Frankly Speaking: Does the Arab American vote matter?

Short Url
Updated 22 October 2024
Follow

Frankly Speaking: Does the Arab American vote matter?

DUBAI: As the US presidential election looms, a YouGov poll commissioned by Arab News has revealed a near-even split between former president Donald Trump and Vice President Kamala Harris among Arab American voters. This result may surprise some, but according to a prominent Arab American analyst of Middle East affairs, it reflects the general sentiment among the US public, where key constituencies in swing states will determine the next occupant of the White House.

“Clearly, we see that the Arab American public generally reflects the same trend here as the American public because so many of these Arab Americans are not newly naturalized,” Firas Maksad, a senior fellow at the Washington-based Middle East Institute, said on the Arab News weekly current affairs show “Frankly Speaking.”

The YouGov survey results suggest that the Israeli war in Gaza and other events in the Middle East weigh strongly on the mind of the average Arab American voter. “But at the end of the day, it’s American Arab rather than Arab American,” Maksad said. “They have to vote based on bread-and-butter issues, the well-being of their families, the issues that impact them at home, rather than have an impact overseas. That’s not surprising.

“They are second, third, fourth-generation Arab Americans. Some of them came here in the mid-1800s. And so, they very much reflect the general sentiment in the American population.”

He added: “When asked point-blank about the significance of Gaza, most Arab Americans rank it as the top issue. However, that doesn’t seem to reflect in their overall choice. You would expect that not so many of them would be voting for President Trump, who was so clearly pro-Israel, who moved the American Embassy to Jerusalem and allowed Israel to annex the occupied Golan Heights,” Maksad said.

“There might be some tension between what Arab Americans say when asked what they think about Palestine, and the fact that they are also Americans who have their livelihood to worry about, the economy being chief among them, but also things like immigration. For so many women, also issues relating to their reproductive rights and abortion.”

Historically, the Arab vote has had little impact on the results of US elections. But is that still the case or has something changed? “That’s not the case,” Maksad said, “because of where they (Arab American voters) are, where that constituency is. States like Michigan that are going to be crucial, but even in Georgia, a significant population. Close to where I am in Washington, D.C. is Virginia, and there is a significant Arab population there in northern Virginia,” he said.

Read our full coverage here: US Elections 2024: What Arab Americans want

Indeed, elections that hinge on narrow margins make smaller constituencies like Arab Americans vital to either party’s success. Their impact in key states is magnified when considering the razor-thin victories in recent elections. The race in many states is so tight that “the margin is 0.5 percent one way or the other,” Maksad told Katie Jensen, host of “Frankly Speaking.”

He added: “So, that makes the Arab American vote a crucial one, a crucial constituency to win. We see that reflected in the positions of the various campaigns and the efforts to cater to, and to win over, that segment of the population.”




Firas Maksad unpacked the YouGov survey findings with ‘Frankly Speaking’ host Katie Jensen. (AN photo)

Maksad added that the “willingness and excitement” of Arab Americans to vote, “far exceeding” that of the general population, is a “sign of health that the Arab American community is engaged in the democratic process here in the US, particularly when there are concerns about discrimination and racism.”

Some 40 percent of Arab Americans who were surveyed by YouGov considered themselves Democrats while 28 percent were Republicans. Yet a slim majority was going to vote for Trump.

“The question has been out there as to whether some of this is a protest vote against the Biden-Harris ticket or team for their inability or lack of a political will to rein in Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu,” Maksad said.

“But, again, what’s sort of puzzling about this is that if this is a protest vote, you wouldn’t necessarily vote for Trump because he is even more pro-Israeli for all the reasons that we’ve already discussed. You would go through a third party candidate like the Greens. So, I don’t know how much of that can be prescribed to what has unfolded in the Middle East.”

Maksad said that factors such as immigration and the economy need to be taken into account, too. “Immigration seemed to very interestingly rank very high on the minds of Arab Americans, which honestly, as an immigrant myself, I was not completely surprised by because those who immigrated here legally and went through the process, and paid the taxes, tend to feel pretty strongly about those who are cutting in line and not paying their fair share,” he said.

“So, illegal immigration here, which often plays in favor of Trump rather than Harris, could also be a factor.”

Looking ahead, Maksad said that a snapshot look at the latest US opinion polls suggested that the Trump campaign is gaining momentum. So, what would a Trump win mean for the Middle East?

“The sense, whether rightfully or wrongfully, is that President Trump is a much more forceful figure, particularly when it comes to the Middle East. Everybody here recalls the Abraham Accords (between Israel and several Arab countries), which many did not think were possible,” he said.

“There’s that sense then, this promise that President Trump has kept repeating that he will end those wars, whether it’s the war in Ukraine or the war in Gaza. We will have to see whether he will make good on that promise.

“Whether he will be able to bring Netanyahu to heel on issues that the US wants to … is an open question.”


Jury orders Tesla to pay more than $240 million in Florida Autopilot crash case

Updated 02 August 2025
Follow

Jury orders Tesla to pay more than $240 million in Florida Autopilot crash case

  • Jury held that Tesla bore significant responsibility because its technology failed and that not all the blame can be put on a reckless driver
  • Decision comes as Musk seeks to convince buyers that his cars are safe enough to drive on their own as he plans to roll out a driverless taxi service

MIAMI: A Miami jury decided that Elon Musk’s car company Tesla was partly responsible for a deadly crash in Florida involving its Autopilot driver assist technology and must pay the victims more than $240 million in damages.
The federal jury held that Tesla bore significant responsibility because its technology failed and that not all the blame can be put on a reckless driver, even one who admitted he was distracted by his cellphone before hitting a young couple out gazing at the stars. The decision comes as Musk seeks to convince Americans his cars are safe enough to drive on their own as he plans to roll out a driverless taxi service in several cities in the coming months.
The decision ends a four-year long case remarkable not just in its outcome but that it even made it to trial. Many similar cases against Tesla have been dismissed and, when that didn’t happen, settled by the company to avoid the spotlight of a trial.
“This will open the floodgates,” said Miguel Custodio, a car crash lawyer not involved in the Tesla case. “It will embolden a lot of people to come to court.”

A Tesla Model S car is seen in a showroom in Santa Monica, California, on January 4, 2018. (REUTERS/File Photo)

The case also included startling charges by lawyers for the family of the deceased, 22-year-old, Naibel Benavides Leon, and for her injured boyfriend, Dillon Angulo. They claimed Tesla either hid or lost key evidence, including data and video recorded seconds before the accident. Tesla said it made a mistake after being shown the evidence and honestly hadn’t thought it was there.
“We finally learned what happened that night, that the car was actually defective,” said Benavides’ sister, Neima Benavides. “Justice was achieved.”
Tesla has previously faced criticism that it is slow to cough up crucial data by relatives of other victims in Tesla crashes, accusations that the car company has denied. In this case, the plaintiffs showed Tesla had the evidence all along, despite its repeated denials, by hiring a forensic data expert who dug it up.
“Today’s verdict is wrong,” Tesla said in a statement, “and only works to set back automotive safety and jeopardize Tesla’s and the entire industry’s efforts to develop and implement lifesaving technology,” They said the plaintiffs concocted a story ”blaming the car when the driver – from day one – admitted and accepted responsibility.”
In addition to a punitive award of $200 million, the jury said Tesla must also pay $43 million of a total $129 million in compensatory damages for the crash, bringing the total borne by the company to $243 million.
“It’s a big number that will send shock waves to others in the industry,” said financial analyst Dan Ives of Wedbush Securities. “It’s not a good day for Tesla.”
Tesla said it will appeal.
Even if that fails, the company says it will end up paying far less than what the jury decided because of a pre-trial agreement that limits punitive damages to three times Tesla’s compensatory damages. Translation: $172 million, not $243 million. But the plaintiff says their deal was based on a multiple of all compensatory damages, not just Tesla’s, and the figure the jury awarded is the one the company will have to pay.
It’s not clear how much of a hit to Tesla’s reputation for safety the verdict in the Miami case will make. Tesla has vastly improved its technology since the crash on a dark, rural road in Key Largo, Florida, in 2019.
But the issue of trust generally in the company came up several times in the case, including in closing arguments Thursday. The plaintiffs’ lead lawyer, Brett Schreiber, said Tesla’s decision to even use the term Autopilot showed it was willing to mislead people and take big risks with their lives because the system only helps drivers with lane changes, slowing a car and other tasks, falling far short of driving the car itself.
Schreiber said other automakers use terms like “driver assist” and “copilot” to make sure drivers don’t rely too much on the technology.
“Words matter,” Schreiber said. “And if someone is playing fast and lose with words, they’re playing fast and lose with information and facts.”
Schreiber acknowledged that the driver, George McGee, was negligent when he blew through flashing lights, a stop sign and a T-intersection at 62 miles an hour before slamming into a Chevrolet Tahoe that the couple had parked to get a look at the stars.
The Tahoe spun around so hard it was able to launch Benavides 75 feet through the air into nearby woods where her body was later found. It also left Angulo, who walked into the courtroom Friday with a limp and cushion to sit on, with broken bones and a traumatic brain injury.
But Schreiber said Tesla was at fault nonetheless. He said Tesla allowed drivers to act recklessly by not disengaging the Autopilot as soon as they begin to show signs of distraction and by allowing them to use the system on smaller roads that it was not designed for, like the one McGee was driving on.
“I trusted the technology too much,” said McGee at one point in his testimony. “I believed that if the car saw something in front of it, it would provide a warning and apply the brakes.”
The lead defense lawyer in the Miami case, Joel Smith, countered that Tesla warns drivers that they must keep their eyes on the road and hands on the wheel yet McGee chose not to do that while he looked for a dropped cellphone, adding to the danger by speeding. Noting that McGee had gone through the same intersection 30 or 40 times previously and hadn’t crashed during any of those trips, Smith said that isolated the cause to one thing alone: “The cause is that he dropped his cellphone.”
The auto industry has been watching the case closely because a finding of Tesla liability despite a driver’s admission of reckless behavior would pose significant legal risks for every company as they develop cars that increasingly drive themselves.
 


Markets dive after Trump hits more countries with steep tariffs

Updated 5 min 34 sec ago
Follow

Markets dive after Trump hits more countries with steep tariffs

  • Global shares stumbled, with Europe’s STOXX 600 tumbling 1.89 percent on the day

ZURICH/WASHINGTON: US President Donald Trump’s latest wave of tariffs on exports from dozens of trading partners sent global stock markets tumbling on Friday and countries and companies scrambling to seek ways to strike better deals.
As Trump presses ahead with plans to reorder the global economy with the highest tariff rates since the early 1930s, Switzerland, “stunned” by 39 percent tariffs, sought more talks, as did India, hit with a 25 percent rate.
New tariffs also include a 35 percent duty on many goods from Canada, 50 percent for Brazil, 20 percent for Taiwan, which said its rate was “temporary” and it expected to reach a lower figure.
The presidential order listed higher import duty rates of 10 percent to 41 percent starting in a week’s time for 69 trading partners, taking the US effective tariff rate to about 18 percent, from 2.3 percent last year, according to analysts at Capital Economics.
US stocks reeled. The Dow Jones Industrial Average closed down 1.23 percent at 43,588.58, the S&P 500 1.6 percent to 6,238.01 and the Nasdaq Composite 2.24 percent at 20,650.13.
Global shares stumbled, with Europe’s STOXX 600 tumbling 1.89 percent on the day.

Markets also reacted to a disappointing jobs report. Data showed US job growth slowed more than expected in July while the prior month’s data was revised sharply lower, pointing to a slowdown in the labor market.
Trump responded by ordering the firing of the commissioner of the Labor Department’s Bureau of Labor Statistics, Erika McEntarfer, and claiming, without evidence, that the job figures were “rigged.”
Meanwhile, Canadian negotiators said a deal with the US could still be weeks away.
Trump’s new tariffs have created yet more uncertainty, with many details unclear. They are set to take effect on Aug 7 at 0401 GMT, a White House official said.
Trump administration officials defended the president’s approach. “The uncertainty with respect to tariffs ... was critical to getting the leverage that we needed to create the circumstance in which the president could create the trade deals we’ve seen over the last few weeks, which have been nothing short of monumental,” Council of Economic Advisers Chair Stephen Miran said on CNBC.
The European Union, which struck a framework deal with Trump on Sunday, is still awaiting more Trump orders to deliver on agreed carve-outs, including on cars and aircraft, EU officials said, saying the latest executive orders did not cover that.
Also, it is unclear how the administration intends to define and police the transshipment restrictions, which threaten 40 percent levies on any exporter deemed to have tried to mask goods from a higher-tariffed originator, such as China, as their own product.
Trump’s tariff rollout also comes amid evidence they have begun driving up prices.
US Commerce Department data released Thursday showed prices for home furnishings and durable household equipment jumped 1.3 percent in June, the biggest gain since March 2022.

NO WINNERS?
Some countries hit with hefty tariffs said they will seek to negotiate with the US in hopes of getting a lower rate.
Switzerland said it would push for a “negotiated solution” with the US
“It’s a massive shock for the export industry and for the whole country. We are really stunned,” said Jean-Philippe Kohl, deputy director of Swissmem, representing Switzerland’s mechanical and electrical engineering industries.
South Africa’s Trade Minister Parks Tau said he was seeking “real, practical interventions” to defend jobs and the economy against the 30 percent US tariff it faces.
Southeast Asian countries, however, breathed a sigh of relief after the US tariffs on their exports that were lower than threatened and leveled the playing field with a rate of about 19 percent across the region’s biggest economies.
Thailand’s finance minister said a reduction from 36 percent to 19 percent would help his country’s economy.
“It helps maintain Thailand’s competitiveness on the global stage, boosts investor confidence and opens the door to economic growth, increased income and new opportunities,” Pichai Chunhavajira said.
Australian products could become more competitive in the US market, helping businesses boost exports, Trade Minister Don Farrell said, after Trump kept the minimum tariff rate of 10 percent for Australia.
But businesses and analysts said the impact of Trump’s new trade regime would not be positive for economic growth.
“No real winners in trade conflicts,” said Thomas Rupf, co-head Singapore and CIO Asia at VP Bank. “Despite some countries securing better terms, the overall impact is negative.”
“The tariffs hurt the Americans and they hurt us,” winemaker Johannes Selbach said in Germany’s Moselle Valley, adding jobs and profits on both sides of the Atlantic would be hit.
L’Oreal and a growing number of European fashion and cosmetics companies are exploring use of an obscure, decades-old US customs clause known as the “First Sale” rule as a potential way to soften the impact of the tariffs.
The “First Sale” rule allows companies to pay lower duties by applying tariffs to the value of a product as it leaves the factory — much lower than the eventual retail price.

CANADA, INDIA
Trump has tapped emergency powers, pressured foreign leaders, and pressed ahead with trade policies that sparked a market sell-off when they were first announced in April.
His order said some trading partners, “despite having engaged in negotiations, have offered terms that, in my judgment, do not sufficiently address imbalances in our trading relationship or have failed to align sufficiently with the United States on economic and national-security matters.”
Trump issued a separate order for Canada that raises the rate on Canadian goods subject to fentanyl-related tariffs to 35 percent, from 25 percent previously, saying Canada had “failed to cooperate” in curbing illicit narcotics flows into the US
The higher tariffs on Canadian goods contrasted sharply with Trump’s decision to grant Mexico a 90-day reprieve from higher tariffs of 30 percent on many goods to allow time to negotiate a broader trade pact.
Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney said he was disappointed by Trump’s decision, and vowed to take action to protect Canadian jobs and diversify exports.
India is in trade talks with the US after Washington imposed a 25 percent tariff on New Delhi, a move that could impact about $40 billion worth of its exports, an Indian government source with knowledge of the talks told Reuters on Friday.

 


Trump says he has heard India will stop buying Russian oil

Updated 02 August 2025
Follow

Trump says he has heard India will stop buying Russian oil

WASHINGTON: US President Donald Trump said on Friday he had heard that India would no longer be buying oil from Russia.

(Developing story)

 


Trump admits that firing the central bank chief would destabilize the market

Updated 02 August 2025
Follow

Trump admits that firing the central bank chief would destabilize the market

WASHINGTON: US President Donald Trump said on Friday that Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell will “most likely” stay in his position even as Trump sharply criticized the Federal Reserve’s policies.

In an interview with Newsmax that aired on Friday, Trump said he would remove Powell “in a heartbeat” and said the Fed’s interest rate was too high but added that others have said Powell’s removal would “disturb the market.”
“He gets out in seven or eight months and I’ll put somebody else in,” Trump said. 

In a post on his Truth Socia platform earlier, Trump said “Powell should resign, just like Adriana Kugler, a Biden Appointee, resigned.” 


Jeffrey Epstein’s former girlfriend, Ghislaine Maxwell, is transferred to a prison camp in Texas

Updated 8 min 52 sec ago
Follow

Jeffrey Epstein’s former girlfriend, Ghislaine Maxwell, is transferred to a prison camp in Texas

  • Ghislaine Maxwell’s case has been the subject of heightened public focus since an outcry over the Justice Department’s statement last month saying that it would not be releasing any additional documents from the Epstein sex trafficking investigation

WASHINGTON: Jeffrey Epstein’s former girlfriend, Ghislaine Maxwell, has been moved from a federal prison in Florida to a prison camp in Texas as her criminal case generates renewed public attention.
The federal Bureau of Prisons said Friday that Maxwell had been transferred to Bryan, Texas, but did not explain the circumstances. Her attorney, David Oscar Markus, also confirmed the move but declined to discuss the reasons for it.
Maxwell was convicted in 2021 of luring teenage girls to be sexually abused by the disgraced financier, and was sentenced to 20 years in prison. She had been held at a low-security prison in Tallahassee, Florida, until her transfer to the prison camp in Texas, where other inmates include Theranos founder Elizabeth Holmes and Jen Shah of “The Real Housewives of Salt Lake City.”
Minimum-security federal prison camps house inmates the Bureau of Prisons considers to be the lowest security risk. Some don’t even have fences.
The prison camps were originally designed with low security to make operations easier and to allow inmates tasked with performing work at the prison, like landscaping and maintenance, to avoid repeatedly checking in and out of a main prison facility.

Prosecutors have said Epstein’s sex crimes could not have been done without Maxwell, but her lawyers have maintained that she was wrongly prosecuted and denied a fair trial, and have floated the idea of a pardon from President Donald Trump. They have also asked the US Supreme Court to take up her case.
Maxwell’s case has been the subject of heightened public focus since an outcry over the Justice Department’s statement last month saying that it would not be releasing any additional documents from the Epstein sex trafficking investigation. The decision infuriated online sleuths, conspiracy theorists and elements of Trump’s base who had hoped to see proof of a government cover-up.
Since then, administration officials have tried to cast themselves as promoting transparency in the case, including by requesting from courts the unsealing of grand jury transcripts.
Maxwell, meanwhile, was interviewed at a Florida courthouse over two days last week by Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche and the House Oversight Committee had also said that it wanted to speak with Maxwell. Her lawyers said this week that they would be open to an interview but only if the panel were to ensure immunity from prosecution.
In a letter Friday to Maxwell’s lawyers, Rep. James Comer, the committee chair, wrote that the committee was willing to delay the deposition until after the resolution of Maxwell’s appeal to the Supreme Court. That appeal is expected to be resolved in late September.
Comer wrote that while Maxwell’s testimony was “vital” to the Republican-led investigation into Epstein, the committee would not provide immunity or any questions in advance of her testimony, as was requested by her team.