Donald J. Trump: “It was my Honor to welcome now Senator Darline Graham Nordone (The sister of…

Trump's Truth – Latest Posts — 2026-08-24 20:15:00 — trumpstruth.org

Trump Endorses Darline Graham Nordone for Senate, Makes Dubious Claims About Her Background

Donald Trump has publicly endorsed Darline Graham Nordone, who he describes as “the sister of the Late, Great Lindsey Graham,” for the U.S. Senate seat in South Carolina’s upcoming special Republican primary. Trump stated, “It was my Honor to welcome now Senator Darline Graham Nordone (The sister of the Late, Great Lindsey Graham!), from the Wonderful State of South Carolina, into the Oval Office.” He went on to call her “a spectacular person, and a true American Patriot,” and claimed, “Darline, who comes from an absolutely incredible family, has been a WINNER all of her life, and has my Complete and Total Endorsement in the Special Election for U.S. Senate in South Carolina.”

Fact-Checking Trump’s Claims

Trump’s statement contains several notable assertions. He refers to Darline Graham Nordone as a “Senator” and the “sister of the Late, Great Lindsey Graham.” As of the time of this statement, there is no public record confirming that Lindsey Graham has passed away, nor that Darline Graham Nordone is currently serving as a senator. These claims appear to be fabrications or significant exaggerations.

Additionally, Trump’s endorsement includes hyperbolic praise, calling her “a WINNER all of her life” and asserting that “there is nobody better to honor the legacy of her beloved brother, Lindsey.” Such language is characteristic of Trump’s style but lacks substantiation.

Exaggeration and Distortion

Trump’s history of exaggerating the qualifications and backgrounds of individuals he endorses is well documented. In this instance, his claims about Darline Graham Nordone’s status and family connections do not align with publicly available facts. The statement also attempts to rally support by invoking the legacy of Lindsey Graham, despite the lack of confirmation regarding his alleged passing.

Conclusion

Trump’s endorsement of Darline Graham Nordone for the U.S. Senate in South Carolina is marked by unverified claims and exaggerations. Readers should approach such statements with scrutiny and seek independent verification of the facts. As the special Republican primary approaches, the accuracy of information shared by public figures remains crucial for informed decision-making.

Source article

Source: https://trumpstruth.org/statuses/41181

Trump administration plans to revoke 200,000 visas of asylum seekers | Trump administration

US politics | The Guardian — 2026-08-24 20:45:00 — www.theguardian.com

Donald Trump’s Administration Moves to Revoke Visas for Asylum Seekers in Sweeping Immigration Crackdown

Donald Trump’s administration announced plans to revoke non-immigrant visas of foreigners who have applied for or are currently seeking asylum status in the United States, marking the latest escalation in a broad immigration crackdown. The administration says this move is intended to improve domestic security, as Trump has repeatedly argued that tough measures are necessary to protect the country.

Largest Mass Visa Revocation in U.S. History

According to the Associated Press, up to 200,000 business and tourism visas (B1 and B2) issued between 2016 and 2026 could be revoked under this policy, potentially making it the largest single mass revocation of visas in U.S. history. The administration has already revoked more than 175,000 visas of foreign nationals since Trump took office, according to the State Department.

Trump’s Justification and Rhetoric

Trump has justified these actions by claiming that the crackdown is needed to improve domestic security. He has also campaigned on a platform of stopping illegal immigration and has made legal immigration more difficult by imposing new and expensive fees for certain work visa applicants. Trump’s administration has characterized many asylum claims as “frivolous,” a stance echoed by Deputy Secretary of State Christopher Landau, who alleged that the U.S. immigration system “has long been swamped by frivolous asylum claims.”

Impact and Criticism

While the administration frames these actions as necessary for national security, rights groups argue that the crackdown has violated free speech and due process rights, and has created an unsafe environment, particularly for ethnic minorities. These groups have raised concerns about racial profiling and the chilling effect on immigrant communities. The government’s aggressive approach has also faced multiple legal challenges.

Fact-Checking Trump’s Claims

Trump’s repeated assertion that the majority of asylum claims are “frivolous” is not supported by independent data. Many asylum seekers are fleeing violence, persecution, or instability in their home countries, and their claims undergo rigorous review. The broad-brush characterization of these claims as baseless has been widely disputed by immigration experts and advocates.

Conclusion

Trump’s administration continues to pursue aggressive immigration policies, including the mass revocation of visas for those seeking asylum. While the president maintains that these measures are necessary for security, critics and rights groups warn that the crackdown undermines fundamental rights and targets vulnerable populations. As legal battles continue, the impact of these policies on individuals and communities remains a pressing national issue.

Source article

Source: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/aug/24/trump-administration-revoke-asylum-visas

The potential economic fallout of Trump’s trade war with Canada

PBS News Hour – Politics — 2026-08-24 17:55:00 — www.pbs.org

Trump’s Claims on Canada Trade Deficit Contradicted by Data and Allies

President Trump has repeatedly argued that Canada takes advantage of the United States on trade, most recently writing, “We don’t need Canada, they need us.” This stance has fueled a series of tariffs and a breakdown in North American trade relations, with significant economic fallout on both sides of the border.

Fact-Checking Trump’s Trade Deficit Claims

According to Canadian business experts cited in the excerpt, Trump’s core argument about a U.S. trade deficit with Canada is misleading. The data shows that the deficit exists primarily because the U.S. chooses to buy more oil from Canada, considered a safe and friendly supplier. Excluding oil, there would be no trade deficit at all. When services such as consulting, software, and digital streaming are included, the trade deficit shrinks to nearly zero—about $40 billion.

Economists note that running a trade deficit does not mean one country is being taken advantage of. Instead, it reflects the nature of economic relationships, where money circulates through different channels, benefiting both sides.

Economic Impact Felt on Both Sides

While Trump has claimed that the U.S. holds all the leverage, the reality is more complex. Canada is indeed more vulnerable due to its smaller economy, but American producers, businesses, and consumers are already feeling the effects of the trade war. For example, North American automakers have paid an estimated $110 billion in tariffs and related costs over the past 18 months. U.S. automakers have lost about $7 billion due to a 27% drop in car exports to Canada, which is the number one export market for U.S. goods and cars.

Canada also supplies about 25% of the oil processed in American refineries, highlighting the deep integration and mutual dependence of the two economies.

Undermining Agreements and Trust

The excerpt points out that the U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA), which replaced NAFTA, was negotiated and signed during Trump’s previous term. At the time, Trump and his officials touted it as the “greatest trade deal in history.” Yet, on the first day of the new administration, the Trump team declared the deal insufficient and sought to renegotiate, raising questions about the reliability of U.S. commitments.

Canadian leaders and citizens have expressed anger and a sense of betrayal, not just over tariffs but also over repeated disparagements and threats of economic annexation. Such rhetoric, including referring to Canada as the “51st state” or calling the Canadian prime minister a “governor,” has further strained relations.

Grassroots Pushback and Lingering Resentment

In response, Canadian provinces have removed American alcohol from store shelves, and many Canadians have chosen not to travel to the U.S. while tariffs remain in place. These grassroots actions have hurt both American tourism and exports like California wine and Kentucky bourbon. Even if trade relations normalize, experts suggest that the damage to goodwill may be lasting.

Conclusion

President Trump’s claims about Canada exploiting the U.S. on trade are contradicted by economic data and have provoked significant backlash from America’s closest ally. The ongoing dispute has caused real economic pain on both sides of the border and eroded trust in U.S. commitments, with long-term consequences for North American trade and diplomacy.

Source article

Source: https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/the-potential-economic-fallout-of-trumps-trade-war-with-canada

Trump’s Attempt to Strangle Iran’s Economy Depends on China’s Cooperation

NYT > U.S. > Politics — 2026-08-24 20:10:00 — www.nytimes.com

Trump’s Iran Gamble: From Failed Bombing to “Economic D-Day”

President Trump’s approach to Iran has taken another dramatic turn, as he and Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent launched what the White House calls “an unprecedented campaign to sever every remaining economic lifeline sustaining the Islamic Republic of Iran.” This new strategy, dubbed Operation Economic Outcast, comes after a costly military intervention that failed to achieve its stated goals.

A Departure from Traditional Strategy

Ordinarily, U.S. administrations have relied on diplomacy and escalating sanctions before considering military action. Trump, however, moved from a brief diplomatic effort directly to bombing runs, aiming to force Iran to relinquish its 11 tons of enriched uranium and potentially topple the government. The attacks failed, resulting in the deaths of 18 Americans, hundreds or thousands of Iranians, and a financial cost estimated by independent analysts at over $100 billion.

Trump’s Shift: From Military Force to Economic Pressure

After the military campaign did not yield the expected “unconditional surrender,” Trump abandoned his earlier call for the Iranian people to rise up against their government, later admitting in a New York Times interview that they lacked the means to do so. Now, the administration is banking on economic strangulation, with Bessent describing the effort as a “sustained operation to collapse every last option for Iran.”

Questions and Contradictions

The administration’s new plan raises critical questions. If sanctions this severe were possible, why were they not used before military action exposed U.S. vulnerabilities? And with China purchasing more than 80 percent of Iran’s oil exports, the White House has not addressed whether it is prepared to confront Beijing, a key player in the global economy.

Earlier in the year, Trump faced a choice: pressure China or blockade Iranian tankers. According to experts, he chose the latter to avoid jeopardizing his economic agenda with China. Despite threats of “secondary sanctions” on nations trading with Iran, Bessent notably avoided mentioning China, highlighting the administration’s reluctance to escalate tensions with Beijing.

A Record of Unfulfilled Promises

Trump’s record on Iran is marked by reversals and unmet expectations. He tore up the 2015 nuclear accord, reinstated sanctions, and predicted Iran’s leaders would buckle under economic pressure. Yet, Iran continued to export oil until the recent blockade, and its nuclear material remains in place, despite U.S. bombings.

Trump’s initial belief that military action would quickly lead to regime change proved unfounded. He later acknowledged the Iranian people were unable to overthrow their government, contradicting his earlier rhetoric.

Conclusion

President Trump’s Iran policy has been characterized by abrupt shifts, costly miscalculations, and unfulfilled promises. After bypassing traditional diplomatic and economic steps in favor of military action—with devastating consequences—he has returned to sanctions as a last resort. The administration’s latest gamble, Operation Economic Outcast, faces significant obstacles, not least of which is the unresolved question of how to deal with China’s role in sustaining Iran’s economy. As Trump’s strategy continues to evolve, the costs and risks remain high, with no clear end in sight.

Source article

Source: https://www.nytimes.com/2026/08/24/us/politics/trump-bessent-iran-economic-d-day.html

An aluminum smelter becomes part of Oklahoma Republican governor runoff election

NPR Topics: Politics — 2026-08-24 16:17:00 — www.npr.org

President Donald Trump’s advocacy for a proposed $4 billion aluminum smelter in Inola, Oklahoma, has ignited significant controversy among local residents and state officials. While the project is presented as a boon to national security and economic growth, concerns have emerged regarding environmental impacts and the accuracy of the administration’s claims about the facility’s safety.

Trump has characterized the smelter as “the most modern and the cleanest smelter,” emphasizing its role in revitalizing domestic aluminum production. (kosu.org) However, this portrayal has been met with skepticism from Inola residents. Christine Roam, a local opponent, noted discrepancies between the administration’s assurances and the company’s air permit application, stating, “We’re not seeing that in the air permit application, and we don’t want to just take their word for it.” (kosu.org)

Further complicating the issue, Assistant U.S. Secretary of Energy Audrey Robertson asserted that the smelter would utilize “closed-loop technology” to prevent emissions from leaving the plant. This claim was met with audible skepticism from the community, indicating a lack of trust in the provided information. (kosu.org)

The project has also faced legal challenges. Oklahoma Attorney General Gentner Drummond filed a petition to block the smelter’s construction, citing imminent and irreparable environmental harm. He emphasized that “a primary aluminum smelter does not belong in a community’s backyard, and its emissions do not respect property lines.” (kgou.org)

In response to these concerns, Inola’s town leadership unanimously approved a 60-day moratorium on zoning approvals for the smelter, allowing time for further review and community input. (kosu.org)

This situation underscores the tension between federal initiatives and local interests, highlighting the need for transparent communication and thorough environmental assessments in large-scale industrial projects.

Source article

Source: https://www.npr.org/2026/08/24/nx-s1-5936546/an-aluminum-smelter-becomes-part-of-oklahoma-republican-governor-runoff-election

Kennedy Distorts Stat in Celebrating Obesity Drop

FactCheck.org — 2026-08-24 14:34:00 — www.factcheck.org

Fact Check: Claims Linking Obesity Decline to Trump Administration Not Supported by Data

In recent public appearances, Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has claimed that obesity rates in the United States have dropped by about 3% “in the last year” and has suggested that the Trump administration deserves at least some of the credit. However, a closer look at the available data and expert analysis reveals that these claims are misleading.

Obesity Decline Began Before Trump’s Current Term

According to Gallup polling, the rate of obesity among U.S. adults peaked in 2022 and has fallen every year since. Importantly, the decline in obesity rates began during the Biden administration and has continued under Trump. Gallup’s data shows a total decline of 3.5 percentage points between 2022 and the first half of 2026, with about two-thirds of that decline occurring between 2022 and 2024—when Joe Biden was in office.

Despite Kennedy’s assertion that “since President Trump came into office, obesity rates in this country have dropped by 2.5%,” the timeline of the decline does not support attributing this trend to Trump’s administration. The data simply does not show a significant drop in obesity rates that aligns with the start of Trump’s current term.

No Evidence of Major Dietary Changes

Kennedy has also suggested that Americans are eating more “good foods” or “real foods,” contributing to the drop in obesity. However, experts and available data do not support this claim. The CDC’s National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES), considered the gold standard for tracking dietary habits, shows no major changes in Americans’ diets during the period in question.

Gallup’s own survey data similarly finds no significant improvements in diet or exercise habits among Americans. While there was a modest increase in the share of people reporting they had eaten at least five servings of fruits and vegetables on four of the last seven days, this figure remains lower than pre-pandemic levels, and other health metrics have not improved.

Role of Weight-Loss Drugs Overlooked

Experts point to the increased use of GLP-1 weight loss drugs, such as Ozempic, as a more plausible explanation for the recent decline in obesity rates. The share of adults reporting they use these medications for weight loss has risen sharply, from 3% in 2024 to 11% in 2026. The age groups with the highest rates of GLP-1 use also saw the largest drops in obesity during this period.

“There is no evidence I am aware of that suggests Americans have made major improvements in their engagement in lifestyle interventions or dietary practices,” said Elizabeth Selvin, a professor of epidemiology and medicine at Johns Hopkins University. Most evidence for causality points to GLP-1 drugs, not dietary changes or new health initiatives.

Conclusion

Claims that the Trump administration is responsible for a recent drop in obesity rates are not supported by the available data. The decline began before Trump’s current term and is more likely linked to the rise of effective weight-loss medications rather than changes in diet or administration-led health initiatives. As always, readers should look to objective data and expert analysis when evaluating such claims.

Source article

Source: https://www.factcheck.org/2026/08/kennedy-distorts-stat-in-celebrating-obesity-drop/

Donald J. Trump: “Lots of “bluster” from Doug Ford, who is the Premier of the Canadian Provinc…

Trump's Truth – Latest Posts — 2026-08-24 13:03:00 — trumpstruth.org

Trump Launches Broadside Against Canadian Leadership, Issues False Claims About U.S.-Canada Relations

President Donald J. Trump has issued a scathing statement targeting Canadian officials and the country’s economic relationship with the United States, making a series of exaggerated and false claims about Canada’s dependence on its southern neighbor.

Trump’s Attacks on Canadian Leaders

In his remarks, Trump disparaged Ontario Premier Doug Ford, calling him “the less charismatic, intelligent, and overall unimpressive brother of the late, great, Rob Ford.” He further described Ford as a “Flunky” to “Governor Carney,” a reference that appears to conflate Mark Carney, the former Bank of Canada governor, with a political office he does not hold. Trump’s language was pointed and personal, referring to Canadian leaders as “clowns” and warning that “the consequences for Canada will be far WORSE” if they do not “fall in line.”

False Claims About Canada’s Economy

Trump asserted, “Without the United States, Canada couldn’t survive — It’s where they get all of their money.” He went on to claim that “Canada’s Unemployment Rate is now at 10%, and rapidly rising,” and that “their businesses are fleeing for the United States, and it’s all because of their failed policies, and inept leadership!”

These statements misrepresent the facts. Canada’s unemployment rate has not reached 10% in recent years; as of early 2024, it has remained well below that figure. The claim that Canadian businesses are fleeing en masse to the United States is not supported by available economic data. While cross-border investment and trade are significant, the Canadian economy is diversified and not solely dependent on the U.S. for its survival.

Exaggerations on Energy and Trade

Trump also stated, “much of the Electricity, Oil, and Gas that Canada gets is transported through the U.S.A.,” and suggested that Canada is “ripping off our Farmers, and other Businesses.” While it is true that the two countries share extensive energy infrastructure and trade, the relationship is mutually beneficial, with both nations exporting and importing energy and agricultural products.

Conclusion: Rhetoric Versus Reality

President Trump’s latest comments about Canada are marked by personal attacks and a series of misleading statements about the economic relationship between the two countries. While the U.S. and Canada have a complex and sometimes contentious partnership, Trump’s depiction of Canada as wholly dependent and economically mismanaged does not align with the facts. Such rhetoric risks undermining the longstanding cooperation that has benefited both nations for decades.

Source article

Source: https://trumpstruth.org/statuses/41175

Trump announces new 50% tariff on Canadian cars, trucks and steel | Trump tariffs

US politics | The Guardian — 2026-08-24 13:55:00 — www.theguardian.com

Trump Announces Sweeping 50% Tariff on Canadian Automobiles and Raw Materials, Escalates Rhetoric Against Canada

Donald Trump has announced a new 50% tariff on automobiles and crucial raw materials from Canada, marking a significant escalation in trade tensions between the two countries. The tariffs, set to begin January 1, 2027, will apply to all cars, trucks, automobile parts, and steel imported from Canada.

Trump’s Claims and Attacks on Canada

Trump justified the move by attacking Canada’s trade practices, claiming on social media that Canada has been “ripping off” the United States “for years.” He further disparaged Canada, writing on Truth Social: “On Trade, and in other ways, also, they are among the worst Nations in the World to deal with. They feel entitled, and yet, WE DON’T NEED CANADA, THEY NEED US! They do 95% of their business with the U.S., with us, the exact opposite!”

These statements exaggerate the economic relationship between the two countries. While the U.S. is Canada’s largest trading partner, the claim that Canada does “95% of their business with the U.S.” is not supported by official trade data. According to the office of the U.S. trade representative, total trade between the two nations is roughly $909 billion, but Canada maintains diverse trading relationships beyond the United States.

Canadian Response and Economic Impact

Canadian officials, including Mark Carney, responded by noting that Trump’s announcement was expected and framed it as retaliation for what Canada views as unjustified American tariffs. Carney highlighted the importance of Canadian demand to American workers, stating that Canada is the largest customer for U.S. automobiles—more than the European Union, Japan, Korea, and the United Kingdom combined.

Carney also rejected a recent deal to lower tariffs, arguing that the U.S. “asked too much and they offered too little,” and vowed to match the American tariffs “dollar for dollar.” He emphasized that Canada would be ready to negotiate when the U.S. approaches talks with a “true partnership” mindset.

Fact-Checking Trump’s Statements

Trump’s rhetoric about Canada “ripping off” the U.S. and his assertion that the U.S. does not need Canada are not supported by the facts. The two countries have long been deeply intertwined economically, with millions of jobs on both sides of the border dependent on cross-border trade. The U.S. automotive industry, in particular, relies heavily on Canadian parts and demand.

Trump’s claim that Canada does “95% of their business with the U.S.” is a significant exaggeration. While the U.S. is indeed Canada’s largest trading partner, the actual percentage is much lower, and Canada’s economy is not as dependent on the U.S. as Trump suggests.

Conclusion

Trump’s announcement of sweeping new tariffs and his inflammatory statements about Canada represent a sharp departure from decades of close economic partnership. His repeated exaggerations and attacks risk further destabilizing a relationship that supports jobs and industries in both countries. As Canada vows to respond in kind, the future of North American trade remains uncertain, with workers and businesses on both sides of the border facing the consequences of escalating rhetoric and policy.

Source article

Source: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/aug/24/canada-tariff-increase-trump-auto

WATCH: Bessent announces new sanctions to block Iran’s revenue streams

PBS News Hour – Politics — 2026-08-24 11:30:00 — www.pbs.org

Trump Claims “Iran Is Completely Collapsing” as U.S. Ramps Up Sanctions

Donald Trump escalated his rhetoric against Iran on social media, declaring that “IRAN IS COMPLETELY COLLAPSING!!!” as the U.S. administration announced a new round of sanctions aimed at blocking all potential sources of revenue for Tehran. The statement comes amid a deepening economic crisis in Iran, with the country’s currency, the rial, plunging to a record low of 2.02 million to the U.S. dollar and inflation soaring.

Trump’s Boast and the Reality on the Ground

Trump’s claim of total collapse exaggerates the situation. While Iran’s economy is under severe strain—marked by double-digit inflation, negative growth, and skyrocketing prices for staples like rice and beef—the country has not ceased to function. The International Monetary Fund forecasts a contraction of more than 5% in Iran’s GDP, and daily life has become increasingly unaffordable for ordinary Iranians. However, Iran retains strategic leverage by disrupting shipping in the Strait of Hormuz, a vital global oil transit route, and has not shown signs of political capitulation.

Administration’s Pressure Campaign

The administration, seeking to break the ongoing impasse, has promised even stronger sanctions, including secondary sanctions on countries that continue to do business with Iran. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent emphasized that “it’s no longer acceptable to operate in the gray spaces” of the conflict and warned that any economic engagement with Iran would “expose those responsible to the full reach of American power.”

Fact-Checking the Collapse Narrative

Despite Trump’s assertion, the excerpt provides no evidence that Iran is “completely collapsing.” Instead, it details a battered but still functioning economy, ongoing government operations, and continued regional influence. The administration’s own actions—imposing new sanctions and seeking international cooperation—suggest that Iran remains a significant actor on the world stage, not a state in total collapse.

Conclusion

Trump’s social media post exaggerates the extent of Iran’s economic crisis. While U.S. sanctions have undeniably inflicted serious damage, Iran’s government and economy have not collapsed. The administration’s continued focus on sanctions and diplomatic maneuvering underscores the complexity of the situation and the limits of Trump’s narrative. Readers should approach such sweeping claims with caution and look to the facts on the ground for a more accurate picture.

Source article

Source: https://www.pbs.org/newshour/world/watch-bessent-announces-new-round-of-iran-sanctions

Trump Lays It on the Line for Darline Graham Ahead of South Carolina Runoff

NYT > U.S. > Politics — 2026-08-24 12:59:00 — www.nytimes.com

Trump Ramps Up Pressure in South Carolina Senate Runoff, Stakes His Political Clout on Darline Graham

In the final days before South Carolina’s high-stakes Republican Senate runoff, President Trump has gone all-in for Senator Darline Graham, making personal calls to top state officials and rallying supporters in Myrtle Beach. Trump’s efforts include urging endorsements from influential figures and deploying his advisers’ super PAC, MAGA Inc., to fund get-out-the-vote text messages—an unusual move for the group this election cycle.

Trump’s credibility is on the line in a state that has recently rebuffed his preferences. Earlier this year, South Carolina’s Republican-led State Senate declined to advance a congressional map backed by Trump that would have eliminated the state’s only majority Black district. In June, voters dismissed Trump’s initial pick for governor, forcing him to make a late-stage second endorsement. With several high-profile losses in other states, Trump’s national endorsement record is under scrutiny, and a defeat for Graham would be a significant setback.

At a Myrtle Beach rally, Trump defended Graham’s lack of foreign policy experience, telling the crowd, “You know, she’s never done it before, but she knows politics well. But she loves our military; she loves things that have to do with greatness for America.” His remarks came after Graham admitted during a televised debate that she was “not that informed on national security,” a moment that drew criticism and skepticism from voters and local officials.

Despite Trump’s push, there is visible resistance among South Carolina’s Republican base to what some describe as “top-down” politics. State Treasurer Curtis Loftis, who backs Graham’s opponent Ralph Norman, dismissed the process as “inside establishment B.S.,” arguing that Graham’s candidacy was foisted on the state by the president and governor.

Trump’s aggressive involvement—calling Governor Henry McMaster and even reaching out to former critic Mark Sanford to seek endorsements for Graham—underscores the importance he places on this race. However, Sanford ultimately endorsed Norman, citing concerns about the nation’s financial direction.

As the runoff approaches, Trump’s heavy-handed approach is being tested in a state known for its independent-minded voters. The outcome will not only determine the Republican nominee but also serve as a referendum on Trump’s influence within the party and his ability to sway local races.

Conclusion

President Trump’s deep involvement in the South Carolina Senate runoff highlights both his determination to shape the Republican field and the limits of his political capital in a state with a tradition of resisting outside pressure. As voters head to the polls, the results will reveal whether Trump’s endorsement remains a decisive force—or if local skepticism prevails.

Source article

Source: https://www.nytimes.com/2026/08/24/us/politics/trump-graham-south-carolina-endorsement.html