harris holds only a 9-point lead in this group. Meanwhile, Trump has made major gains among trade school voters, moving from a 7-point deficit in 1992 to a staggering 31-point lead in 2024. This dramatic realignment reflects broader shifts in voter demographics and priorities heading into the next election.

September 29, 2024

REMINDER: The PULSECAST attempts to put a finger on the pulse of what mainstream pollsters and data nerds are saying. It is not Glenn or Stu’s election prediction. Read more detail here.

No summary during the weekend.

September 28, 2024

REMINDER: The PULSECAST attempts to put a finger on the pulse of what mainstream pollsters and data nerds are saying. It is not Glenn or Stu’s election prediction. Read more detail here.

No summary during the weekend.

September 27, 2024

REMINDER: The PULSECAST attempts to put a finger on the pulse of what mainstream pollsters and data nerds are saying. It is not Glenn or Stu’s election prediction. Read more detail here.

Donald Trump currently holds a 43.93 percent chance of winning the election, which is just a slight dip from the previous day. This minor drop seems to be driven by a single poll showing Kamala Harris with a seven-point lead—the best polling result for her entire campaign so far. However, it’s likely that this poll is an outlier, and we’ll see how it plays out in the coming days.

September 26, 2024

REMINDER: The PULSECAST attempts to put a finger on the pulse of what mainstream pollsters and data nerds are saying. It is not Glenn or Stu’s election prediction. Read more detail here.

As of today, Donald Trump has a 44.52 percent chance of winning the election. This is just a tick-down from yesterday at 45.05 percent.

Stu suspects that this slight downturn is largely due to one poll that had Kamala Harris up by seven, which has been the best poll of the entire campaign for her. He suspects that this will be an outlier

September 25, 2024

REMINDER: The PULSECAST attempts to put a finger on the pulse of what mainstream pollsters and data nerds are saying. It is not Glenn or Stu’s election prediction. Read more detail here.

Donald Trump had another strong day with his chances to win rising from 43.82 percent to 45.03 percent. This shift has effectively erased the negative decline in his polling this past month. The race is still a tossup with Kamala Harris's polling at 54.97 percent.

Trump continues to lead significantly on key issues, such as immigration, where he’s up by 21 points. This lead, coupled with the financial strain Americans are facing—like skyrocketing utility bills, food and gas prices, and inflation—begs the question: Why is the race still this close? Glenn and Stu suspect that many voters still don't believe Harris bears responsibility for the failures of the Biden presidency. One poll indicates that 19 percent of voters who say Biden's presidency was a failure are still voting for Harris.

September 24, 2024

REMINDER: The PULSECAST attempts to put a finger on the pulse of what mainstream pollsters and data nerds are saying. It is not Glenn or Stu’s election prediction. Read more detail here.

Donald Trump's chances to win have improved slightly, rising from 43 percent to 43.82 percent, marking a nearly full-point gain. While that may seem small, it's significant for these kinds of prediction models, which are designed to move slowly and reflect longer-term trends. This gain comes after Trump had initially dropped by 4.3 percent following the last debate, but his deficit has now been cut to just 2.9 percent. The New York Times/Sienna poll, a highly influential source, played a key role in this shift, showing positive results for Trump in key states like Nevada, Arizona, Georgia, and North Carolina.

Looking at the state-level breakdown, Trump's leading by up to five points in some, with North Carolina showing a two-point lead. Winning North Carolina in particular is critical, as it’s considered a must-win state. To secure a win overall, Trump will need to hold on to Georgia, North Carolina, and possibly Arizona, while also flipping one of the blue-wall states like Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, or Michigan.

September 23, 2024

REMINDER: The PULSECAST attempts to put a finger on the pulse of what mainstream pollsters and data nerds are saying. It is not Glenn or Stu’s election prediction. Read more detail here.

Today's Pollcast has Donald Trump’s chances of winning at 43.2 percent, according to aggregated polling data. This figure indicates a decline of 4.3 percent from last week and a drop of approximately 4.6 percent over a longer period. Despite this dip, many pollsters are still optimistic for Donald Trump.

These prediction models often weigh the results of higher-rated pollsters more heavily in their calculations. For example, New York Times/Siena polling is among the most reputable, and its state-level data paints a positive picture for Trump. In key battleground states like Arizona, Trump holds a 5-point lead (50 percent to 45 percent). In Georgia, Trump's ahead by 4 points (49 percent to 45 percent). In North Carolina, Trump is up by 2 points (49 percent to 47 percent). This most recent data mark a reversal from the past two to four weeks, during which polls were favoring Kamala Harris in those swing states.

Moreover, national polling has been more favorable to Trump than Harris in recent weeks. If this trend continues and Trump can sustain both national and state polling advantages, his overall outlook could significantly improve.

However, it’s crucial to note that winning Arizona, Georgia, and North Carolina alone isn't enough for Trump to secure the presidency. He would still need victories in other key states like Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, or Michigan. While his performance in these battleground states is essential, his path to victory requires success beyond just these three.

September 22, 2024

REMINDER: The PULSECAST attempts to put a finger on the pulse of what mainstream pollsters and data nerds are saying. It is not Glenn or Stu’s election prediction. Read more detail here.

As of today, Donald Trump’s chances of winning stand at 44 percent, while Kamala Harris leads with 55.8 percent, reflecting a close race. Though Harris has the advantage, this nearly 55-45 split still indicates a highly competitive contest. Such a margin is akin to a coin flip, underscoring the uncertainty of the election outcome. Despite recent polling challenges for Trump, this is far from a decisive lead for Harris, as both candidates remain within striking distance of each other.

The current polling divergence between Trump and Harris has widened over the past week, but it’s important to remember that Trump is not in a dire position. Political analysts emphasize that a race this tight makes forecasting difficult, leaving room for significant shifts as new data comes in.

September 21, 2024

REMINDER: The PULSECAST attempts to put a finger on the pulse of what mainstream pollsters and data nerds are saying. It is not Glenn or Stu’s election prediction. Read more detail here.

Donald Trump experienced a slight uptick in his chances yesterday, moving him to 44.3 percent to 44.77 percent. While it may seem minor, such daily fluctuations can be important when viewing polling trends over time.

One possible factor contributing to this uptick could be the fallout from the recent assassination attempt. Although it’s difficult to pinpoint a single cause, polling released yesterday was generally favorable to Trump on a national level. However, it’s worth noting that Kamala Harris still performed well in key swing states.

On today's episode of the Glenn Beck Program, Stu compared polling to weight loss: progress isn't always visible in the short term. With Harris enjoying strong polling recently, it's important to take a longer view to assess the direction of the race. This uptick for Trump may signal a shift, but it will take more time to see how the numbers stabilize over the coming days.

EXCLUSIVE: Tech Ethicist reveals 5 ways to control AI NOW

MANAURE QUINTERO / Contributor | Getty Images

By now, many of us are familiar with AI and its potential benefits and threats. However, unless you're a tech tycoon, it can feel like you have little influence over the future of artificial intelligence.

For years, Glenn has warned about the dangers of rapidly developing AI technologies that have taken the world by storm.

He acknowledges their significant benefits but emphasizes the need to establish proper boundaries and ethics now, while we still have control. But since most people aren’t Silicon Valley tech leaders making the decisions, how can they help keep AI in check?

Recently, Glenn interviewed Tristan Harris, a tech ethicist deeply concerned about the potential harm of unchecked AI, to discuss its societal implications. Harris highlighted a concerning new piece of legislation proposed by Texas Senator Ted Cruz. This legislation proposes a state-level moratorium on AI regulation, meaning only the federal government could regulate AI. Harris noted that there’s currently no Federal plan for regulating AI. Until the federal government establishes a plan, tech companies would have nearly free rein with their AI. And we all know how slowly the federal government moves.

This is where you come in. Tristan Harris shared with Glenn the top five actions you should urge your representatives to take regarding AI, including opposing the moratorium until a concrete plan is in place. Now is your chance to influence the future of AI. Contact your senator and congressman today and share these five crucial steps they must take to keep AI in check:

Ban engagement-optimized AI companions for kids

Create legislation that will prevent AI from being designed to maximize addiction, sexualization, flattery, and attachment disorders, and to protect young people’s mental health and ability to form real-life friendships.

Establish basic liability laws

Companies need to be held accountable when their products cause real-world harm.

Pass increased whistleblower protections

Protect concerned technologists working inside the AI labs from facing untenable pressures and threats that prevent them from warning the public when the AI rollout is unsafe or crosses dangerous red lines.

Prevent AI from having legal rights

Enact laws so AIs don’t have protected speech or have their own bank accounts, making sure our legal system works for human interests over AI interests.

Oppose the state moratorium on AI 

Call your congressman or Senator Cruz’s office, and demand they oppose the state moratorium on AI without a plan for how we will set guardrails for this technology.

Glenn: Only Trump dared to deliver on decades of empty promises

Tasos Katopodis / Stringer | Getty Images

The Islamic regime has been killing Americans since 1979. Now Trump’s response proves we’re no longer playing defense — we’re finally hitting back.

The United States has taken direct military action against Iran’s nuclear program. Whatever you think of the strike, it’s over. It’s happened. And now, we have to predict what happens next. I want to help you understand the gravity of this situation: what happened, what it means, and what might come next. To that end, we need to begin with a little history.

Since 1979, Iran has been at war with us — even if we refused to call it that.

We are either on the verge of a remarkable strategic victory or a devastating global escalation. Time will tell.

It began with the hostage crisis, when 66 Americans were seized and 52 were held for over a year by the radical Islamic regime. Four years later, 17 more Americans were murdered in the U.S. Embassy bombing in Beirut, followed by 241 Marines in the Beirut barracks bombing.

Then came the Khobar Towers bombing in 1996, which killed 19 more U.S. airmen. Iran had its fingerprints all over it.

In Iraq and Afghanistan, Iranian-backed proxies killed hundreds of American soldiers. From 2001 to 2020 in Afghanistan and 2003 to 2011 in Iraq, Iran supplied IEDs and tactical support.

The Iranians have plotted assassinations and kidnappings on U.S. soil — in 2011, 2021, and again in 2024 — and yet we’ve never really responded.

The precedent for U.S. retaliation has always been present, but no president has chosen to pull the trigger until this past weekend. President Donald Trump struck decisively. And what our military pulled off this weekend was nothing short of extraordinary.

Operation Midnight Hammer

The strike was reportedly called Operation Midnight Hammer. It involved as many as 175 U.S. aircraft, including 12 B-2 stealth bombers — out of just 19 in our entire arsenal. Those bombers are among the most complex machines in the world, and they were kept mission-ready by some of the finest mechanics on the planet.

USAF / Handout | Getty Images

To throw off Iranian radar and intelligence, some bombers flew west toward Guam — classic misdirection. The rest flew east, toward the real targets.

As the B-2s approached Iranian airspace, U.S. submarines launched dozens of Tomahawk missiles at Iran’s fortified nuclear facilities. Minutes later, the bombers dropped 14 MOPs — massive ordnance penetrators — each designed to drill deep into the earth and destroy underground bunkers. These bombs are the size of an F-16 and cost millions of dollars apiece. They are so accurate, I’ve been told they can hit the top of a soda can from 15,000 feet.

They were built for this mission — and we’ve been rehearsing this run for 15 years.

If the satellite imagery is accurate — and if what my sources tell me is true — the targeted nuclear sites were utterly destroyed. We’ll likely rely on the Israelis to confirm that on the ground.

This was a master class in strategy, execution, and deterrence. And it proved that only the United States could carry out a strike like this. I am very proud of our military, what we are capable of doing, and what we can accomplish.

What comes next

We don’t yet know how Iran will respond, but many of the possibilities are troubling. The Iranians could target U.S. forces across the Middle East. On Monday, Tehran launched 20 missiles at U.S. bases in Qatar, Syria, and Kuwait, to no effect. God forbid, they could also unleash Hezbollah or other terrorist proxies to strike here at home — and they just might.

Iran has also threatened to shut down the Strait of Hormuz — the artery through which nearly a fifth of the world’s oil flows. On Sunday, Iran’s parliament voted to begin the process. If the Supreme Council and the ayatollah give the go-ahead, we could see oil prices spike to $150 or even $200 a barrel.

That would be catastrophic.

The 2008 financial collapse was pushed over the edge when oil hit $130. Western economies — including ours — simply cannot sustain oil above $120 for long. If this conflict escalates and the Strait is closed, the global economy could unravel.

The strike also raises questions about regime stability. Will it spark an uprising, or will the Islamic regime respond with a brutal crackdown on dissidents?

Early signs aren’t hopeful. Reports suggest hundreds of arrests over the weekend and at least one dissident executed on charges of spying for Israel. The regime’s infamous morality police, the Gasht-e Ershad, are back on the streets. Every phone, every vehicle — monitored. The U.S. embassy in Qatar issued a shelter-in-place warning for Americans.

Russia and China both condemned the strike. On Monday, a senior Iranian official flew to Moscow to meet with Vladimir Putin. That meeting should alarm anyone paying attention. Their alliance continues to deepen — and that’s a serious concern.

Now we pray

We are either on the verge of a remarkable strategic victory or a devastating global escalation. Time will tell. But either way, President Trump didn’t start this. He inherited it — and he took decisive action.

The difference is, he did what they all said they would do. He didn’t send pallets of cash in the dead of night. He didn’t sign another failed treaty.

He acted. Now, we pray. For peace, for wisdom, and for the strength to meet whatever comes next.


This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

Globalize the Intifada? Why Mamdani’s plan spells DOOM for America

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

If New Yorkers hand City Hall to Zohran Mamdani, they’re not voting for change. They’re opening the door to an alliance of socialism, Islamism, and chaos.

It only took 25 years for New York City to go from the resilient, flag-waving pride following the 9/11 attacks to a political fever dream. To quote Michael Malice, “I'm old enough to remember when New Yorkers endured 9/11 instead of voting for it.”

Malice is talking about Zohran Mamdani, a Democratic Socialist assemblyman from Queens now eyeing the mayor’s office. Mamdani, a 33-year-old state representative emerging from relative political obscurity, is now receiving substantial funding for his mayoral campaign from the Council on American-Islamic Relations.

CAIR has a long and concerning history, including being born out of the Muslim Brotherhood and named an unindicted co-conspirator in the Holy Land Foundation terror funding case. Why would the group have dropped $100,000 into a PAC backing Mamdani’s campaign?

Mamdani blends political Islam with Marxist economics — two ideologies that have left tens of millions dead in the 20th century alone.

Perhaps CAIR has a vested interest in Mamdani’s call to “globalize the intifada.” That’s not a call for peaceful protest. Intifada refers to historic uprisings of Muslims against what they call the “Israeli occupation of Palestine.” Suicide bombings and street violence are part of the playbook. So when Mamdani says he wants to “globalize” that, who exactly is the enemy in this global scenario? Because it sure sounds like he's saying America is the new Israel, and anyone who supports Western democracy is the new Zionist.

Mamdani tried to clean up his language by citing the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum, which once used “intifada” in an Arabic-language article to describe the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising. So now he’s comparing Palestinians to Jewish victims of the Nazis? If that doesn’t twist your stomach into knots, you’re not paying attention.

If you’re “globalizing” an intifada, and positioning Israel — and now America — as the Nazis, that’s not a cry for human rights. That’s a call for chaos and violence.

Rising Islamism

But hey, this is New York. Faculty members at Columbia University — where Mamdani’s own father once worked — signed a letter defending students who supported Hamas after October 7. They also contributed to Mamdani’s mayoral campaign. And his father? He blamed Ronald Reagan and the religious right for inspiring Islamic terrorism, as if the roots of 9/11 grew in Washington, not the caves of Tora Bora.

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

This isn’t about Islam as a faith. We should distinguish between Islam and Islamism. Islam is a religion followed peacefully by millions. Islamism is something entirely different — an ideology that seeks to merge mosque and state, impose Sharia law, and destroy secular liberal democracies from within. Islamism isn’t about prayer and fasting. It’s about power.

Criticizing Islamism is not Islamophobia. It is not an attack on peaceful Muslims. In fact, Muslims are often its first victims.

Islamism is misogynistic, theocratic, violent, and supremacist. It’s hostile to free speech, religious pluralism, gay rights, secularism — even to moderate Muslims. Yet somehow, the progressive left — the same left that claims to fight for feminism, LGBTQ rights, and free expression — finds itself defending candidates like Mamdani. You can’t make this stuff up.

Blending the worst ideologies

And if that weren’t enough, Mamdani also identifies as a Democratic Socialist. He blends political Islam with Marxist economics — two ideologies that have left tens of millions dead in the 20th century alone. But don’t worry, New York. I’m sure this time socialism will totally work. Just like it always didn’t.

If you’re a business owner, a parent, a person who’s saved anything, or just someone who values sanity: Get out. I’m serious. If Mamdani becomes mayor, as seems likely, then New York City will become a case study in what happens when you marry ideological extremism with political power. And it won’t be pretty.

This is about more than one mayoral race. It’s about the future of Western liberalism. It’s about drawing a bright line between faith and fanaticism, between healthy pluralism and authoritarian dogma.

Call out radicalism

We must call out political Islam the same way we call out white nationalism or any other supremacist ideology. When someone chants “globalize the intifada,” that should send a chill down your spine — whether you’re Jewish, Christian, Muslim, atheist, or anything in between.

The left may try to shame you into silence with words like “Islamophobia,” but the record is worn out. The grooves are shallow. The American people see what’s happening. And we’re not buying it.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

How private stewardship could REVIVE America’s wild

Jonathan Newton / Contributor | Getty Images

The left’s idea of stewardship involves bulldozing bison and barring access. Lee’s vision puts conservation back in the hands of the people.

The media wants you to believe that Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) is trying to bulldoze Yellowstone and turn national parks into strip malls — that he’s calling for a reckless fire sale of America’s natural beauty to line developers’ pockets. That narrative is dishonest. It’s fearmongering, and, by the way, it’s wrong.

Here’s what’s really happening.

Private stewardship works. It’s local. It’s accountable. It’s incentivized.

The federal government currently owns 640 million acres of land — nearly 28% of all land in the United States. To put that into perspective, that’s more territory than France, Germany, Poland, and the United Kingdom combined.

Most of this land is west of the Mississippi River. That’s not a coincidence. In the American West, federal ownership isn’t just a bureaucratic technicality — it’s a stranglehold. States are suffocated. Locals are treated as tenants. Opportunities are choked off.

Meanwhile, people living east of the Mississippi — in places like Kentucky, Georgia, or Pennsylvania — might not even realize how little land their own states truly control. But the same policies that are plaguing the West could come for them next.

Lee isn’t proposing to auction off Yellowstone or pave over Yosemite. He’s talking about 3 million acres — that’s less than half of 1% of the federal estate. And this land isn’t your family’s favorite hiking trail. It’s remote, hard to access, and often mismanaged.

Failed management

Why was it mismanaged in the first place? Because the federal government is a terrible landlord.

Consider Yellowstone again. It’s home to the last remaining herd of genetically pure American bison — animals that haven’t been crossbred with cattle. Ranchers, myself included, would love the chance to help restore these majestic creatures on private land. But the federal government won’t allow it.

So what do they do when the herd gets too big?

They kill them. Bulldoze them into mass graves. That’s not conservation. That’s bureaucratic malpractice.

And don’t even get me started on bald eagles — majestic symbols of American freedom and a federally protected endangered species, now regularly slaughtered by wind turbines. I have pictures of piles of dead bald eagles. Where’s the outrage?

Biden’s federal land-grab

Some argue that states can’t afford to manage this land themselves. But if the states can’t afford it, how can Washington? We’re $35 trillion in debt. Entitlements are strained, infrastructure is crumbling, and the Bureau of Land Management, Forest Service, and National Park Service are billions of dollars behind in basic maintenance. Roads, firebreaks, and trails are falling apart.

The Biden administration quietly embraced something called the “30 by 30” initiative, a plan to lock up 30% of all U.S. land and water under federal “conservation” by 2030. The real goal is 50% by 2050.

That entails half of the country being taken away from you, controlled not by the people who live there but by technocrats in D.C.

You think that won’t affect your ability to hunt, fish, graze cattle, or cut timber? Think again. It won’t be conservatives who stop you from building a cabin, raising cattle, or teaching your grandkids how to shoot a rifle. It’ll be the same radical environmentalists who treat land as sacred — unless it’s your truck, your deer stand, or your back yard.

Land as collateral

Moreover, the U.S. Treasury is considering putting federally owned land on the national balance sheet, listing your parks, forests, and hunting grounds as collateral.

What happens if America defaults on its debt?

David McNew / Stringer | Getty Images

Do you think our creditors won’t come calling? Imagine explaining to your kids that the lake you used to fish in is now under foreign ownership, that the forest you hunted in belongs to China.

This is not hypothetical. This is the logical conclusion of treating land like a piggy bank.

The American way

There’s a better way — and it’s the American way.

Let the people who live near the land steward it. Let ranchers, farmers, sportsmen, and local conservationists do what they’ve done for generations.

Did you know that 75% of America’s wetlands are on private land? Or that the most successful wildlife recoveries — whitetail deer, ducks, wild turkeys — didn’t come from Washington but from partnerships between private landowners and groups like Ducks Unlimited?

Private stewardship works. It’s local. It’s accountable. It’s incentivized. When you break it, you fix it. When you profit from the land, you protect it.

This is not about selling out. It’s about buying in — to freedom, to responsibility, to the principle of constitutional self-governance.

So when you hear the pundits cry foul over 3 million acres of federal land, remember: We don’t need Washington to protect our land. We need Washington to get out of the way.

Because this isn’t just about land. It’s about liberty. And once liberty is lost, it doesn’t come back easily.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.