Politics

Poll: Here’s how much Trump voters would pay in taxes to back his policies

Published

8 months ago

November 8, 2025

President Donald Trump’s supporters are willing to take a financial hit in order to support his policies, according to a new poll from Blue Light News and Public First.

Democrats are also willing to shoulder economic pain to oppose Trump — though they’re not willing to go as far as Republicans.

In a polling experiment, Blue Light News and Public First modeled how Trump can shape voters’ opinions of legislation that would cost or save them money. The typical Trump supporter would overlook having to pay about $65 more per month in taxes to back their leader, while anti-Trump voters would forego about $33 in savings if it meant opposing Trump’s agenda.

The findings demonstrate the role of partisanship in shaping public opinion about policy, and they reveal a dynamic that observers have long noted: The loyalty of Trump’s base, and the dedication of his opposition, sometimes seem to overpower voters’ apparent self-interest. Eventually, however, partisans on both sides had their limits.

Questions of economic burden and partisan loyalty were at the forefront of U.S. politics this week, with voters across several states repudiating Trump and his party and electing Democrats by enormous margins. Many of the Democratic winners, including in New Jersey and Virginia, campaigned on voters’ anger about the high cost of essentials such as energy prices, housing and health care.

The Blue Light News Poll results are a reminder that — while many of Trump’s supporters have a reputation for intense loyalty — they also have a breaking point. And Tuesday’s election results suggest that despite Republican voters’ willingness to pay a literal price for Trump’s policies, the Trump agenda to date may have pushed voters too far.

The poll sought to measure just how much Trump’s stances on potential legislation affected voters’ views.

The polling experiment was designed to solve a common problem with issue polling: There is often a gap between voters’ views on something when they initially hear about it, and how they feel about that same issue once it becomes politicized. Poll respondents may say they support a particular policy, but feel differently if a politician they like comes out against it.

“One of the main challenges pollsters face is how to poll something after a politician has announced it. By that point, it can be impossible to separate genuine support for the policy, from support for the politician, from support for the arguments being made for and against it,” said Seb Wride, head of polling at Public First. “To counter this, we cut out all the substance of the announcement, and looked just at how quantifiable impacts and statements of partisan support cancel each other out.”

Respondents were given a choice between two hypothetical bills. They were described not in terms of specific policies, but in terms of effects: The impact on their personal income taxes, the number of jobs in their state and the price of a dozen eggs.

Survey respondents were also told whether Trump, Republican lawmakers and Democratic lawmakers supported or opposed each bill.

After giving several variations of bills to thousands of survey respondents, we had tens of thousands of data points on voters’ preferences — enough to model out how respondents’ support for the hypothetical legislation was influenced by the approval of Trump and lawmakers.

The results were clear: There’s a real Trump endorsement effect on support for a bill.

The median Trump voter would choose a bill that would cost them $65 in monthly taxes if Trump also favored it, over a bill that saved them on taxes but did not have Trump’s support.

The trend was similar with other metrics. Trump voters were also willing to back bills that resulted in up to about 2,000 lost jobs in their state or a $1.14 increase in egg prices, provided that Trump was supportive.

For 2024 Trump voters, the president’s support was uniquely powerful. Republican lawmakers’ endorsement also had an impact with those voters, but it had less than half the power of Trump’s. Controlling for Trump’s support, GOP respondents were only willing to accept a $27 monthly tax increase for a bill backed by Republican lawmakers.

And Trump voters did not care what Democratic lawmakers thought of a bill; Democrats’ support for a bill did not move Trump voters’ positions in any statistically significant way.

Voters who had cast their ballots for former Vice President Harris in 2024 had the opposite response.

The median Harris voter would give up tax breaks to oppose Trump’s agenda, only favoring a bill backed by Trump if it decreased their monthly taxes by $33 or more.

Those Democratic voters were also willing to miss out on the creation of more than 1,000 jobs in their states, or a 40-cent cut in the price of a dozen eggs, because of Trump’s support for a bill.

Harris voters, on the other hand, were amenable to Democratic-backed legislation that increased their taxes by $61, compared to an alternative bill that did not have Democratic support. For Trump voters, the effect of Democratic lawmakers supporting a bill was not statistically significant.

Politics

When a World Cup exit becomes a political crisis

Published

7 hours ago

July 3, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

Many of the countries that failed to advance in the World Cup are seeing the normal cycle of accountability: angry fans, finger-pointing media, fired coaches. Uruguay’s sports officials have gone further, reportedly cancelling a team charter plane and making players take commercial flights home as a form of punishment. In Turkey, where a stunning crash-out was greeted with rage from many fans, the nation’s football boss has asked the justice minister to imprison citizens who criticize the team.

Yet nowhere have the political recriminations gone further than in South Korea, where the president has called on the Ministry of Culture, Sports and Tourism to investigate the country’s failure to advance to the round of 32, one of South Korea’s most disappointing World Cup campaigns in decades.

“I feel not just confusion but utter bewilderment at this unexpected outcome,” President Lee Jae Myung wrote on X on Sunday. “I am deeply sorry for causing such profound disappointment to the public over this absurd affair. We will swiftly push forward with reforms to sports administration to ensure such a thing never happens again.”

The issue at hand is clear, according to Lee’s post: “When favoritism and cronyism take precedence over competence in selecting a commander, the result is as predictable as fire burning paper,” he wrote — pointing back to head coach Hong Myung-bo’s controversial appointment in July 2024.

The selection of Hong sparked speculation about favoritism because the Korea Football Association abruptly selected him after months of pursuing foreign candidates. Critics questioned the transparency of the hiring process, and a government audit later found that the KFA had violated several of its own hiring procedures, fueling allegations of preferential treatment. The audit, however, did not conclude that Hong himself had acted improperly, and Hong himself denied receiving special treatment.

Ultimately, Hong remained as head coach because the authorities concluded that while the appointment process was procedurally flawed, there was no legal basis to cancel his contract. But it explains why the public’s criticism against their national soccer team has been so concentrated on the coach, whom many view as an illegitimate appointment. Hong has already announced his resignation, but that hasn’t soothed the ire of Korean fans. Many believe that the results would have been different if a coach had been selected through a proper hiring process — and it seems the president may believe so as well.

While the political repercussions of South Korea’s team losing may seem shocking, it isn’t an unreasonable overstep: Public funds account for about 30 percent of KFA’s budget. In addition, one of the defining goals of Lee’s presidency has been to strengthen transparency and accountability in both private and public sectors, which is why the opaque procedures of KFA were more likely to catch the administration’s eye. Despite Korea’s political divisions, lawmakers from across the political spectrum have voiced their common desire to reform KFA.

While South Korea is the most far-reaching example of political fallout from a World Cup exit, it is not the only country where politicians have become involved in the messy aftermath. In Turkey, football federation president İbrahim Hacıosmanoğlu reportedly called on Justice Minister Yılmaz Tunç to prosecute fans who insulted the national team following its elimination.

The incident also came after the national team’s official account shared a promotional video from President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan’s ruling Justice and Development Party, prompting accusations that the federation had blurred the line between sport and politics. The team’s elimination only deepened that political entanglement.

The two cases reflect different understandings of accountability, but with one common denominator: the belief that the World Cup is more than just a run-of-the-mill sporting event.

Politics

The European sports host with the most

Published

7 hours ago

July 3, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

Switzerland is busy selling itself as a premier venue for international sports competitions — and the government is throwing its weight behind the effort.

In June, Bern backed plans to fund international sports competitions from 2027 to 2029, and two weeks ago, it approved $247 million in funding for the 2038 Winter Olympics, which it is moving toward securing the right to host.

Ruth Metzler-Arnold, president of Switzerland’s Olympic committee, said at the time that the 2038 bid “is bringing everyone together behind a concerted vision that will bolster Swiss sport in the long run and inspire generations to come.”

Switzerland already has a sizable sporting footprint. Many international sports organizations — including FIFA, the International Olympic Committee, European football governing body UEFA and the Union Cycliste Internationale — are already headquartered in the Alpine country.

In early June, the Swiss approved more than a million dollars each to support the 2027 World Rowing Championships in Lucerne and the 2028 European men’s Handball Championships in Zurich. Government money will also flow to swimming, figure skating, basketball and bobsled championships.

Switzerland is currently in a “privileged dialogue” with the IOC over its 2038 Winter Games bid, meaning that it holds exclusive rights to organize a bid until the end of next year. Karl Stoss, the chair of the IOC’s Future Host Commission ‌for the Olympic Winter Games, said in February that a host election could happen as soon as April 2027.

On the soccer field, Switzerland hosted the 2025 Women’s European Championship and co-hosted the 2008 men’s European Championship. Progress in its long-shot 2026 World Cup campaign — which continues tonight in Vancouver against Algeria — will only bolster Switzerland’s sports credentials.