Donald Trump’s historical disconnect with the Black community hasn’t deterred him from pursuing an unexpected demographic in his bid for a third presidential term. Despite facing accusations of racist practices throughout his career, Trump is actively targeting Black voters, asserting increased enthusiasm for his candidacy during recent rallies.

“Have you seen our poll numbers with African Americans and with Hispanic Americans? But I’m not that surprised because I see it, I feel it,” Trump declared during a rally in Atkinson, New Hampshire, days before the state’s primary. “We did great in 2016, we did much better in 2020 but there is much more enthusiasm now.”

There’s scant evidence of significant inroads among Black voters for Trump, with polls indicating that Black voters overwhelmingly support President Joe Biden. However, even slight shifts in voting patterns in crucial states could impact the race.

For Biden, the primary concern is not a substantial migration of Black voters to Trump, but rather the risk that these voters, frustrated by various issues, may not show up to vote at all. In closely contested states like Georgia, Pennsylvania, and Michigan, minor changes in turnout could influence the election outcome.

A December AP-NORC poll indicated that only 50% of Black adults nationally approve of Biden, down from 86% in July 2021. While this decline is more significant than among adults overall and white adults, only 25% of Black adults expressed a favorable view of Trump.

Trump’s campaign advisers assert that they aim to leverage these shifts to prompt a political realignment, potentially challenging the Democratic Party’s longstanding advantage with Black voters.

“We are creating a massive problem for the Democratic Party’s base that … could be altering for a generation,” said Chris LaCivita, a senior adviser on the Trump campaign. “That’s just an opportunity that we would be remiss if we didn’t exploit.”

Cornell Belcher, a Democratic pollster, acknowledged the challenges faced by Obama in 2012, where young voters and voters of color expressed frustration with the slow pace of progress on key goals.

“I’m not surprised that Joe Biden right now starts off underperforming among young voters and voters of color. I’d be surprised if he didn’t. But that’s what campaigns are for,” Belcher said.

While Trump is intensifying efforts to present a more diverse group of supporters, he continues to face criticism for inflammatory rhetoric and racially charged remarks. Despite this, he often highlights endorsements from Black celebrities, positioning them as evidence of his appeal to the Black community.

As Trump approaches a potential rematch against Biden, diversifying his support base and appealing beyond the overwhelmingly white Republican base becomes a priority. Sen. Tim Scott, the only Black Republican in the Senate, has emerged as a prominent surrogate for Trump, and his selection as a vice-presidential running mate is among the considerations.

Biden and Democrats are not relinquishing their efforts to secure Black voter support. Biden launched his reelection bid at Mother Emanuel AME Church in Charleston, South Carolina, where a tragic shooting occurred in 2015.

Both parties are refining strategies to engage Black voters. The Republican National Committee has established outreach centers in minority areas since 2013, with plans to add two more in 2024. The Biden campaign, in contrast to previous Democratic approaches, has invested early in engaging core constituencies, including Black voters, with significant outreach and investments in African American media in key swing states.

DNC chair Jaime Harrison dismissed Republican efforts, accusing them of promoting “fairy tales about their plan to win over Black voters.” He emphasized the commitment of Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris to securing every vote, recognizing the high stakes of the election.

Efforts are underway in Missouri and Mississippi to curtail voters’ influence on abortion rights, echoing strategies seen in other states, notably Ohio last year. Democrats and advocates for abortion rights argue that these endeavors reflect attempts by Republican lawmakers and anti-abortion activists to undermine democratic processes designed to involve voters in shaping state laws.

Laurie Bertram Roberts, executive director of the Mississippi Reproductive Freedom Fund, criticizes these efforts, stating, “They’re scared of the people and their voices, so their response is to prevent their voices from being heard.” She identifies a pattern reminiscent of tactics used in other states, including Ohio.

Since the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2022 decision overturning the constitutional right to abortion, voters in seven states have either safeguarded abortion rights or defeated attempts to restrict them through statewide votes. Democrats plan to make the issue a focal point in the 2024 campaign.

A proposal recently passed by the Mississippi House aims to prohibit residents from initiating abortion-related measures on the statewide ballot. This move comes in the context of Mississippi having stringent abortion restrictions, allowing the procedure only to save the woman’s life or in cases of rape or incest. Democrats argue that this legislation undermines the democratic process by limiting the people’s voice.

In Missouri, anti-abortion groups support a plan that would require initiatives to secure a majority vote in five of the state’s eight congressional districts, in addition to a simple statewide majority. This proposal coincides with an abortion-rights campaign launching a ballot measure effort to enshrine abortion rights in the state constitution. Abortion rights groups in Missouri criticize Secretary of State Jay Ashcroft, accusing him of attempting to obstruct the initiative by manipulating the measure’s ballot summary.

These attempts to prevent abortion-related measures from reaching the ballot mirror strategies employed in other states to target the ballot initiative process, a form of direct democracy available to voters in about half the states. Similar actions have been witnessed in Florida and Nevada, where efforts were made to keep abortion rights amendments off the ballot.

Ohio’s experience with a statewide vote on abortion rights last year is cited as a precedent for these tactics. After voters approved the abortion protections, Republican lawmakers sought to block the amendment from overturning the state’s existing restrictions. In a special election, attempts were made to raise the threshold for passing future constitutional amendments, but the effort was defeated.

Deirdre Schifeling, Chief Political and Advocacy Officer of the ACLU, emphasized the broader implications of such actions, stating, “It’s about, ‘Will the majority be heard?’” Democrats and abortion rights advocates view these efforts as attacks on democracy itself.

House Republicans have taken a decisive step in their bid to oust Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas, releasing two articles of impeachment on Sunday. Citing what they perceive as Mayorkas’s failure to effectively manage the U.S.-Mexico border, Republicans argue that the secretary is guilty of “high crimes and misdemeanors” constituting a “willful and systemic refusal to comply with the law” on immigration, along with a “breach of the public trust.” However, Democrats and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) dismissed the move as a politically motivated maneuver lacking constitutional merit.

The impeachment resolution contends that Mayorkas “willfully and systemically refused to comply with the immigration laws, failed to control the border to the detriment of national security, compromised public safety, and violated the rule of law and separation of powers in the Constitution, to the manifest injury of the people of the United States.”

House Republicans have been advocating for Mayorkas’s impeachment since gaining control of the House in 2023. This latest move comes amid their parallel efforts to impeach Democratic President Joe Biden, specifically regarding his son Hunter’s business dealings, which have faced challenges in advance.

The impeachment drive against Mayorkas gained momentum following a series of hearings in recent weeks, coinciding with heightened attention on border security and immigration issues in the 2024 campaign. Former President Donald Trump, the leading candidate for the Republican presidential nomination, has promised the “largest deportation operation” in U.S. history if he returns to the White House.

Mayorkas, currently engaged in negotiations with senators on bipartisan border policy, faces impeachment at a critical juncture. The House Homeland Security Committee, controlled by Republicans, is set to vote on the articles of impeachment, with Speaker Mike Johnson aiming for a swift House vote afterward.

While passage requires only a House majority, the Senate would hold a trial, and a two-thirds vote is necessary for conviction, an outcome deemed unlikely in the Democratic-run Senate.

Democrats argue that Republicans are engaging in a sham impeachment process lacking constitutional grounds. They accuse Republicans of contributing to border challenges by attacking Mayorkas without providing the necessary tools for the DHS to manage the situation.

The impeachment articles follow a yearlong examination by Republicans of Mayorkas’s handling of the border, with a focus on policies they believe either removed effective Trump-era measures or introduced policies encouraging illegal migration. Republicans highlight growing numbers of migrants overwhelming border authorities, emphasizing a perceived crisis of the administration’s making.

Democrats counter that policy differences are not grounds for impeachment and argue that Mayorkas is managing border security amid a global mass migration driven by various factors. They emphasize the outdated and underfunded nature of the immigration system and question the motivations behind the impeachment proceedings.

The DHS, in response, cites efforts to remove a significant number of individuals, particularly over the past six months, and ongoing initiatives to combat fentanyl smuggling as evidence of the department’s commitment to border duties. They underscore the challenges of achieving 100% detention and argue that focusing on security threats remains a priority.

The last Cabinet secretary to be impeached was William Belknap in 1876, the war secretary under President Ulysses Grant, over corruption issues. However, Belknap was acquitted after a Senate trial failed to secure the necessary two-thirds majority for conviction.