A whistleblower has told the House Judiciary Committee that the Obama FBI launched an off-the-books operation targeting Donald Trump and his campaign as soon as he announced his bid for the White House in 2015.

The operation, ordered by then-FBI Director James B. Comey, predicated the Crossfire Hurricane operation. According to an FBI agent involved in the clandestine criminal investigation, Comey sent two female FBI undercover agents to infiltrate Trumps 2016 campaign at high levels, who were directed to act as “honeypots” while traveling with Trump and his campaign staff on the trail, the Washington Times reports.

According to the disclosure, which The Washington Times reviewed, the investigation differed from the later Crossfire Hurricane counterintelligence operation targeting Russian collusion. It said the early off-the-books probe was a criminal investigation targeting Mr. Trump and his 2016 presidential campaign staff.

The agent “personally knew” that Mr. Comey ordered an FBI investigation against Mr. Trump and that Mr. Comey “personally directed it,” according to the disclosure.

The whistleblower says that the investigation wasn’t targeting any specific crimes, but was more of a ‘fishing expedition’ to try and find something incriminating on Trump.

Former FBI Assistant Director Chris Swecher told the Times that if the report is true, it’s a “booming, egregious violation” of the rules governing the attorney general and the FBI.

“It’s an unpredicated infiltration of a presidential campaign which is sensitive,” he said. “It’s sensitive to the point where it would have to have been approved by the [attorney general] and … would have to be predicated. And in this case, I’m not hearing any predication. It would have to be on the books anyway, regardless.”

Unlike Crossfire Hurricane – a counterintelligence investigation into whether members of the Trump campaign coordinated, knowingly or unknowingly, with the Russian government – the earlier honeypot operation “had no predicated foundation, so Mr. Comey personally directed the investigation without creating an official case file in Sentinel or any other FBI system.”

The report claims that the undercover agents’ real targets included campaign adviser George Papadopoulos, a now-infamous figure in the Trump-Russia saga. Papadopoulos ultimately pled guilty to a single count of making false statements to the FBI about his Russian contacts—a charge that landed him 12 days in prison. But documents released later showed that he had repeatedly denied Trump campaign involvement in the 2016 hacking of the Democratic National Committee emails.

In one chilling detail, the whistleblower’s disclosure alleges that the FBI closed the secret operation only after a journalist got hold of a photograph of one of the undercover agents, threatening to publish it. In an attempt to quash the story, the FBI press office reportedly told the outlet that the photo depicted an “informant” whose life could be endangered if her identity was revealed.

One of the undercover agents was allegedly moved to the CIA to keep her out of the spotlight as a potential witness, while another FBI employee involved in the operation was promoted.

Comey, who was fired by Trump in 2017 amid controversy over the Russia probe, has yet to respond to the new allegations.

Via SchiffGold.com,

On Friday, Peter dropped another episode of the Peter Schiff Show. He comments on an IMF conference in Europe, the newsworthy BRICS conference held in Russia, and the latest political proposals made in the presidential race, namely Donald Trump floating the idea of replacing income taxes with tariffs and Kamala Harris taking aim at subscription services. 

First, Peter addresses the turbulence in mining stocks. Newmont suffered a major blow after missing earnings, and the sector in general was down this week:

“Even though gold was positive on the week, gold stocks got crushed. The GDX, which is the seniors, the biggest index, was down 5.3% on the week. … But the reason was Newmont Mining, the biggest gold company in the world and the only gold company in the S&P 500, which reported earnings after the bell on Wednesday. Newmont closed the day down 14%.

Despite this, Peter is optimistic that Newmont is still a valuable company. They slightly missed profit forecasts, but are setting new earnings records and matched revenue expectations:

“It was actually the best quarter in five years. And if you compare the quarter to the same quarter a year ago, they earned six times as much money—way more than the prior quarter. They’re still on a path to make the most money in the history of Newmont Mining, and they’re still going to have a record year for earnings. The reason the stock got killed was because they missed. They were supposed to earn 86 cents on the quarter, and they earned 81 cents—less than a 6% miss. The revenues were about in line.”

Turning to the aforementioned IMF conference, Peter lambasts Janet Yellen, who is deluded enough to think the country is in a sound fiscal position:

“[Yellen] is the secretary of the debt, not the secretary of the treasury, because we don’t have any treasury—the treasury is bare. All we got is debt. She’s basically in charge of managing the debt and getting people to buy it. What’s your plan? How are you going to convince people to buy this stuff? Janet Yellen’s response was, ‘We’re just going to make sure that we stay on a sound fiscal path.’ How do we stay on a path that we’re not even on? We left soundness decades ago. We can’t stay on anything.”

Donald Trump recently expressed openness to abolishing the income tax. Peter is likewise open to this policy, but would want Trump to slash spending accordingly:

“I would love nothing more than to go back to that tax system, but we have to do it honestly, which means we have to cancel a lot of government. We have to eliminate agencies and departments. We have to really shrink the government in order to get back to the freedom and prosperity that we had at that time, which we could have again. I think it’s very unlikely, given the politics.”

Finally, Peter turns to the major geopolitical news of the week: the BRICS summit. After adding four new members (Iran, Ethiopia, Egypt, and the UAE), the leaders of BRICS met in Russia to plan a gradual move away from the dollar. When the US continually erodes the value of the dollar and wields it against geopolitical rivals, it does make sense to consider alternative currencies:

“First of all, it makes no sense. Why should two countries that don’t use dollars transact in the dollar? Just pick one of the currencies that’s involved. You’ve got two countries that have currencies. Why involve the United States, a third party, who’s not even involved in the transaction? Why use our dollars? Use the currencies that you’re actually transacting in. And so that is the goal, for the BRICS nations to phase out the use of the US dollar and use their own currencies.” 

Peter recently attended the New Orleans Investment Conference, where he appeared on the Market Misbehavior podcast with David Keller. Check it out!

In continuing signs that the U.S. consumer is tapped, Nissan is planning on cutting production of its main U.S. models by 30%, according to a new report from Nikkei, which says the cuts could jeopardize the automaker’s 2024 global sales targets. 

Nissan forecasts a 99% drop in quarterly operating profit to 995 million yen ($6.52 million) and a 12% decline to 500 billion yen for the year, citing weakening U.S. market earnings, the report says.

The company’s target of 3.65 million vehicles sold for 2024 is now at risk, it says. 

Nikkei reports that Since September, Nissan has gradually reduced production, notifying dealerships and suppliers. Its North American unit confirmed inventory adjustments for key models. 

Production of the Rogue SUV, accounting for 30% of U.S. sales, and the Frontier pickup (10%) is being cut. The Rogue is manufactured in Smyrna, Tennessee, and the Frontier in Canton, Mississippi. Those two plants collectively reduced output by 40,000 vehicles in September and October. Initially planned through October, these cuts now extend to December.

In the July-September quarter, Nissan’s U.S. sales dipped 2%, with gasoline-only Rogue sales dropping 20%. September U.S. production fell 24% year-over-year, impacting Rogue units built both in the U.S. and Fukuoka, Japan.

With electric vehicle demand softening but hybrid interest rising, Nissan faces competitive pressure from Toyota and Honda, both of which offer hybrids in the U.S. Inventory days have ballooned to 100 days for Nissan, compared to Toyota’s 30 and Honda’s 50, prompting Nissan to increase sales incentives, adding 30% above industry averages.

Nissan aimed to stabilize inventories by September and cut costs with new models, yet sales for April-September fell 4% globally, totaling 1.59 million vehicles.

The ongoing U.S. market decline suggests Nissan may need to revise its full-year forecast again. North American struggles include slow EV rollout and stalled plans for new EV production at the Canton plant, which has been postponed indefinitely, the report concluded. 

Via SchiffGold.com,

The presidential election is on November 5th, and radical economic promises abound. The very next day, the Fed will meet to decide on more interest rate cuts. Gold and silver are holding all-time highs. With all these factors and more, after Halloween, we will see just how spooky things can get for the US economy.

Markets are trying to figure out who will win the election.

• “Trump Trade” advocates think that a second Trump administration is coming, and a bullish indicator as his promises for deregulation and lower corporate taxes come to fruition.

• Contrasted with Kamala Harris’s constitutionally questionable plan to give handouts to African-Americans as her support with the demographic wanes, markets appear to prefer the former

…but as Peter Schiff recently pointed out on his podcast, bullish market sentiment doesn’t mean the economy is in good shape. 

It’s in big trouble regardless of who wins. While Trump is more likely to reduce the size of the government, neither candidate seems likely to fully reverse our staggering budget deficits. We have low interest rates and a growing economy, but a completely dead manufacturing base and a commercial real estate market that’s teetering on the brink. Trump has promised to eliminate the income tax and replace it with tariffs, but you can’t do that in a country that doesn’t produce anything. As Peter Schiff said:

“It’s not like all these companies are going to start manufacturing in America–they can’t. Because if they manufactured in America, the prices would be so high that they couldn’t sell the product. That’s why they left in the first place. They left to stay competitive. And…if they come back under the current environment, they won’t be. So we need massive deregulation.”

US Manufacturing Employees Since 1970, US Bureau of Labor Statistics

In Japan, the dovish new Japanese prime minister is reversing his previous position and signaling that Japan shouldn’t raise interest rates. The dying yen carry trade has momentarily reincarnated since imploding in August amidst tremendous yen volatility and crashing Japanese equities. However, it isn’t the prime minister’s choice to raise rates or not, and of course, politicians make all kinds of comments during election season. Japanese central bank governor Kazuo Ueda was classically vague about which direction the Bank of Japan would go in the coming months.

Even after the Fed slashed the federal funds rate, and is expected to cut further, mortgage rates are still stubbornly up. The 10-year Treasury Yield has ticked higher this month, and combined with high inflation, mortgage rates are responding. Even with a lower cost of borrowing, out of control inflation will keep getting worse with more rate cuts, as borrowing becomes more attractive even as goods and services become less and less affordable.

10-Year Treasury Yields, 2023-2024 (MacroTrends.net)

With the Fed’s interest rate-cutting bonanza and a money supply that has risen for 11 straight months, higher inflation is a guarantee for cash-strapped and over-indebted consumers who are already stretched thin — regardless of what happens to Japanese yen and in the US election.

The inflationary period in 1970 came after a two-year lag in money supply growth, portending a massive decline in the dollar’s purchasing power in the next 24 months no matter who wins this November.

The spooky economy will just keep getting spookier. And unfortunately, neither Kamala Harris’s plan to “invest” in African Americans, nor Trump’s plan to replace the income tax with tariffs overnight, are anywhere close to being viable solutions that can save it.

By Stefan Koopman, Senior macro strategist at Rabobank

Imagine securing a record-breaking majority, meticulously briefing every major policy shift you want to make, doing everything economists and central bankers had once begged you to do, start thinking about spending and investment in a strategic way, pre-announcing key decisions well in advance – only to emerge as a knockoff of Liz Truss.

As we outlined in our post-Budget special, there’s a straightforward diagnostic for assessing how fiscal announcements impact bond yields and exchange rates. An uptick in yields alongside a steady currency is not a ‘spooked’ market: it’s exactly what you’d expect – and what you’d want? – from fiscal loosening. And while it’s tempting to compare a yield with Germany’s, please keep in mind here that Germany and its ultra-low bund yields are NOT the benchmark for sound fiscal policy – it’s the benchmark of fiscal masochism that damages a country long-term.

So while we initially thought the Reeves’ budget might be faring better than Truss’s with the market, yesterday’s market reaction proved otherwise. Gilt yields rose sharply across the curve, more than in other G10 economies, and the currency depreciated instead of appreciated. It seems the UK bond market is still caught in a case of “post-Truss stress disorder”. The second it’s faced with a bit of uncertainty and unfamiliar territory, investors are playing it safe: de-risk first, ask questions later. Fair enough – it’s still small beer compared to what we’ve seen in 2022, but when the correlation between yields and currency flips, it’s a red flag.

That being said, we think the sell-off is overdone. Yes, the Budget implies some fiscal loosening, but only if you compare it to the Office for Budget Responsibility’s March projections. Those projections were crafted by a government that knew it was on its way out. The unrealistically deep spending cuts, reminiscent of Osborne’s severe austerity measures, were never going to fly, but do complicate the current fiscal narrative. Consider this: the OBR forecasts that the current deficit – defined as the gap between day-to-day spending (excluding capital investment) and current revenues – will shrink from £55.5bn this year to a surplus of £10.9bn in four years. Furthermore, the £100bn increase in capital spending over the parliamentary term is merely to maintain a stable ratio of public investment to GDP. Isn’t this precisely what policymakers and economists have been advocating for?

The risk of stickier inflation is not necessarily a UK problem. My colleague Elwin de Groot notes that Eurozone inflation figures yesterday confirmed what data from several member states had already flagged the other day: that core and services inflation remain relatively sticky and that food and energy inflation were the key contributors to the rebound in headline inflation to 2% y/y in October from 1.7% in September.

Some of that rebound had been expected due to a less favorable base comparison. However, food prices did rise significantly more sharply than expected (more than 7% m/m on a seasonally-adjusted annualised basis). If this does not reverse in the next month, it could be a sign that businesses have resumed the passing-on of cost increases to consumers. This would also be consistent with a pick-up in consumer spending, a hint of which we received Wednesday with the unexpected Eurozone growth pickup in Q3.

However, it is too early draw any strong conclusions yet. The key message from yesterday’s Eurozone HICP report was above all that core inflation and in particular services sector inflation remain persistent albeit gradually losing pace. Services inflation stayed put at 3.9% y/y – which has basically been the average rate since November 2023. On an annualised basis, seasonally adjusted prices rose some 3.8% m/m. As long as the economy doesn’t fall off a cliff and growth of negotiated wages remains in the range of some 3-4% (which in a relatively tight labor market usually translates to even slightly higher growth of employee compensation), services inflation is likely to remain on a path of gentle decline.

In the past two days, the market has pared back its ECB rate cut pricing for December, although it is still pricing for some 20% chance of a 50bp cut rather than a 25bp one. Since the comment made in the October ECB meeting that “everything pointed in the right direction” [for inflation], the actual October inflation data may serve as a reality check. We maintain our view of a 25bp cut in December.

In the US, PCE inflation slowed to 2.1% year-on-year in September, marking the lowest annual rate since February 2021. Core PCE inflation, however, remained steady at 2.7% for the third consecutive month, printing on the high side with a 0.254% monthly increase. Personal spending rose by 0.5%, driven not only by income growth but also by a decline in the personal saving rate, which fell to 4.6% in September. As the labor market shows signs of cooling – with fewer job openings, slower hiring, and a decrease in voluntary quits – the sustainability of this trend of under-saving is in question.

This cooler market is also exhibiting fewer inflationary pressures. The Q3 Employment Cost Index data revealed that private sector wages and salaries grew at an annualized rate of 3.1%. With a target inflation rate of 2% and trend productivity growth somewhere between 1% and 2%, wage growth at 3.1% is not inflationary and could easily justify a ‘normal’ 25 basis point cut by the Federal Reserve next week.

Performance artist Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is at it again…

Let’s first review the antics of AOC. First she staged outrage at an empty parking lot to protest Donald Trump.

You mean this @aoc lot where she staged her sadness and dismay at an empty parking lot gate? #aoc actually staged her grief in front of a gate to an empty parking lot. pic.twitter.com/pcF35lXOph

— Scott Adams (@scottadamsshow) June 28, 2019

Then she suggested she was almost raped and/or murdered on Jan. 6 despite being nowhere near the Capitol building.

AOC: I was almost rqped and kiIIed on January 6th in the Capitol building.

Reality: She wasn’t even there. pic.twitter.com/hAQuGqd2Ri

— End Wokeness (@EndWokeness) October 28, 2024

Then she faked being in handcuffs at an abortion protest.

The funniest part about this video of AOC being escorted out by Capitol Police is her pretending to be in handcuffs. She is a professional victim. pic.twitter.com/Sw4TuxEbKz

— Caleb Hull (@CalebJHull) July 19, 2022

And now, for her latest act – AOC just put out a campaign ad in “Arabic” that’s instead “Pure gibberish.”

How hard is it to ask an intern: “is this legible?”

I know team Trump doesn’t care about our lives or communities either, but at least they don’t pretend to.

— AHMED | أحمد (@ASE) October 29, 2024

As the Telegraph notes, “her Arabic campaign material features characters that have been placed in reverse order and are disconnected from each other – a fundamental mistake in Arabic script. The language’s letters should be in a smooth form from right to left.“

According to Meir Javedanfar, a professor of Iranian studies at Reichman University, “Much like her knowledge of the Middle East, the Arabic on Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez flyers is gibberish and written backwards.”

Amazing…

The Democratic Party has proven through countless lost opportunities that it doesn’t give a shit about Arab or Muslim communities, about actual Arab people, all it cares about are optics.

And even the optics, in this case, are shamefully embarrassing.

— AHMED | أحمد (@ASE) October 29, 2024

Authored by Steve Watson via Modernity,news,

President Trump has filed a $10 billion lawsuit against CBS news over its deceptive editing of Kamala Harris’ 60 Minutes interview.

Trump is accusing CBS of election interference to help Harris, with his attorneys stating “CBS’ partisan and unlawful acts of election and voter interference through malicious, deceptive, and substantial news distortion calculated to confuse, deceive, and mislead the public.”

Trump further charges that CBS was blatantly attempting “to tip the scales in favor of the Democratic Party as the heated 2024 Presidential Election — which President Trump is leading — approaches its conclusion.”

“President Trump brings this action to redress the immense harm caused to him, to his campaign, and to tens of millions of citizens in Texas and across America by CBS’s deceptive broadcasting conduct,” the lawsuit further states.

60 Minutes was caught editing Kamala’s answers in an attempt to make her sound somewhat coherent. They left her word salad answer to a question about Israel on the cutting room floor, replacing it with a completely different sentence that she said earlier in the interview.

Holy. Shit.

60 Minutes cut Kamala’s nonsense answer on Israel and replaced it with a completely seperate sentence she said earlier in the interview…

Mixing and matching questions and answers. This isn’t journalism. It’s fraud.pic.twitter.com/onXli46xL6

— Geiger Capital (@Geiger_Capital) October 8, 2024

CBS News has also refused to release the full transcript of the interview.

Trump should also file a lawsuit against Harris’ campaign for deceptively editing footage of him speaking at rallies and during interviews.

Yet again Thursday, the Kamala HQ X account posted an out of context clip of Trump talking about Liz Cheney, with a caption insinuating that he’d like to see her shot in the face.

Trump: Let’s put Liz Cheney with a rifle standing there with nine barrels shooting at her. Let’s see how she feels about it when the guns are trained on her face pic.twitter.com/DTUwgS3oWv

— Kamala HQ (@KamalaHQ) November 1, 2024

If you watch the full clip, Trump is talking about how hawkish Cheney is, and how such politicians will eagerly send young Americans to die in pointless wars while they sit in their DC offices.

CONTEXT: He’s talking about how politicians are so quick to send young Americans to die in foreign endless wars

“They’re all war hawks when they’re sitting in Washington in a nice building saying Oh gee, let’s send 10,000 troops into the mouths of the enemy.” pic.twitter.com/0FSXRntsEF

— ALX 🇺🇸 (@alx) November 1, 2024

They do the same thing daily with out of context clips of Trump, because it’s all they’ve got.

With the example above from yesterday, where Trump wasn’t even talking about abortion or women’s rights, Harris repeated the lie and CBS made it headline news:

The only people this will work on is low IQ morons, which tells you something about how the Harris campaign views American voters.

*  *  *

Your support is crucial in helping us defeat mass censorship. Please consider donating via Locals or check out our unique merch. Follow us on X @ModernityNews.

Authored by Mary Man via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

Billionaire John Paulson said he would work with Elon Musk to cut federal spending, particularly by reducing green energy subsidies, if appointed Treasury Secretary under Trump’s administration.

Paulson shared these comments during a Tuesday interview with The Wall Street Journal. “All of these tax subsidies for solar, for wind, inefficient, uneconomic energy sources. Eliminate that. That brings down spending,” he told the media outlet.

He specifically mentioned targeting green energy subsidies in the Inflation Reduction Act, which he referred to as the “Green New Deal.”

A staunch Trump ally and major donor to his 2016, 2020, and 2024 campaigns, Paulson is also a trustee of the conservative Manhattan Institute, chaired by fellow Wall Street executive Paul Singer. Trump has named Paulson a possible Treasury Secretary if he wins the 2024 election.

Paulson’s stance mirrors Musk’s, who claimed he could slash at least $2 trillion from the federal budget.

“Your money is being wasted,” Musk said at a Trump rally on Oct. 27 at New York’s Madison Square Garden. “We’re going to get the government off your back and out of your pocketbook.”

The $2 trillion target amounts to nearly a third of current spending, with the federal government spending $6.75 trillion in fiscal year 2024, according to the Treasury Department.

Trump mentioned that he asked Musk to lead the newly proposed Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) aimed at auditing U.S. federal agencies. Musk replied on X, saying, “I can’t wait. There is a lot of waste and needless regulation in government that needs to go.”

Neither Trump nor Musk has provided details on the specific programs they would cut.

Musk, like Paulson, is a prominent Trump supporter, campaigning with him, donating nearly $120 million to a pro-Trump super PAC, and pledging $1 million to voters who support free speech and gun rights. On Monday, Philadelphia’s district attorney asked a state judge to block Musk’s $1 million giveaway, calling it an “illegal lottery scheme.”

The Treasury Secretary manages federal finances and tax laws, often engaging with Wall Street, business leaders, and foreign dignitaries.

Paulson is among several candidates being considered for the role, alongside Scott Bessent, founder of Key Square Group and a Trump ally on Wall Street, former trade ambassador Robert Lighthizer, and former SEC Chairman Jay Clayton.

Paulson said that if nominated, he would not anticipate pushback from the Senate.

“I have good relationships with senators on both sides of the aisle. The review process is a rigorous process. That’s a hurdle that would have to be crossed before we get to the Senate. I think once we cross that review process, I wouldn’t expect opposition.” he told The Wall Street Journal.

The economy stands as the top issue for voters in the 2024 presidential election. A Gallup poll found it is the only topic over 50 percent of registered voters rated as “extremely important” in shaping their decision.

With less than one week until Election Day, polls report a close race between Vice President Kamala Harris and former President Donald Trump in seven key battleground states, with Trump holding a slight national lead, according to RealClearPolitics.

From NTD News

Dividend stocks have historically shown growth, even during periods of recession.

In this graphic, Visual Capitalist’s Bruno Venditti showcases the top 15 ‘Dividend Kings’ in 2024, as identified by FinanceCharts, based on data available as of October 2024.

What Makes a Company a Dividend King?

A key benefit of investing in dividend-paying companies is that dividends typically grow steadily, with well-established firms often increasing payouts annually.

Dividend Kings are companies that have increased their dividends annually for more than 50 years.

Dividend Royalty

Altria Group offers the highest dividend yield at 8.18%. Formerly known as Philip Morris, the American corporation is one of the world’s largest producers and marketers of tobacco, cigarettes, and medical products for treating smoking-related illnesses.

Altria is followed by Universal, another tobacco company. The leading global supplier of leaf tobacco offers a dividend yield of 6.5%.

Northwest Natural Holding ranks third in our list. The company provides natural gas service to approximately two million people in Oregon and Southwest Washington.

Genuine Parts and Northwest Natural have the longest dividend-raising streaks on our list, both at 68 years.

Learn More on the Voronoi App 

To learn more about personal finances, check out this graphic on the cost of the American dream in 2024.

Authored by Jacob Burg via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

Nearly half (48 percent) of Generation Z voters and 23 percent of U.S. voters overall have lied about their voting preferences this year to people close to them, according to a recent Axios Vibes survey conducted by The Harris Poll.

The poll, which surveyed 1,858 registered voters online between Oct. 22 and 24, found that 58 percent of overall voters say their preferences are a private matter, with 33 percent saying they aren’t close to certain family members due to different political beliefs. For Gen Z voters—aged between 18 and 27—that number is 44 percent, and for Millennials (aged 28–43), that number is 47 percent.

The survey found that those who came of age during the Trump era are seemingly more sensitive to perceived social pressure and judgment from friends or family.

“There’s a new privacy emerging here, where it’s far more convenient to either lie or not talk about it,” said John Gerzema, CEO of The Harris Poll. “The new social etiquette is to be like Switzerland: Why do you want that heat?”

Among Generation X voters, those born between 1965 and 1980, 17 percent said they had lied to someone close about who they were voting for this year, while 6 percent of those born before 1965 said the same. Another 22 percent of overall voters said they would potentially lie about their voting preferences this year.

Across the political spectrum, 27 percent of Democrats, 24 percent of Republicans, and 20 percent of independent voters said they’ve lied about who they are voting for.

The survey did not ask respondents why they had lied or to whom they had lied.

Gerzema said the toxicity of political polarization has pushed many Americans into self-censoring or lying about voter preferences to maintain social, familial, and workplace relationships. Those raised on smartphones tend to be more averse to social or workplace confrontations over politics and may lie about who they’re voting for to avoid an awkward altercation, Gerzema said.

The Axios Vibes survey also found that 30 percent of men had said they lied about who they voted for compared to 17 percent of women, suggesting that some could be silent supporters of either Trump or Harris amid social pressure to vote for either candidate.

The survey found 40 percent of voters said they’re waiting until election day to vote, in case there is a change in the final week, with 8 percent saying it would be a “gut decision” at the voting booth.

The economy remains the key concern among voters when choosing a candidate, according to a Gallup poll released on Oct. 9. It shows that 52 percent of voters, surveyed in the last two weeks of September, said that the economy was “extremely important” when determining their choice for president, while another 38 percent saw it as “very important.”