Had she not become First Lady, Melania Trump might have graced the silver screen as a Bond girl – with her supermodel figure, alluring foreign accent, and head-to-toe couture. While her husband transformed from a real estate tycoon and reality TV star to the world's most powerful man, the woman beside him has her own fascinating story. As she prepares to potentially make her elegant return to the White House in Manolo Blahniks, here are some revealing facts about Melania Trump.

Father, mother, and half-brother

The 54-year-old wife of the comeback-seeking president was born Melanija Knavs in 1970 in Novo Mesto, Slovenia (then part of Yugoslavia), to a father who started as a driver before becoming a car salesman and a mother who was a fashion designer. She has one sister and a half-brother from her father's previous relationship, whom, according to reports, she never met as their father refused to acknowledge him as his son.

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Israel Hayom English (@israelhayomeng)

As a child, she participated in fashion shows and showed talent in sewing and design. Beyond her artistic abilities, she also demonstrated impressive academic skills and served as her school's treasurer.

Modeling career and nude photoshoots

With her striking features, sculpted figure, and impressive height of 5'11" - like his mother, her son Barron stands tall at 6'9" - it was almost inevitable that Melania would try modeling. She began at age 16, leading to a contract with a modeling agency and subsequently a career in Europe and the USA that included shoots for prestigious fashion magazines such as Vogue, Harper's Bazaar, and Sports Illustrated.

During her career, she appeared nude in a series of photos for GQ and Max magazines, and in what seemed like a prophetic shoot, she posed as First Lady in a 1993 fashion editorial.

Early in her modeling career, she won a beauty contest where the prize was a movie role, but she declined it after being sexually harassed by a producer. During this period, to advance her international modeling career, she changed her surname to Knauss.

The incomplete degree and language skills

Despite claims of holding an architecture degree from the University of Ljubljana in Slovenia, journalists discovered in 2016 that she dropped out after her first year of design and architecture studies. Plot twist: references to her degree were swiftly removed from her official White House biography.

Reports claimed she spoke no fewer than six languages: Slovenian, English, French, Serbian, Italian, and German. However, according to The Washington Post journalist Mary Jordan's book, people who crossed paths with her over the years alleged that she wasn't fluent in most of them, and her knowledge was limited to basic words.

First meeting with Trump

In 1998, she first met Trump at a party – at the time he was "just" a wealthy real estate magnate – and the couple began dating while he was in the midst of divorcing his second wife, Marla Maples. They got engaged in 2004 and married in 2005; marriage number three for him, number one (and still counting) for her.

In 2006, their son Barron William Trump was born. While Melania picked his middle name, Trump chose Barron – the same name he'd used as his own alias when trying to keep his identity under wraps.

The million-dollar wedding

Her 2005 wedding featured a Dior gown designed by John Galliano (which graced the cover of Vogue) with an estimated cost exceeding $200,000, taking 550 hours to create, adorned with 1,500 crystals, incorporating 92 yards of premium satin, and a 16-foot veil. It weighed over 44 pounds.

After the ceremony, she changed into a lighter dress by designer Vera Wang. She forwent a bouquet, instead holding ancient family prayer beads. She walked down the aisle to an opera soprano's rendition of "Ave Maria." The wedding ring was valued at over $1.5 million, with reports indicating the diamond was 12 carats.

The event was split into two parts: first, a ceremony at the Episcopal Church of Bethesda-by-the-Sea in Palm Beach, Florida, followed by an elaborate reception at Mar-a-Lago, Trump's resort estate, in a room costing tens of millions to construct, inspired by Louis XIV and decorated with 10,000 flowers. Among the wedding guests were Bill and Hillary Clinton, Heidi Klum, Shaquille O'Neal, Simon Cowell, Barbara Walters, and P Diddy.

Guests enjoyed a Michelin-style menu featuring caviar, shrimp, lobsters, steaks, and hundreds of bottles of premium Cristal champagne. The wedding cake stood at five feet tall, weighed 200 pounds, and was decorated with 3,000 sugar flowers soaked in Grand Marnier cream, though guests never tasted it as it remained uncut. Instead, they enjoyed an extensive dessert menu and were sent home with individual chocolate truffle cakes. A 46-piece orchestra entertained guests while first-tier singers including Elton John, Tony Bennett, Billy Joel, and Paul Anka took turns performing.

Business ventures and plagiarism scandal

Before becoming First Lady, Melania launched a jewelry collection on QVC (the American shopping channel) and a caviar skincare line. Both ventures disappeared almost as quickly as they appeared. Parts of her 2016 Republican Convention speech were copied from Michelle Obama's 2008 Democratic Convention speech. Her team called it "common words and values." The internet called it copy-paste.

How she ruined Christmas

As First Lady, she launched a campaign called "Be Best" focusing on children's welfare, cyberbullying, and opioid addiction, with critics pointing out the irony of her anti-cyberbullying stance given her husband's Twitter habits.

In 2018, her use of red Christmas trees sparked criticism as many compared them to horror movie scenes. Melania stood by her choices, calling them "avant-garde." In 2020, she became embroiled in another Christmas controversy when leaked recordings revealed her saying "Who gives a f--- about Christmas stuff?" during a discussion about her First Lady duties.

An exceptional model?

Melania received her EB-1 visa (also known as the "Einstein visa" or "extraordinary ability" visa) in 2001, typically reserved for individuals with "extraordinary ability and skills" in science, technology, education, engineering, mathematics, and other fields, often including Nobel Prize winners or outstanding athletes.

The move raised many eyebrows as Melania was then a model, not typically considered an "extraordinary ability" category. In 2006, she became a US citizen, making her the first naturalized First Lady in American history.

The controversial jacket, tennis pavilion renovations, and kidney tumor

In 2018, she sparked outrage when she visited migrant children at a Texas detention center wearing a jacket emblazoned with the words "I really don't care, do U?" In 2020, she renovated the White House tennis pavilion during the COVID-19 pandemic, drawing criticism for the timing. During protests following George Floyd's death, she wore a black dress, generating theories about the message she was trying to convey. In 2018, she underwent surgery to remove a benign growth from one of her kidneys.

The prenup

Before her wedding, Melania signed an extensive prenuptial agreement that, according to reports, was updated after Barron's birth to secure his inheritance rights. The agreement ensured Melania would remain "financially comfortable" regardless of future family tensions.

In 2017, she delayed her and Barron's move to the White House after Trump's presidential election, claiming she wanted to stay in New York with Barron until his school year ended, but according to reports, there was another reason: according to The Washington Post journalist Mary Jordan's book, Melania was in the midst of renegotiating her prenuptial agreement with Trump, conditioning the move on ensuring Barron's future status would be equal to his other children.

The post All the way to First Lady: 10 fascinating facts about Melania Trump appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

Emotions are still running high over the results of the 47th US presidential election. For millions of Americans (and even non-Americans), it felt like a lot was on the line.

There is much to consider when reflecting on the choice that American voters faced. Those who lean Democrat advocated the stance of "anyone but Donald Trump," citing his character, sexual assault charges, racist comments, and refusal of a peaceful transfer of power as evidence that he was unfit for office. Meanwhile, those who lean Republican pointed to the Biden administration's failure to address the needs of the working class, the alleged cover-up of President Joe Biden's deteriorating mental health, and the decision to appoint Vice President Kamala Harris without giving Democratic constituents a chance to vote for their candidate.

The list of issues could go on. According to NBC exit polls, voters' top concerns were democracy (34%), the economy (31%), abortion (14%), immigration (11%), and foreign policy at a mere 4%. This suggests that the Israel-Hamas war and the threat of a nuclear Iran had little influence over this election; instead, a wide array of other factors drove the results.

One of the most striking aspects of this election was the shift among groups that traditionally voted Democrat. Many are discussing the significant movement of votes among Arab, Latino, and Black Americans, and unsurprisingly, the same shift can be seen among Jewish Americans. PEW research shows that 70% of American Jews typically vote Democrat, but an exit poll from the Orthodox Union and Honan Group indicated a serious split in the Jewish vote in states like Pennsylvania: 48% for Harris vs. 41% for Trump. The anti-Israel fanaticism of the far left and the Democrats' failure to distance themselves from these elements contributed heavily to this erosion of Jewish support.

The actions of the far left influenced the election results and worked in favor of Trump and his supporters. As Representative Ritchie Torres aptly wrote, the far left "managed to alienate historic numbers of Latinos, Blacks, Asians, and Jews from the Democratic Party with absurdities like 'Defund the Police,' 'From the River to the Sea,' and 'Latinx.'" It's a clear summary of the demographic shift. Despite claims that Jews control those in power, American Jews are too small a minority to have influenced the election significantly.

The far left is often described as a minority that doesn't represent the values of Democrats and classic liberals. Yet in this election, the party neglected the working class in favor of woke jargon and performative activism. Democrats used identity politics and moral superiority messaging to speak to moderates and their former base, who didn't buy what the party was selling.

Anyone attributing the election outcome to white supremacy, patriarchy, and misogyny is missing the point, using these as a convenient way to avoid discussing pressing political issues. The overuse of these terms by the far left has stripped them of the power to inspire change.

Most Americans who feel economically worse off than they were four years ago hold Biden and Harris accountable. Democrats who refuse to acknowledge this will continue to lose to Republicans, who have positioned themselves as the party of the working class and distanced themselves from the far left. While there are certainly issues within the Republican Party, the silent majority of Americans appear fed up with identity politics. For Democrats to win back support, they'll need to distance themselves from "woke" activists and return to a common-sense message that resonates with working-class Americans.

America has grown weary of the far left, and it seems there is more to lose politically by pandering to these activists and keyboard warriors, who hold more sway on X, Twitch, and TikTok than in the real world. The working class is simply not buying the ivory-towered ideas that the far left is promoting.

The post From woke to broke: Why Democrats lost the working class appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

Following his presidential victory, President-elect Donald Trump is expected to begin selecting the members of his new cabinet soon. Final decisions are anticipated in the coming weeks, with several candidates being vetted for multiple positions simultaneously.

In a wide-ranging interview on "The Joe Rogan Experience" podcast last month, Trump declared that his "biggest mistake" during his first term was hiring "bad people, or disloyal people" to his White House team. The former president effectively acknowledged errors in his staffing choices, which led to an exceptionally high turnover rate among senior administration officials.

Several former senior officials who departed or were dismissed became vocal critics of Trump after leaving their positions. Former National Security Advisor John Bolton published a highly critical memoir about his tenure. For his upcoming term, Trump intends to place significantly greater emphasis on personal loyalty as the central criterion in staff selection.

According to multiple sources and reports in American media outlets, the State Department leadership is likely to be determined from among three contenders: former National Security Advisor Robert O'Brien, Senator Bill Hagerty of Tennessee, and Senator Marco Rubio of Florida. For the crucial position of US Ambassador to Israel, sources indicate David Friedman, who maintains a decades-long relationship with the president-elect and served in the same role during Trump's first term, is being strongly considered for reappointment.

Former US Ambassador Richard Grenell, who served as Trump's envoy to Germany, has emerged as a leading candidate for national security advisor. The defense secretary position has drawn three prominent candidates: former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, Representative Mike Waltz of Florida, and Senator Tom Cotton of Arkansas. For the Department of Homeland Security leadership, former Immigration and Customs Enforcement Director Tom Homan, former Acting Secretary Chad Wolf, and Representative Mark Green are under consideration. Former Director of National Intelligence John Ratcliffe and Senator Mike Lee lead the field of candidates for Attorney General.

For White House chief of staff, the highest-ranking position within the president's inner circle, veteran political strategist Susie Wiles has emerged as the leading candidate. Wiles, widely credited as the mastermind behind Trump's recent election victory, may be joined in the senior leadership team by former Trump White House official Brooke Rollins, who is also under consideration for the role.

The treasury secretary position has attracted five high-profile candidates: JPMorgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon, though sources indicate uncertainty about his willingness to accept; former Soros Fund Management executive Scott Bessent; hedge fund manager John Paulson; Fox News commentator Larry Kudlow; and former US Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer, who served during Trump's first term.

Sources close to the transition process emphasize that these selections remain fluid, noting Trump's penchant for last-minute decisions and willingness to reverse course. His decisive victory two nights ago has significantly expanded his options for filling these crucial positions, an advantage the president-elect appears poised to leverage fully.

The post Trump 2.0: Pompeo, Friedman among floated appointees appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

Former President Donald Trump received a dramatic surge in support from Jewish voters in New York on Tuesday, securing 45% of the Jewish vote compared to 30% in 2020, according to Fox News exit polls.

The substantial shift represents a 50% increase in Trump's backing among Jewish voters in the Empire State, while Vice President Kamala Harris captured 55% of the Jewish vote – a notable decrease from President Biden's 69% share in 2020.

"I'm so so proud of Jewish turnout across the country. We are getting early reports in and huge groundbreaking numbers," Maury Litwack from the Teach Coalition, who has been monitoring Jewish voter patterns in New York House races and battleground states, said in a post on X.

Litwack, who has been tracking Jewish voting trends, attributed the Republican gains to growing dissatisfaction with the Democratic party's response to rising antisemitism across the US and on college campuses during the Israel-Hamas war.

Red wave?

Blue wave?

How about a push back on antisemitism wave.

I can point to numerous examples of candidates taking terrible positions on antisemitism or staying silent on antisemitism that have cost them their races this cycle.

— Maury Litwack (@mlitwack) November 6, 2024

The impact of Jewish voter mobilization was already evident in recent Democratic primary elections, where progressive Representatives Jamaal Bowman of New York's 16th Congressional District and Cori Bush of Missouri were defeated.

The Republican Jewish Coalition made unprecedented investments in the election cycle, committing $15 million to support Trump while arguing that Harris aligns with progressive values rather than Jewish voter interests.

Ivanka Trump, who converted to Judaism before her marriage to Jared Kushner, made history as the first Jewish member of a first family during her father's presidency.

The post Trump surges 50% among Jewish voters in NY appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

The period between Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump's election victory and his White House inauguration spans nearly three months, during which Israel may face unprecedented diplomatic challenges. With Democrats still at the helm and outgoing President Joe Biden seeking to cement his legacy, Israel finds itself in an increasingly complex position as the current war continues.

History offers a telling precedent: When former President Barack Obama's term was ending and Trump had won his first presidential election, the outgoing administration left Israel with an unwelcome surprise. The US broke with tradition by withholding its Security Council veto on anti-Israel resolutions, leading to the passage of a measure condemning settlement activity. This December 16, 2016 decision marked Obama's parting gesture after years of tense relations with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

Jerusalem, mindful of this precedent, is now on high alert. Israel's UN Ambassador Danny Danon warned earlier this week about the potential weakening of US support at the Security Council. In a chamber where Arab nations and Israel's critics hold a decisive majority, the risks are substantial – ranging from proposed arms embargoes against Israel to resolutions advancing Palestinian statehood or full UN membership, or demands for ending the war on terms unfavorable to Israel.

A crucial test looms within days. The White House has pressed Netanyahu to increase humanitarian aid to northern Gaza, expressing continued dissatisfaction with current efforts. If significant changes don't materialize quickly, the administration may feel emboldened to impose conditions on Israel regarding the war's conclusion. Should direct pressure prove insufficient, they might pursue their objectives through the Security Council.

Biden, who has been considered a pro-Israel president and whose legacy will be judged by history, seeks to leave his diplomatic mark in the coming months. The Middle East situation presents more opportunities than other recent conflicts, making agreements on Gaza and Lebanon likely priorities.

Netanyahu, who yesterday accelerated the process of removing Israeli Defense Minister Yoav Gallant from the defense ministry, may navigate these challenges effectively – though the situation remains complex. More optimistically, Trump's imminent return to the White House in roughly two months could serve as leverage in dealings with Arab nations and terrorist organizations, as these actors anticipate a potential shift in US policy toward the regional conflict.

This dynamic might, for the first time, lead Hamas to consider agreements without demanding complete war termination, while Lebanon could show unprecedented flexibility in negotiations. The transition from a moderate Democratic administration to an unpredictable president could significantly influence the terms of current agreements.

The post Biden's final stretch: Israel braces for diplomatic showdown appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

08:25 a.m.: Fox News and Reuters call presidential race after Pennsylvania moves to Trump column making him 47th president-elect.

07:40: Trump projected to win Georgia, putting him on the cusp of the necessary 270 electoral college votes.

07:00: Sources from Trump's circle tell Israel Hayom: Trump won. Sources from the Democratic side say, "We've all but lost hope."

Video: Trump welcomed by supporters at Mar-a-Lago / Credit: Social media

06:50: AP projects Harris victory in Virginia.

06:23 AP projects North Carolina, a crucial swing state, will be in Trump's column. He is leading almost all remaining swing states, commanding a lead of 230-187 in the electoral college.

4:39: Trump has a total of 178 electoral votes so far; Harris 99.

03:10: Harris in the lead as first votes in Pennsylvania, Michigan are being counted. Too early to call.

02:58 a.m.: Trump has a total of 90 electoral votes so far; Harris 27.

02:38 a.m.: Georgia has Trump in the lead with 6% of the vote counted; in NC, Harris has a lead with less than 10% of the vote counted.

02:36 a.m.: NC, GA, NH, critical swing states, start counting votes as polls close. CNN says it is too early to call the race in any one of them.

Tuesday

12:30 p.m: Kamala Harris has began delivering a speech at the Democratic Convention Center, expressing gratitude to campaign volunteers.

9:55 p.m: The Second Gentleman, Doug Emhoff, spoke at a campaign event in Michigan, stating that his wife will win the election. "I want to look at Kamala and say, 'Honey, you are the President of the United States.'"

9:03 p.m: Washington: A man armed with a fireworks launcher and carrying flammable materials was arrested at the Capitol building on suspicion of intending to start a fire, according to Reuters.

8:57 p.m: The FBI released a special statement acknowledging fake threats of a terrorist attack, allegedly targeting areas where polling stations are located in several states. It is believed the threats were sent from Russian email addresses.

7:39 p.m.: The Harris campaign raised alarm about possible voting irregularities, urging supporters: "If you encounter any issues at the polls, call our Voter Assistance Hotline." The campaign also asked supporters to share voting information on social media and tag friends heading to the polls today.

7:35 p.m.: Georgia state officials report bomb threats at two polling locations. A state source indicated the threats originated from Russia.

Trump: "I would like to tell all of the people that are in line to stay in line. Democrats, if they like, they can leave. But I'd like the Republicans to stay in line." pic.twitter.com/ISmVjHOwFD

— TheBlaze (@theblaze) November 5, 2024

7:03 p.m.: Trump: "I would like to tell all of the people that are in line to stay in line. Democrats, if they like, they can leave. But I'd like the Republicans to stay in line."

6:48 p.m.: Former President Trump is now casting his ballot in Palm Beach, Florida, accompanied by his wife Melania. (Ido Ben Porat)

6:22 p.m.: Republican campaign sources tell Israel Hayom there is optimism, and even beyond cautious optimism, as Election Day begins in the US. Campaign officials say voter turnout in battleground states, early voting patterns, and other statistical indicators suggest former President Donald Trump has a greater chance of reaching 270 electoral votes by tonight. "It resembles 2016 much more than 2020," one Republican source said.

5:50 p.m.: Kamala Harris' campaign team has launched a dedicated X page for Election Day, encouraging citizens to vote and make their voices heard.

5:10 p.m.: Democratic candidate Kamala Harris posted an urgent appeal to her supporters: "Today is your last chance to make an impact in this election. Help reach every last voter before polls close."

Today is your last chance to make an impact in this election. Help reach every last voter before polls close: https://t.co/fI8FyHWp46 pic.twitter.com/AN1D9zE2C5

— Kamala Harris (@KamalaHarris) November 5, 2024

5:02 p.m.: Republican candidate Donald Trump posted on his X account this morning ahead of US Election Day: "It's officially Election Day! This will be the most important day in American History. Voter enthusiasm is through the roof because people want to Make America Great Again. That means lines are going to be long! Stay in line! The Radical Communist Democrats want you to pack up and go home. Together, we are going to have a tremendous victory and make America great again!"

It is now officially ELECTION DAY! This will be the most important day in American History.

Voter enthusiasm is THROUGH THE ROOF because people want to Make America Great Again. That means lines are going to be long!

I need you to deliver your vote no matter how long it takes.…

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) November 5, 2024

4:54 p.m.: A sense of complacency is evident in Florida, a Republican state known for supporting Trump. Israel Hayom's correspondent reports from the Arena where Donald Trump's election night rally will be held. (Ariel Kahana, reporting from Florida)

The post 'This will truly be the golden age of America,' Trump says in victory speech appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

Welcome, President Harris. You have a full agenda, but the Middle East might demand your immediate focus.

Here's a key piece of advice: don't listen to your advisors. It's likely that at the top of your shortlist for National Security Advisor is Philip Gordon, your current advisor. Gordon is an experienced, practical figure with a PhD in international relations and over a decade of Middle East involvement. He has proven experience in strategizing, coordinating, and executing policy. The problem is, Dr. Gordon might end up destabilizing the Middle East.

The Iranians want a new nuclear deal, much like the one Dr. Gordon helped craft in 2015. At first glance, such an agreement seems like just what the region needs: it would halt Iran's march towards a nuclear bomb and allow the U.S. to pivot towards East Asia and China. However, this kind of deal could actually worsen the situation, for two main reasons.

The first reason is that easing sanctions on Iran would give it new resources to bolster its proxy organizations across the Middle East. An Iranian proxy, Hamas, triggered the current crisis. There's no guarantee that Iran would exercise better control over other proxies, like the Houthis or even Hezbollah. If you ease the pressure on Tehran, sooner or later the region will ignite again.

The second reason is Israel's response to such an agreement. It's no secret that the Israeli right-wing isn't thrilled about your election. In government corridors, they likely view you as a strategic challenge, if not a disaster. A new nuclear deal might push Israel to conclude that they're out of options and have no choice but to strike Iran's nuclear facilities to prevent it from obtaining a bomb. If the Israeli government expects hostility from you, it might assume it has nothing to lose and that time is not on its side.

What should you do? The fact that the Iranians want a nuclear deal indicates that sanctions are affecting them. Allowing Iran to maintain its status as a nuclear threshold state while granting sanctions relief would not only enable it to further enhance its nuclear capabilities but also grant it more resources to do so. Dr. Gordon and many within the Democratic establishment will argue that this is the only way to prevent an Iranian bomb and stabilize the Middle East. When Israel responds militarily and Iran destabilizes the region, these same advisors will recommend trying to prevent escalation, continuing the very failed strategy tried thus far. The end result would be that your administration could face four years of regional war in the Middle East.

Instead, it's better to increase economic pressure on Iran and restore Israel's confidence. Accelerate the supply of essential weapons to Israel, while clarifying to Tehran that any deal must include a significant reduction in its nuclear capabilities. A firm approach is the only way to avoid further deterioration.

Welcome back, President Trump. I know, you don't really want to deal with the Middle East. But it seems you don't have a choice.

The Middle East isn't just hanging by a thread—it's teetering on the edge. Iran and Israel are openly trading blows, and a regional conflict is underway, even if the previous Biden administration hasn't yet acknowledged it as such. The question is how you can stop or contain the descent into chaos. To succeed, you should understand what each of the main players in this drama—Iran and Israel—want from you.

Here's how it breaks down: The Iranians are actually the simpler side to understand. They can be divided into two camps. The first camp, led by Iranian President Massoud Pazhekian, wants a nuclear deal. He wants sanctions relief and is willing to limit Iran's nuclear activity to achieve it. He won't fully give up Iran's nuclear program, but why not see how far he's willing to go for some sanctions relief?

The second camp, composed of Revolutionary Guard members and radical conservatives, wants the U.S. out of the region and is prepared to use military force to make it happen—not directly, of course, but through proxies in Iraq, Syria, and Yemen. We know that you don't think the U.S. should remain in these countries, but if American troops are there, you certainly don't want them under fire.

The two camps aren't necessarily at odds with each other. The Iranians might believe that escalating military pressure will lead you to be more flexible in negotiating a new deal. They're shrewd negotiators, and they won't enter talks without trying to apply leverage on you. You can expect their proxy activity to increase in 2025, even as they pursue a diplomatic track to secure an agreement. The question is, what will you do?

One approach is to ramp up sanctions as much as possible and force the Iranians to concede more and more until they satisfy your demands. But economic pressure will lead Iran to escalate militarily, just as they did in the summer of 2019. In that scenario, you'll need to decide whether to divert expensive military resources to the Middle East, instead of Europe or East Asia. If you're not careful, you might get drawn into a war in the region.

Here, Israel could be useful, but you'll need to clarify a few things to the Israelis. Prime Minister Netanyahu and his cabinet will likely want the U.S. to act directly against Iran. You don't want that, and you have no interest in being drawn into yet another endless war in the Middle East. It would be wise to be honest with the Israelis from the start: there won't be an American strike on Iran. But there will be strong American backing for Israel to act against Iran and its proxies.

What you'll want to do is flood America's allies in the region with American-made weaponry: bunker-busting bombs for Israel, advanced jets for the Emirates, and precision weaponry for the Saudis. This would enable them to deter Tehran and, if necessary, confront it themselves. Coupled with economic pressure on Iran, you'd have a strategy: pressure Iran into concessions while trying to maintain stability in the Middle East. And remember, stability in this region is always a relative concept.

The post A letter to the 47th president appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

As millions of Americans prepare to head to the polls, major election forecasting models have updated their final predictions, offering Vice President Kamala Harris' campaign a cautiously optimistic outlook, though the race remains extraordinarily close.

Leading polling analyst Nate Silver, who had consistently favored former President Donald Trump's electoral prospects in recent weeks, released his final forecast this morning, giving the Democratic candidate a razor-thin advantage for the first time in months.

The margin, however, is virtually imperceptible: Silver's model gives Harris a 50.015% probability of securing the Electoral College, while the Republican candidate stands at 49.985%.

The 538 forecast has also adjusted its outlook, now showing Trump at 50% and Harris at 49%. Simultaneously, The Economist, which had previously leaned toward Trump, now projects an even 50-50 split. Their model indicates Trump has been losing momentum over the past week, shedding five percentage points that shifted to Harris' column.

The JHK forecast detected similar movement. While yesterday's projection gave Trump a 52% chance of victory, this morning's update reversed course, suggesting a 51% win probability for the vice president.

This Democratic uptick may have been catalyzed by AtlasIntel's latest survey, a polling organization that had consistently shown strong numbers for Trump throughout the campaign and is widely incorporated into forecasting models. Their final poll, conducted over the weekend, showed Trump leading by just one percentage point.

The Hill's forecast stands alone in maintaining its previous prediction, continuing to give the Republican candidate a 54% chance of victory.

Meanwhile, betting markets, which have reemerged as a significant indicator in this election cycle, show increasing confidence in the Republican candidate: Kalshi's platform indicates a 57% probability of his victory, while Polymarket places his chances near 60%.

The post Trump or Harris? Forecasting models give Democrats sliver of hope appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

The 2024 presidential race enters its final stretch, following months of extensive coverage of Republican candidate former President Donald Trump and Democratic candidate Vice President Kamala Harris. While each candidate has their own strategy to win the election, they share one consensus: the significance of their positions on the ongoing war between Israel and Hamas in Gaza, following Hamas' deadly attack on October 7, 2023. This issue takes on additional significance when it comes to dual citizens – Israeli-Americans – who make up a distinct voting bloc.

Following a year of volatile protests across American campuses, rising antisemitism, hostages still being held in Gaza, and an ongoing war with no end in sight, Americans on both sides of the Israel debate have criticized the current administration's handling of the conflict. For Israeli-American voters, this has raised a crucial question: which candidate do they trust with their vote?

"I didn't realize how seriously Israeli-Americans take this election until I posted an Instagram story asking for help signing up," Daria Bar, a 30-year-old Israeli-American resident of Haifa said. "I was bombarded with messages advising me who I should vote for and why, even though my mind was set on Trump. I felt many judged me for it – someone even said it was 'out of character' for me. Trump is definitely a controversial person, but if the question is what's best for Israel's interests, there's absolutely no doubt. After Harris acknowledged Israel was 'committing genocide,' how could I vote for her?"

For dual citizens, the significance of this election extends beyond typical partisan politics. In the aftermath of Oct. 7, many find themselves weighing each candidate's potential impact on the two nations, having to consider what might serve America's interests versus Israel's needs during wartime.

"In my 35 years in Israel, I have always voted in the US Presidential elections. I did not even consider not voting until maybe a month ago. I've debated intensely with myself and a few close friends and I have decided not to vote," a 67-year-old Israeli-American resident of Binyamina who chose to remain anonymous said.

"I did not even consider not voting until maybe a month ago," a 67-year-old Israeli-American resident of Binyamina who chose to remain anonymous said, reflecting on his 35 years of voting in US presidential elections. "I've debated intensely with myself and a few close friends, and I have decided not to vote. I could never vote for Trump because of the type of president he was and no doubt would be in the future. While I can agree with some of his policies, especially as regards Israel, I am absolutely unable to return this type of person to such a powerful role.

"Early on, I thought I could support Harris, even though as VP she never really impressed me as an assertive person with clear objectives," he added. "But in the last month, I sense that she is absolutely not clear, perhaps not even with herself, and certainly not strong enough to lead the 'free world'. Her stance on Israel is the worst it could be in my view – it's ambiguous and seems intentionally uninformed. I could not vote for her either. I've always valued my vote from Israel, but for the first time, I feel like I don't want to participate in this at all. It is a very difficult feeling for me."

However, for 29-year-old Raz Elfar, an Israeli-American resident of Tel Aviv, Trump is undoubtedly the obvious choice, though he too won't be voting in this election. "Being registered in California, I knew from the start I wouldn't vote – there's simply no motivation to do so. But if I could, I'd vote for Trump, which I believe should be obvious, even for non-Israelis. Look at Trump's presidency – the world was in a far better place. Now we're witnessing chaos on all fronts: Russia-Ukraine, China-Taiwan, North Korea, Iran-Israel, October 7th – all unfolding under Biden's watch."

"The White House needs a stronger presence," he added. "Trump's actions consistently demonstrated his support for Israel. While Biden has been helpful in many ways, I sense Harris holds a less favorable stance toward our interests. Choosing Trump serves both American and Israeli interests – with World War III looming, it's time for the sheriff to return to town."

According to a new survey by the Israel Democracy Institute, this pro-Trump sentiment is widespread among Israelis. The poll shows they strongly prefer former President Trump over Vice President Harris when it comes to Israel's interests. Approximately two-thirds of respondents indicated Trump would be better for Israel, while only 13% favored Harris.

The political breakdown among Jewish respondents in Israel revealed that 90% of right-wing voters and 52% of centrists believe Trump would be more beneficial for Israel, while the left slightly favors Harris over Trump (42% versus 29%). Gender analysis in Israel showed a moderate gap, with 69% of men preferring Trump compared to 60% of women. The most striking difference appeared in age demographics: an overwhelming 90% of young Israelis believe Trump would better serve Israel's interests, compared to just 55% of older respondents who shared this view.

The results may be unpredictable, but one thing is certain: never has the American public, including Israeli-American voters, been more divided over their presidential candidates. This unprecedented divide likely stems from the sense of urgency and gravity surrounding the upcoming election's outcome. As both American and Israeli-American voters prepare to cast their ballots or choose to sit this election out, Israelis too are watching intently to see which leader will shape the war's trajectory moving forward.

The post How will Israeli-Americans vote? appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

A new poll reveals deep partisan divisions among American voters regarding responsibility for the escalation of the Middle East conflict, with about half expressing serious concerns about potential regional war. The survey by The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research shows varying levels of support for US involvement in the region.

The poll, conducted between Oct. 11-14, 2024, found that while approximately half of voters are "extremely" or "very" worried about a broader regional conflict, only about 4 in 10 express significant concern about potential US military involvement. The survey was completed before Israel's strike on Iranian military installations on Friday.

As former President Donald Trump and Vice President Kamala Harris compete for Muslim and Jewish voters in crucial swing states like Michigan and Pennsylvania, the Middle East situation has emerged as a key campaign issue.

The survey revealed that about 6 in 10 voters attribute "a lot" of responsibility for the war's escalation to Hamas, Iran's government, and Hezbollah. However, partisan differences emerge regarding Israel's role, with approximately 6 in 10 Democrats saying the Israeli government bears "a lot" of responsibility, compared to only about one-quarter of Republicans sharing this view.

Regarding US policy options, voters show strong support (55%) for economic sanctions against Iran, which could impact its support for Hezbollah in Lebanon and Hamas in Gaza. However, they remain divided on providing weapons to Israel's military, with more opposing than supporting direct government funding for Israel's military operations.

The poll indicates minimal backing for US troop deployment, with about half of voters opposing such action. Only about 2 in 10 voters support sending US troops to assist Israel, with a similar proportion remaining neutral.

On cease-fire efforts, approximately half of voters believe the US is doing "about as much as it can" to facilitate agreements between Israel, Hamas, and Hezbollah. About 3 in 10 voters think more could be done, while roughly 2 in 10 suggest less involvement.

The partisan divide extends to cease-fire involvement, with about 3 in 10 Republicans favoring reduced US engagement, compared to approximately 1 in 10 Democrats. About 6 in 10 Democrats believe current US efforts are sufficient, versus roughly 4 in 10 Republicans.

The poll surveyed 1,072 adults using NORC's probability-based AmeriSpeak Panel, designed to represent the US population. For registered voters, the margin of sampling error is plus or minus 4.2 percentage points.

The post AP-NORC poll reveals what Americans think about Israel's role in Mideast escalation appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.