‘Voters are fed up’: Michigan primary forces Democratic party to accept leftwing shift

David Smith
Sat, August 8, 2026 

THE GUARDIAN


Abdul El-Sayed, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Zohran Mamdani.Illustration: Guardian Design / Getty Images

Standing before The Spirit of Detroit, a landmark bronze statue in the city's downtown, in the early hours of a Wednesday morning, Abdul El-Sayed channelled boxing great Muhammad Ali. "We shook up the world," he declared.

The 41-year-old former public health official had just delivered a knockout blow to the Democratic establishment, defeating the US congresswoman Haley Stevens to claim the party's nomination for the Senate in swing state Michigan.

El-Sayed had campaigned on a boldly progressive agenda of universal healthcare, halting military aid to Israel and sweeping campaign finance reform. The moderate Stevens had received $60m from outside groups, including $30m from the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (Aipac) and its affiliates.

It was the latest and possibly biggest tremor in a political earthquake consuming the Democratic party. Its leftwing insurgency was no longer confined to deep blue coastal cities; it had breached the walls of a critical midwestern swing state. Now it is forcing a reckoning about the party's leadership and its ideological direction ahead of the 2026 midterms and the 2028 presidential election.

Matt Duss, executive vice-president of the Center for International Policy and a former foreign policy adviser to the leftwing senator Bernie Sanders, said: "It's dissatisfaction with the status quo. It's dissatisfaction with the establishment. This is an anti-system moment.

"We see this not just in our country but in democracies around the world. Voters are fed up with an elite establishment that is simply not delivering for them, that doesn't feel their pain, that doesn't seem to know or care about their struggles, and that's part of why Abdul succeeded."

The past decade of US politics has been dominated by the rightwing populism of Donald Trump. But leftwing populism has been running – and flourishing – on a parallel track since Sanders' outsider campaign for president in 2016 was ultimately beaten back by Hillary Clinton and the Democratic establishment.

Duss added: "The 2016 Sanders campaign was sort of the Big Bang for the rebirth of the progressive left in the United States. We've got a lot of others who joined Bernie. We've got a lot of great leaders on the progressive left now and are glad to have Abdul El-Sayed run."

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, a bartender who was an organiser for Sanders' 2016 campaign, pulled off a stunning upset two years later against an incumbent in New York's 14th district, becoming, at 29, the youngest woman ever to serve in the House of Representatives. She was joined by a small but vocal group of progressives known as "the Squad".

Sanders ran again in 2020 and, though he lost to establishment figure Joe Biden, his team had significant input into the surprisingly progressive agenda of the Biden presidency. But the events of 2024 – Biden's abortive run for a second term, Kamala Harris's coronation and Donald Trump's return to power – exposed a chasm between the party leadership and the grassroots

Last November, Zohran Mamdani, a democratic socialist laser-focused on affordability, beat the establishment favourite Andrew Cuomo to become the first Muslim mayor of New York. He then helped three insurgent candidates win Democratic primary elections in New York. The "Mamdani effect" swept through Colorado, Illinois, Michigan, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Washington state, Wisconsin and Washington DC.

The driving factors include frustration with Trump, the cost of living, corporate money in politics and the ongoing conflict in Gaza. Reuters/ Ipsos polling showed Israel's favorability among Democrats plummeting from 59% in 2018 to just 22% in May 2026. The influx of Aipac money into political campaigns has become toxic for younger voters.

In Michigan, which has the highest percentage of Arab Americans relative to population, El-Sayed accused Israel of committing genocide and built his campaign around a demand to end unconditional US military aid to the country. This positioned him directly against Stevens, who defended the US-Israel relationship and benefited from massive Aipac spending.

El-Sayed's ultimate victory – coupled with wins for progressives Will Lawrence and Donavan McKinney in House races in Michigan – marked a watershed moment, a high-stakes proof of concept challenging the myth that leftwing populists cannot win elections outside Democratic strongholds.

Larry Jacobs, director of the Center for the Study of Politics and Governance at the University of Minnesota, perceives a general break within the party flowing from various sources including the "staleness" of its current leaders, Chuck Schumer in the Senate and Hakeem Jeffries in the House – both ardent supporters of Israel. "Gaza and Israel has become a lightning rod for all the other issues," he added. "There's a sense that the Democrats have been patsies in the face of Donald Trump. When Democrats say they want to fight back, they mean it.

"Donald Trump has radicalised the Democratic party," he said. "This revolt within the party would not have happened without Donald Trump. He is provoking a kind of earthquake, raising lots of unsettling questions within the Democratic party – its direction, its leadership, its policy priorities, its beholdenness to big donors."

Trump has rattled the old orthodoxies that prevailed in US politics for decades. If the right can conceive a radical programme in documents such as Project 2025, why can the left not be similarly ambitious? There is little appetite to return to the pre-Trump era, a broken system that led to his rise in the first place, but rather to reimagine wealth redistribution, stronger unions, democratic reform and a just foreign policy.

Joseph Geevarghese, executive director of Our Revolution, a group born out of Sanders' 2016 run, said: "You're seeing a maturation of the progressive movement. You're seeing the infrastructure that's been built over a decade come into play. There's a resonance of the message in reaction to the failed populism of the right but you're also seeing increased sophistication in the organisation of the left."

The rise of groups such as the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) has occurred in tandem with a crisis of confidence and identity within the centrist wing of the Democratic party. At a moment when Trump paints the landscape in big and bold primary colours, the moderates are widely seen as timid incrementalists who lack ideas or superstars to compete with El-Sayed, Mamdani and Ocasio-Cortez.

Geevarghese commented: "Because some of their funding depends on corporate donors, moderates have to pull punches. They are not able to articulate the causes of people's problems. You've got progressives who are able to call out the corporate class and the corruption of our politics and how that affects people's standard of living."

***
Even as they recognise the ground shifting beneath their feet, progressives warn that centrists are not likely to surrender the power they enjoy courtesy of Wall Street and Silicon Valley without a fight.

Norman Solomon, director of RootsAction and executive director of the Institute for Public Accuracy, said: "One might say that hell has no fury like corporate Democrats scorned. I'm thrilled by the results in Michigan but at the same time I'm a bit apprehensive about the blowback from the powerful forces that have been accustomed to literally running the national Democratic party for many decades, arguably since the Democratic Leadership Council (DLC) was so successful at the beginning of the 1990s."

The DLC was founded by Al From, who in 1989 handpicked Bill Clinton to steer the Democratic party toward the centre ground, creating the "Third Way" movement that was pivotal to his 1992 victory and later emulated by Tony Blair in Britain.

From reflected this week: "We've been focusing on beating Republicans and the democratic socialists have been focused on beating us. We've got to fight back. We've got to make it harder for them."

When Clinton first campaigned for president, 43% of Americans thought of themselves as moderate, compared with 36% conservative and 17% liberal. That picture has changed radically in the intervening years of polarisation.

"Our formula is the right formula," From insisted. "Obviously we're in a different world and you have to communicate it different and you'll need ideas that further the same underlying values, as we did, but they've got to be modern ideas, maybe different ideas because circumstances have changed. Our platform was for the 1990s, not for the 2030s, but the principles are the same.

"The democratic socialists want a different system. They don't want to further democratic values. You look at their platform: they want to get rid of the Senate, the presidency, the supreme court; they want ownership of business; they want to get rid of police; they don't want to fund the military.

"That isn't the historic Democratic party. It's not the party of Roosevelt that saved capitalism and saved democracy in the world in world war two. It's a different ideology, it's a different party. "

The true test of viability for El-Sayed – a Rhodes scholar, doctor and son of Egyptian immigrants – will come in November when he faces Mike Rogers, a former Republican congressman, in a race that could determine the balance of power in the Senate. After an unusually rancorous campaign, El-Sayed was quick to urge "the things that unite us are so much bigger than the things that divide us," and Stevens was equally quick to back him.

Indeed, progressives and moderates across the country are likely to maintain an uneasy coexistence for the midterms as each plays to their demographical and geographical strengths in common cause against Republicans. Trump and the House speaker, Mike Johnson, have been seeking to revive a cold war-style panic by branding democratic socialists as "radical Marxists" and "godless communists".

Donna Brazile, a political strategist and former interim chair of the Democratic National Committee, said: "The question is, can two different wings of the same party function, unify and function as a governing majority if the Democrats win the majority? I contend that the answer is yes. We'll agree on very important matters like the economy, improving the lives of the American people, making things more affordable again and not focusing on vanity projects, so the extent that we're all running on the same message of affordability, the answer is yes."

But then comes 2028 and a time for choosing. The centrist group Third Way is planning a new $15m effort to discredit democratic socialism between now and the next presidential election, the New York Times reported. Some Democrats argue that progressives have won only a handful of races – albeit high-profile ones – among hundreds taking place across the country and the extent of the insurgency is exaggerated. Others believe the Michigan result means the leftwing lane just got wider.

Geevarghese commented: "All of the electoral energy and enthusiasm is on the left and, at the end of the day, for a candidate to be viable in the 2028 presidential, they're going to have to articulate a full-throated economic populism. That's what's needed to make it through the primary and ultimately that's what's going to be needed to be the antidote to Donald Trump."

Speculation is already swirling around who might carry the progressive banner into the next presidential primary. Mamdani, born outside the US, is not eligible to run, and has said he does not want to. Congressman Ro Khanna of California, who campaigned for El-Sayed, is frequently mentioned but the most intense focus is on Ocasio-Cortez, who is 36.

Henry Olsen, a senior fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center thinktank in Washington, said: "If I were AOC's advisers, I would look her in the eye and say, 'Do you want to be president? If you want it to be president, the time is now. You will never have a better chance to own a lane that wants a leader.'

"One of the things we've seen across the world in the last decade is young female leaders captivating the left. Why not a 39-year-old AOC?"

U.S. Soccer joins call for 'meaningful change' after UEFA, Concacaf and AFC release joint letter condemning Gianni Infantino



Chris Cwik

Contributing writer

YAHOO SPORTS
Mon, August 10, 2026 


UEFA and Concacaf are continuing to put pressure on FIFA president Gianni Infantino. Following news that Infantino wanted to sell stakes in the World Cup to private investors, both UEFA and Concacaf have emerged as the biggest critics of the president, suggesting he needs to resign.

On Monday, they continued to up that pressure, and found a third confederation to join their crusade. The Asian Football Confederation (AFC), Concacaf and UEFA released a joint statement Monday, outlining the reasons they believe FIFA needs new leadership.

Shortly after that statement was released, U.S. Soccer, Canada Soccer, CFU (Caribbean Football Union) and UNCAF (Central American Football Union) also banded together to ask for "meaningful change that strengthens FIFA's governance, transparency and accountability."

In the original statement released by UEFA, Concacaf and AFC, which was titled, "Open letter to the football family," the three confederations make it clear that they are united in their opinion that one person is not responsible for success in the sport, and that soccer's accomplishments are shared among "FIFA, the confederations, the member associations and the thousands of people who dedicate their lives to the game."

The letter then takes Infantino to task for his leadership and integrity.


"This is about something more fundamental: the integrity of the game, and the integrity of those elected to lead it.

"Leadership in football is not a possession. It is not about holding — or demanding — power to be held. It is a duty of service to the football family that entrusts it.

"When trust is broken through deception, when an individual places himself above the collective that entrusted him with authority, that duty has been abandoned."

The three confederations then criticized Infantino's approach after his private-investor plan fell through. The confederations accuse Infantino of failing to communicate his plan ahead of time and then not providing an adequate timeline for member associations to properly review the issue before bringing it to a vote. The confederations also said FIFA did not "acknowledge that the proposal itself was inherently wrong."

While FIFA has stated it would present a full report of how the proposal came to be, the confederations noted they don't trust FIFA to conduct that review itself, calling for a "fully independent third party" to be responsible for a review.

In the wake of mounting pressure, Infantino held a FIFA leadership meeting in Morocco on Wednesday. The confederations questioned that decision, noting that there were few elected officials present at the meeting and that no FIFA council members or member associations were invited to take part in them.

The confederations also pointed out that select members of the FIFA management committee were asked to attend that meeting, not the full committee. And questioned why Infantino scheduled that meeting abroad, and not at FIFA headquarters in Zurich.

The letter concludes:


"There is silence where there should be accountability, distance where there should be openness.

"These are not the qualities football deserves in its leadership. That is why we have taken this stance: not lightly and not alone, but together, and out of duty to the game we serve.

"Football's strength has always been its unity. We call for that unity to be honoured now, for leadership that serves football, not seeks to command it."

The letter never names Infantino and does not explicitly call for him to resign, though its messaging about leadership seems to heavily imply Infantino should allow someone else to take charge.

Additionally, multiple reports have suggested UEFA, Concacaf and AFC are considering banding together to host their own competitions so players can continue to compete. When news of Infantino's private-investor plan first broke, UEFA announced it would boycott the World Cup and all FIFA-run events. It appears the confederation is following through on that threat.

For U.S. Soccer, it marks the strongest statement the organization has made regarding Infantino and his leadership. It's unclear whether U.S. Soccer, Canada Soccer, CFU and UNCAF will band together to build their own competitions or take additional steps to put pressure on Infantino.

Following massive criticism of that plan, FIFA eventually backpedaled, announcing the plan to sell stakes in the World Cup was scrapped.

Though the deal was dead, criticism of Infantino did not stop. Multiple member associations announced they would not support Infantino's reelection effort. Infantino is up for reelection as FIFA's president in March 2027. No candidate has stepped forward to challenge Infantino for that role yet.

With pressure mounting, Infantino called an emergency meeting in Morocco in early August. FIFA later put out a statement calling it a "constructive" meeting and noting that Infantino still had the support of members of the FIFA management board.

In the days since that meeting, Infantino has received support from some FAs, including Argentina's and Mexico's, among others.

Jeff Bezos Harshly Criticized for $200 Million Pledge to Protect the World’s Most Endangered Species

Joe Wilkins
Sun, August 9, 2026 

FUTURISM

Photos active / Shutterstock

Jeff Bezos and Leonardo DiCaprio have pledged millions of dollars to protect 100 of the world’s most threatened animal species through the Phoenix Species Project.

Amazon billionaire Jeff Bezos and his actor buddy Leonardo DiCaprio are catching some heavy flak recently, but for a seemingly bizarre reason: pledging millions of dollars to protect 100 of the world's most threatened animal species.

The charity initiative, called the Phoenix Species Project, was first revealed on DiCaprio's Instagram account, where the six-time academy award nominee described it as the "largest single philanthropic initiative ever dedicated to the recovery of Critically Endangered species, across 30 countries."

"I could not be prouder to announce this," DiCaprio continued. "Save these species, and we protect everything around them. The forests, the rivers, and the climate itself."

For such a seemingly altruistic venture, the response to the announcement was strikingly polarized. As the Independent noted, DiCaprio and Bezos were summarily blasted for engaging in "greenwashing," a negative term given to the strategy employed by massive corporations and the wealthy to cover their outsize impact on the environment with a little eco-charity.

"As soon as people realize and actually feel the effects of what those rich f***s did to our planet they suddenly start their greenwashing campaign," one Redditor wrote in response to the announcement, per the Independent.

"Uber-wealthy people helping a fraction of the problems that they cause," another commenter lamented. "For publicity."

It certainly wouldn't be the first time Bezos has been accused of greenwashing, especially given the immense carbon footprint of his flagship company Amazon. In 2020, for example, the billionaire's Bezos Earth Fund pledged $10 billion to protect biodiversity, bringing a massive amount of money to the global effort to mitigate climate change — at least on paper.

As the backlash illustrates, your reaction to the those types of efforts probably hinge on your economic and social worldview.

The haters aren't just being petty, though. As the Journal of Political Inquiry observed, Bezos's wealth is only possible thanks to his previous position as chief executive of one of the largest corporate polluters on the planet. Between 2020 and 2021 alone, Amazon's carbon dioxide emissions grew by 18 percent, while his space company Blue Origin is altering the outer atmosphere in ways we're only starting to understand.

And his empire's carbon emissions have only skyrocketed since then, as the demand for cloud computing supersedes previous pledges to clamp down on Amazon's extraordinary excretions of noxious pollutants.

In other words, it's no wonder the masses are rising up in opposition to the billionaire and his actor friend — if only online, at least for now.

 Google co-founder Sergey Brin has now spent $100 million to fight the billionaire tax

Amanda Silberling
Mon, August 10, 2026 


Sergey Brin, president of Alphabet and co-founder of Google Inc., speaks during the 2016 Global Entrepreneurship Summit (GES) at Stanford University in Stanford, California, U.S., on Friday, June 24, 2016. The annual event brings together entrepreneurs from around the world for 3 days of networking, workshops and conferences. 

Photographer: David Paul Morris/Bloomberg via Getty Images

Google co-founder Sergey Brin has donated another $20 million to Build a Better California, an organization advocating against California's proposed billionaire tax, according to a new filing. That means that the world's fourth-richest man, whose net worth hovers around $267 billion, has now spent more than $100 million to avoid an estimated $13.3 billion tax payment.

California's Prop 40, known as the billionaire tax, would impose a one-time 5% tax on the net worth of around 200 billionaires that live in the state. The windfall from this proposed tax would mostly go toward funding California's healthcare programs. The state's Medicaid program alone could lose up to $30 billion in federal funding once Trump's budget cuts take effect next year.

Brin isn't the only tech mogul seeking ways to avoid such a tax. It's no coincidence that Meta founder Mark Zuckerberg reportedly bought a $170 million mansion near Miami this year. Former Uber CEO Travis Kalanick, venture capitalist Peter Thiel, and Brin's fellow Google co-founder Larry Page have also left the state.

Prop 40 has also generated dissent from Governor Gavin Newsom (D-CA), who is concerned about the economic impact of these billionaires and their businesses fleeing California. Instead, Newsom has called for a "national billionaires' tax."

"Today, the office worker can shoulder a higher tax rate than the heiress," Newsom noted in the blog post. "We should end the 'tax-free lifestyle loan,' the gimmick that lets the ultra-wealthy borrow against their stock portfolios while reporting no taxable income."

Californians will vote on Prop 40 in November. The organization that Brin is funding has proposed opposing ballot measures that, if passed, could effectively block Prop 40 by limiting the introduction of new taxes.

Meanwhile, Nvidia co-founder and unlikely working class hero Jensen Huang says he's "perfectly fine" paying the tax.

"I have not even thought about it once," Huang, who would owe around $8 billion in taxes, said in a January interview with Bloomberg. "We chose to live in Silicon Valley, and whatever taxes they would like to apply, so be it. I'm perfectly fine with it."

South Korea to launch $3.5 billion chip fund, speed development of semiconductor hubs

By Kyu-seok Shim and Heejin Kim
Mon, August 10, 2026 


FILE PHOTO: South Korean President Lee Jae Myung attends a press conference at the Alvorada Palace in Brasilia, Brazil, July 27, 2026. REUTERS/Adriano Machado/File Photo

SEOUL, Aug 10 (Reuters) - South Korea will launch a 5 trillion won ($3.52 billion) semiconductor fund targeting promising chip materials, parts, equipment and fabless companies, ‌a presidential official said, as Seoul seeks to accelerate plans for new chip manufacturing hubs across the ‌country.

The government will also provide a further 5 trillion won in trade finance for suppliers, Presidential Chief of Staff Kang Hoon-sik told a press ​briefing after a meeting chaired by President Lee Jae Myung on Monday.

The measures are part of Lee's semiconductor megaproject initiative unveiled in June, under which Samsung Electronics and SK Hynix, together with suppliers and local governments, are expected to invest more than $576 billion in new chip manufacturing projects, including major fabrication facilities in the country's southwest region.

"The government will create a new ‌semiconductor fund worth about 5 trillion won ⁠focused on promising materials, parts and equipment firms and fabless companies," Kang said.

The government would also launch a 10-year, 1 trillion won programme to support cooperation between large companies and smaller ⁠suppliers across semiconductor development, testing and production, Kang said.

The government will also seek passage of a Mega Special Zone Act at parliament within the year to speed up permits, environmental reviews and infrastructure construction, he said.

In his opening remarks before Monday's meeting, ​which was ​also attended by senior executives from Samsung Electronics and SK, ​Lee urged the Defence Ministry to relocate functions ‌of a military air base in Gwangju by mid-2028 to accelerate development of a semiconductor manufacturing complex planned for the site.

The government has designated the 8.3 million-square-metre area (9.9 million square yards) as a candidate national industrial complex and plans to complete relocation and temporary dispersal of military facilities by the second half of 2028.

Kang said the government would ensure power and water supplies are available on schedule for new semiconductor projects.

For the planned chip cluster in the southwestern Gwangju-South ‌Jeolla region, authorities plan to secure 650,000 metric tons of water ​daily by 2030 using recycled wastewater and supplies from nearby dams, he ​said.

For the Yongin semiconductor cluster, South Korea's flagship ​chip manufacturing project south of Seoul, Kang said the government plans to supply 14.7 gigawatts of ‌electricity by 2041 using a combination of cogeneration ​facilities, LNG generation and power ​from other regions.

Kang said megaprojects worth over 350 trillion won in other regions of the country are scheduled to begin construction or facility expansions this year, while a further 57 trillion won of research and development ​projects are also due to start.

The Lee ‌administration has made expanding semiconductor production capacity a central pillar of its industrial strategy, arguing that existing ​production bases around Yongin and Pyeongtaek will not be sufficient to meet demand driven by artificial ​intelligence.

(Reporting by Kyu-seok Shim and Heejin KimEditing by Ed Davies)

 Elon Musk Plans to Spend $119 Billion to Construct the World’s Largest Building, Just Outside Houston

AJ Tiarsmith

Mon, August 10, 2026 

24/7 Wall St. 

Key takeaways

Tesla and SpaceX have confirmed the construction of Terafab, a massive chip megafactory in Texas with $16.8 billion committed for phase one of a potential $119 billion project.See more

Quick Read

Tesla (TSLA) and SpaceX confirmed Terafab, a 100-million-square-foot Texas chip megafactory, with $16.8 billion committed for phase one of a $119 billion ceiling.


Intel (INTC) joined Terafab but hasn't disclosed its contribution, while SpaceX's only binding commitment is $5 billion invested and 1,800 jobs by 2035.

On August 6, 2026, Tesla (NASDAQ:TSLA) and SpaceX formally confirmed Terafab, a jointly built semiconductor megafactory in Grimes County, Texas, just north of Houston. On X, Elon Musk called it "the largest and most valuable building on Earth by far." The site plans exceed 100 million square feet of manufacturing space, more than five times China's New Century Global Center and larger than the Pentagon, Apple Park, and Mall of America combined.

Getty Images

The pitch is vertical integration at a scale nobody has attempted. Terafab will house manufacturing, packaging, and testing of advanced logic and memory chips in a single facility, aimed squarely at the bottleneck Musk keeps hitting: there are not enough chips on Earth to build the Optimus robots, Cybercabs, and space-based data centers he has pitched investors. SpaceX describes the plant as designed to "bridge the divide between current global chip supply and the compute demand of the future", with a stated production goal of more than 1 terawatt of compute per year optimized for edge inference.

The money framing matters. What is committed now is $16.8 billion for the first phase. The widely quoted $119 billion figure is a multi-phase ceiling SpaceX disclosed in its May 2026 filings, first reported by TechCrunch on May 6, 2026, and represents a top-end estimate, not confirmed spend. The legally binding floor is more modest: agreements signed by SpaceX CFO Bret Johnsen commit at least $5 billion in Grimes County by 2030 and at least 1,800 full-time jobs by 2035. Intel (NASDAQ:INTC) has agreed to contribute but has been vague about the size of its commitment.

Beyond the binding floor, the partners are promising at least 3,000 jobs across Grimes and neighboring Brazos County, with early production as soon as 2027 and mass production targeted for 2028. Texas is sweetening the deal: SpaceX received a $30 million Texas Enterprise Fund grant, and the project qualifies under the state's Texas Jobs, Energy, Technology, and Innovation program. Musk first floated Terafab in Austin on March 22, 2026; the Grimes County selection ends months of speculation.

Water was the community's first question, and the answer is unusual. The site sits on Gibbons Creek Reservoir, which previously cooled a coal-fired power plant that closed in 2018. SpaceX has committed to drawing process water from the reservoir rather than local groundwater, a concession clearly aimed at farmers worried about aquifer draw.

Local reaction has been split. A Grimes County meeting on Wednesday, August 5, drew hundreds of residents objecting to the scale of tax breaks and what they described as a lack of transparency. On the other side, Anderson-Shiro Consolidated ISD Superintendent Dr. Sarah Borowicz, in a statement released by the Texas Governor's office, said: "We believe this agreement will strengthen our district, expand opportunities, and better prepare our students for their future."

The signal to watch over the next 18 months is straightforward: does the first-phase $16.8 billion translate into groundbreaking on a fab bigger than the Pentagon, Apple Park, and Mall of America combined, or does the $119 billion ceiling quietly recede into the same category as every other Musk moonshot timeline?

Amazon Used a Startlingly Dirty Trick to Build a Data Center Without Consent of Community

Victor Tangermann
Mon, August 10, 2026 
FUTURISM


Shutterstock / Futurism

Tech giants like Amazon are finding ways to circumvent local opposition to building resource-hogging data centers in rural communities, sparking conflict in city council meetings.

A quiet war is playing out in rural communities across the country.

City council meetings are bursting into conflict as local residents try to keep AI data centers out of their backyards. Americans are starting to see through the promises of tech companies and the local politicians they've wooed, realizing that the advantages of hosting a resource-hogging data center in the neighborhood are slim.

Yet tech giants are finding creative — and sometimes startlingly dirty — new ways to circumvent local opposition in their quest to build out these sprawling facilities. As the Wall Street Journal reports, Amazon exploited 45-year-old zoning laws in Gilroy, California, to start construction on a data center without any residents knowing for five entire years.

"Many if not most residents first learned about this project after construction had already begun," local elementary-school teacher Coleen Crew told the town's recent council meeting, as quoted by the WSJ.

A single city staffer, the community's development director, greenlit Amazon's 438,500-square-foot data center, which spans 56 acres of former farmland. The ancient zoning criteria allowed industrial development along the location on a local freeway.

Gilroy's mayor was surprised his constituents suddenly wanted a say.

"It didn't bother them that a food-distribution center came to Gilroy without their engagement, but now it bothers them that a data center is coming to Gilroy without them having the possibility of engagement," he told the WSJ.

There are plenty of reasons why residents would be against Amazon's latest project. Data centers are a massive resource hog and have been known to raise electricity prices, spike local greenhouse gas emissions, generate ear-splitting noise, and taint water supplies. They are not typically major job creators.

In short, likening it to a "food-distribution center" isn't exactly a fair comparison.

Amazon Web Services president of economic development Roger Wehner told the WSJ that the company "followed standard approval processes for an industrially zoned parcel," but acknowledged that it should've recognized the community's desire for "more engagement sooner."

"We've since met directly with residents and hosted an open house to hear feedback and answer questions," he added.

City officials are now wondering whether to change the approval process in ways that would force developers to hold community meetings and engage with residents.

When resident Rosa Rodriguez found out about the project, she asked city staff in February to publicly comment on an environmental review report, citing concerns over the drought the region is facing. But planners shut her down, telling her the comment period had closed back in September 2024, long before she knew about the project's existence.

Amazon has since tried to win over the public, touting a new wastewater pipeline, tax revenue, construction jobs, and even the sponsorship of the annual Gilroy Garlic Festival. However, frustrated residents weren't mollified, demanding to at least be made aware of big unfolding projects like the data center.

Dr. Phil and a Texas Oil Firm Go to Greenland With a Suspicious Agenda. Signs Point to Trump’s Imperialist Visions.

Nicole LaFond
Mon, August 10, 2026 

TPM

A Texas oil company with ties to President Trump is preparing to drill in a remote area of Greenland without permission from the local government.

Of Course Dr. Phil Is Involved

There hasn't been a ton of new reporting on a suspiciously-timed and blatantly Trump-linked project unfolding in a remote area of Greenland, so I wanted to use Where Things Stand today to help pull some of these threads together. It's a convoluted story, of which we don't have the entire picture, but it involves a Texas oil company with close ties to Trump's imperialist visions in Greenland and, somehow, Dr. Phil.

The Guardian published a piece this weekend that both helped translate the Greenland government's response and chronicle a bit more of what is going on in the semi-autonomous territory of Denmark that President Trump has repeatedly threatened to try to exert more U.S. control over throughout his second term.

A Texas-based oil company with ties to President Trump, called Greenland Energy, is reportedly readying resources to begin drilling in a remote area of Greenland even though it does not yet have permission to do so from the Greenland government and local officials. Locals living in the remote area of Greenland's Nunap Qeqqa, or Jameson Land, have reported seeing drilling equipment being brought ashore and unloaded in the region in recent weeks and the Greenland government issued a "strong warning" against unauthorized actions in the area in a statement in late July.

"All future logistical matters must be advised and approved by the mineral resources authority — before they are carried out," the Greenland government said, per The Guardian's translation of this statement.

An 'Unprecedented Arctic Energy Initiative'

Executives for Greenland Energy have said that they plan to embark on an "unprecedented Arctic energy initiative" in Jameson Land, claiming they have reason to believe that $1 trillion worth of crude oil may lie beneath the surface. The company has been posting regular announcements about its Jameson Land drilling campaign since April of this year. I sifted through them this afternoon to get a clearer picture of some of The Guardian's reporting. The company has said it plans to spend $60 million drilling two wells in the area, though it appears that has since been scaled back to include just one well.

The issue is that Greenland has not issued new licenses for oil drilling since 2021. It appears as though the Texas-based group is working with 80 Mile, a UK company that has rights to drill in Jameson Land. In an Aug. 6 letter from Greenland Energy's management and board of directors to shareholders, executives unpack the arrangement between the company and 80 Miles a bit, putting the onus for regulatory permissions on the UK-based firm. Per the letter:

While 80 Mile Plc, as licensee of the Jameson Land joint venture, continues to lead the permitting process and stakeholder engagement, Greenland Energy remains actively engaged in supporting technical planning, operational readiness, logistics, and overall project coordination. Together, our objective is to ensure that once all required approvals are received, the project is positioned to commence drilling safely, efficiently, and in accordance with Greenland's rigorous regulatory standards.

Recent high-level meetings between project leadership and Greenlandic regulatory and oversight authorities have been constructive, and we continue to be encouraged by the progress being made toward the remaining approvals required for drilling.
Clear Ties to Trump

Looking through the company's statements, Greenland Energy has some ties to Trump and, perhaps, the various imperialistic goals that have fueled some of the most outrageous decisions of his second term. In a statement announcing the Jameson Land project back in April, Greenland Energy cited "disruptions to key shipping corridors, particularly around the Strait of Hormuz" when explaining its goals for the project:

Escalating geopolitical tensions and renewed disruptions to key shipping corridors, particularly around the Strait of Hormuz, are once again highlighting a persistent vulnerability: global energy security remains fragile. Despite years of diversification efforts, both the United States and Europe continue to face exposure to supply disruptions capable of cascading through economies, industries and households.

Personnel is another consideration. Greenland Energy announced in June that it had added Carol Craig to the company's board of directors. Craig runs a space exploration and defense company that is heavily involved in Trump's "Golden Dome" project, the missile defense plan that Trump has used as a basis for his ongoing argument that the "ownership and control of Greenland is an absolute necessity" for the U.S. (It's worth noting that the chair of Greenland Energy's board, Larry Swets, is reportedly known to have the president's ear and has said publicly that the drilling project is "not related to American annexation," per The Guardian.)

Add to the tangled web the fact that Greenland Energy and Envoy Media Company — which is owned by Phil McGraw, the right-wing Trump ally and TV doctor known as Dr. Phil — announced in June they'd developed a new partnership to create an "original docuseries" about the oil-drilling project, "hosted by Dr. Phil and spotlighting Greenland Energy Company's Arctic exploration." Here's more from Dr. Phil's announcement:

The docuseries will chronicle Greenland Energy's historic Jameson Land Basin project and its planned 2026 campaign in East Greenland, the country's first modern onshore oil exploration. The Arctic adventure series will capture the mission of these modern-day wildcatters, as well as the people and character of the country of Greenland itself. The extensive and complex production will deploy top-flight filming techniques to overcome the region's extreme and isolated conditions. The series is designed to inform, educate, while wildly entertaining audiences via this modern-day treasure hunt — its massive scope, technological innovation, life-changing social dynamics, and implications for energy security.

While the government of Greenland announced in its "warning" in July that the company did not have the necessary permissions secured for the project, it's unclear how its partnership with 80 Miles factors in to those concerns. In the letter to shareholders on Thursday, Greenland Energy appeared to at least acknowledge the fact that it doesn't have the necessary permissions to begin the project.

"Large-scale Arctic exploration campaigns require months of preparation before the first drill bit turns," they wrote. "Waiting until permits are issued before initiating logistical preparations would unnecessarily delay operations and risk losing valuable time within Greenland's limited operating season."

While it issued a warning, the government of Greenland might also be weighing how Trump could react should the project not receive the necessarily approvals, according to The Guardian:

As a semi-autonomous territory of Denmark, decisions about Greenland's natural resources rest with its local elected leaders, who now face a delicate decision. They could grant permission for oil drilling, even though the planned wells appear to fall within a conservation area protected by the Ramsar convention on wetlands. Or they could refuse and, some worry, give Trump a pretext to advance his imperialist agenda.

Since the beginning of his second term, Trump has been threatening to take over Greenland, claiming that the U.S. has a right to seize the semi-autonomous territory from Denmark, supposedly due to American efforts to defend the territory during World War II. He has claimed that the U.S. taking over Greenland is "vital" for national security reasons and his Golden Dome project, which he believes will help the U.S. fend off attacks from adversaries like Russia and China.

It's one of several hegemonic Trump II fever dreams that the President continues to elevate every few months — often in increasingly cryptic and ominous ways, like this AI generated Truth Social post from May.

Rachel Maddow flabbergasted as company tries to enlist her in Greenland oil scheme

Matthew Chapman
August 10, 2026 

RAW STORY


Rachel Maddow (image via screengrab).

President Donald Trump's obsession with Greenland has inspired a new harebrained business venture, Rachel Maddow told her viewers on MS NOW Monday night — and it already appears to be falling apart.

But before that, she said with some bemusement, the venture actually tried to get her to promote it.

Several weeks ago, she said, her office got "a totally unsolicited, totally over-the-top PR pitch offering me an embargoed, confidential sneak peek at a new project from Dr. Phil," announcing he was going to Greenland to do a TV show and asking if she'd be interested in covering it.

The "footage" they offered Maddow continued, "turned out to be footage in Greenland of an American guy talking about his plans to drill for oil in Greenland, which he apparently believed he had a right to do." She put the video on.

"That's why we're here, to reposition the road-building equipment," said a man in the clip, adding that "for a fact" they have all the authorizations to move forward with the work.

"The guy they're explaining this to appears to say, 'This is unlawful,'" Maddow noted. "It's kind of hard to hear, but it sounds like that's what he says."

Nonetheless, "some PR firm, in its infinite wisdom, believed that I would find it an exciting opportunity to help promote a new Dr. Phil TV show about how exciting it would be to drill for oil in Greenland."

Since that PR pitch, she said, things haven't gone so well for this enterprise.

"First of all, you should know that in 2021, Greenland passed a national moratorium, a national ban on all future oil exploration," said Maddow.

Despite this, once Trump resumed his public obsession with annexing Greenland, "for some reason, a new company formed in Texas called Greenland Energy," who "said they were going to drill for oil in Greenland."

Then, in June, they visited a remote part of Eastern Greenland with no roads, and "announced to the villagers there that this company, this Texas company, had permission ... to start bringing their equipment, their oil drilling equipment to this untouched Arctic area of Greenland."

Sadly for them, said Maddow, "the company later apologized and said, actually, they didn't have permits to do that. They put out a statement sort of correcting the record, saying, quote, our enthusiasm for the project led us to communicate in a way that created confusion."

 

Ilhan Omar questions whether Trump administration has used ICE to ‘surveil’ critics

Maya Yang
Mon, August 10, 2026 



Congresswoman Ilhan Omar attends a news conference with members of the congressional progressive caucus on funding and accountability for the Department of Homeland Security on 13 January 2026.

Photograph: Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call, Inc/Getty Images


Donald Trump's administration is facing questions over whether it is using Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) to "surveil political opponents" after after an investigative agent was apparently stationed outside Democratic representative Ilhan Omar's monthly town hall meeting in Richfield, Minnesota.

After the incident, Omar demanded the US Department of Homeland Security (DHS) clarify whether Homeland Security Investigations (HSI) agents have been used to monitor "any other activity" involving "local, state, or federal officials" in the state.

In a letter to Homeland Security Investigations (HSI), an arm of ICE, the congresswoman said an agent claiming to be conducting an undercover drug operation was parked outside the community center where she was holding an event last Thursday, without prior coordination with local law enforcement.

According to Omar, who represents Minnesota's fifth congressional district, a Richfield police officer noticed the agent sitting in a Ford Explorer and "became suspicious of the way she was monitoring the building".

"He proceeded to run the plates attached to the vehicle and discovered they were registered to a different vehicle," said Omar. "He approached the woman in the vehicle to ask about the purpose for her presence there and why the plates on her vehicle did not match the government's records. Like any reasonable officer, he was concerned that she harbored ill intentions and may be in a stolen vehicle."

The woman initially identified herself as security, but later called her supervisor and said she was an HSI agent conducting an undercover drug operation in the area, Omar said. Richfield police had not been informed of the operation beforehand, according the congresswoman.

Omar said that despite a visible sign indicating that a town hall was taking place at the community center, the agent remained parked there until speaking with her supervisor, after which she left the property.

"HSI's actions yesterday evening put an entire community at risk," she said. "Instead of monitoring the area for those who might wish harm to me and my constituents, Richfield Police were required to devote time to investigating why an HSI agent was outside of a Congressional event in a vehicle with mismatched plates."

Omar added: "It also raises serious and uncomfortable questions about the purpose of HSI's presence outside of my event. At best, your agent was unable to assess that the parking lot of a community center hosting a congressional event wasn't the best place to conduct a drug operation.

"At worst, it emphasizes many Americans' growing concern that the Trump administration uses ICE to surveil political opponents and may interfere with our democracy."

In her letter, Omar is demanding answers about why the agent was at the community center, how the agent and her supervisor knew she was holding a town hall there and what action they took in response to that knowledge.

The Guardian has contacted DHS for comment.

Inside the department, HSI is a federal law enforcement agency and the main investigative branch of ICE. ICE operations in Minnesota have sparked widespread protests across the state this year and have also resulted in the deaths of two Americans, Alex Pretti and Renee Nicole Good, who were killed by federal agents.

In January, a man sprayed Omar with an unidentified substance from a syringe during a town hall where she called for ICE to be abolished "for good".

The incident drew widespread condemnation from local and state leaders, with Minneapolis mayor Jacob Frey calling it "unacceptable" and saying: "We can disagree without putting people at risk."

⁠Is ICE using too much force? New poll shows big public opinion shift

Christopher Cann,

 USA TODAY
Updated Sun, August 9, 2026 

Months of immigration enforcement controversies have taken their toll, and new polling shows it could be a problem for Republicans heading into the midterms.

About 8 in 10 independent voters say U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement has used too much force in its nationwide operations, according to a poll from YouGov, which sampled 1,000 voters in late July. It's a striking increase from 2025, when polls showed independents more divided on the issue.

The poll, commissioned by the Vera Institute of Justice, a nonprofit working to end mass incarceration, was conducted shortly after ICE officers shot and killed two immigrants during traffic stops in Maine and Texas over the span of six days in July.

An earlier YouGov poll, which was conducted before the two shootings, found that most independents – 62% – believe ICE has gone too far. Other polls from YouGov, AP-NORC and The Civic Health and Institutions Project found that only a fraction of independent voters support ICE's handling of immigration enforcement.




Another fatal shooting by Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers has sparked outrage and calls for an investigation, this time into the death of a 26-year-old Colombian man who was killed on Monday in Maine.

People take part in a protest after a shooting involving U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) in Biddeford, Maine, July 13, 2026. (CJ Gunther, REUTERS)

A staff member of the office of U.S. Senator Susan M. Collins (R-ME) talks to protesters after a shooting involving U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) in Biddeford, Maine, July 13, 2026.

The shooting of Joan Sebastian Guerrero in Maine is the latest fatal shooting by an ICE agent, and comes just days after 52-year-old Lorenzo Salgado Araujo was shot and killed in Houston while authorities said ICE was conducting another traffic stop. (CJ Gunther, REUTERS)

A woman places flowers at a makeshift street side memorial, a day after a U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents fatally shot a driver, in Biddeford, Maine, July 14, 2026. (CJ Gunther, REUTERS)

Another fatal shooting by Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers has sparked outrage and calls for an investigation, this time into the death of a 26-year-old Colombian man who was killed on Monday in Maine.
People take part in a protest after a shooting involving U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) in Biddeford, Maine, July 13, 2026. (CJ Gunther, REUTERS)More

The data comes months ahead of the midterms, as Republicans are seeking to hold onto a narrow majority in both chambers of Congress. Several races are expected to be close and could be decided by independent voters – a group whose support has grown increasingly vital in recent elections.


The Department of Homeland Security in an emailed statement cited June polling data showing 80% of Americans support "deporting immigrants who are here illegally and have committed crimes." The statement urged cities to cooperate with ICE and praised the work of immigration officers.

Immigration was one of the top issues that led Republicans to win the presidency and gain full control of Congress in 2024, amid mounting frustrations over the Biden administration's handling of the U.S. southern border. But high-profile enforcement raids and multiple deadly shootings over the last year have eroded support for a central part of President Donald Trump's immigration agenda, political scientists and strategists said.

But not all of the president's actions on immigration are as unpopular as ICE's interior enforcement. The plunging number of border crossings into the United States is considered a success among at least half of all Americans, including independents, polls show. And Republicans overall maintain a sizable advantage on which party voters believe would do a better job at handling border security.

U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents stand guard outside Delaney Hall in Newark, New Jersey, U.S., May 28, 2026.

But with the midterms less than three months away, any uptick in disfavor for ICE among independents could spell trouble for Republicans seeking to win over voters from the center, experts said.

"This is a big vulnerability," said Matthew Grossman, a political scientist and professor of public policy at Michigan State University. "An issue that [Republicans] had in previous elections is now working to their disadvantage."

In a statement, National Republican Congressional Committee spokesperson Mike Marinella said GOP candidates running in the midterms will continue to embrace Trump's record on immigration and draw a contrast with the Biden administration.

"President Trump secured the border and is finally enforcing the law after four years of Biden-Harris chaos that let fentanyl and criminals pour into this country and cost American lives in every district," he said. "Democrats spent four years defending open borders and calling it compassion while Americans paid the price. Republicans will keep drawing that contrast in every district, because voters haven't forgotten what lawlessness looks like."
'The public mood has changed'

Trump was elected with a promise to carry out the largest deportation operation in U.S. history. On the campaign trail, his supporters held signs that read "MASS DEPORTATION NOW!" And in a 2024 interview with Time magazine, Trump said he wanted to deport "probably 15 million and maybe as many as 20 million" people.

Polls conducted in the months before the 2024 election saw Trump leading Biden by roughly 20 points on immigration and border security. Some polls found that for most voters, immigration was their top issue.

But controversies have eroded that support.

Surges of federal agents into cities such as Los Angeles, Chicago and Minneapolis fueled mass protests, lawsuits and widespread claims of harassment and racial profiling. In January, public outrage spiked following the fatal shootings of Alex Pretti and Renee Good by immigration officers in Minnesota.


ICE agents detain a protester outside of the federal immigration center at Delaney Hall, where ICE is housing detained immigrants, on May 28, 2026 in Newark, New Jersey. The ongoing protests, which became tense over the holiday weekend, come amid reports of a hunger strike by detainees. (Adam Gray, Getty Images)

An ICE agent points his taser at protestors outside of the federal immigration center at Delaney Hall, where ICE is housing detained immigrants, on May 28, 2026 in Newark, New Jersey. The ongoing protests, which became tense over the holiday weekend, come amid reports of a hunger strike by detainees. (Adam Gray, Getty Images)

Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents use mace to forcibly push protesters and members of the press back outside Delaney Hall on Wednesday, May 27, 2026, in Newark. Some of the detainees are currently hunger striking against alleged poor conditions inside the facility. Protesters were attempting to block vehicles from entering or exiting the facility. (Julian Leshay Guadalupe/NorthJersey.com)


In the aftermath, immigration authorities sought to keep a lower profile, moving away from the highly visible raids that drew intense scrutiny. Republicans, meanwhile, talked less about mass deportations and more about targeted enforcement going after criminals, as well as the low number of border crossings.

But protests and backlash reignited again in July after ICE agents in Texas and Maine shot and killed two men in less than a week. And while immigration authorities have largely halted their high-profile raids, ICE detentions have surged.

A poll from The Associated Press and NORC conducted after the shootings found that 39% of adults approved of Trump's performance on immigration, down from 49% at the start of his term.

According to the same poll, 3 in 10 adults approve of the way ICE is enforcing immigration laws. Among independents, 18% approved of ICE's actions.

"This has consequences for the campaigns," said Kyle Kondik, a political analyst who has written several books on U.S. elections. "Some of the messaging that Republicans thought was effective in 2024 on immigration may not be anymore because the public mood has changed."

Immigration remains a deeply partisan issue

U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents and federal officers detain a migrant as he walks out from a hearing at a U.S. immigration court in Manhattan, in New York City, U.S., Oct. 27, 2025.

Polls show that views on immigration largely fall along party lines, as has been the trend for more than a decade, experts said.

Less than 2 in 10 Republicans say ICE has used excessive force, and most either said the agency has used "about the right amount of force" or "not enough," according to the YouGov poll conducted in July. Democrats, meanwhile, remain firmly opposed to the immigration enforcement operations underway, with 9 in 10 saying ICE has gone too far.

In primary races across the United States, immigration was one of the central issues in campaign speeches and advertisements, especially in areas that saw large amounts of enforcement actions.

Some Democratic candidates who won their party's nomination have called for ICE to be abolished, including progressives in Michigan, Illinois and New Jersey.

Abdul El-Sayed tells Michigan voters, "There is so much more that unites us now," after his primary victory and calls for Medicare for all.

On the Republican side, many primary candidates leaned into immigration, spending tens of millions on advertisements that mention or were solely focused on the issue, according to data from the firm AdImpact. Those in areas that have seen controversial ICE actions have walked a tightrope, criticizing some tactics while supporting popular immigration-related initiatives like enhanced border security.

It's largely proved successful. On Aug. 4, a slate of Trump-backed Republican candidates who support the administration's immigration enforcement efforts won the GOP nomination in Washington state, Kansas and Michigan.

But, as analysts note, candidates often appeal to their party's hard-line or most vocal factions in primaries before later tempering their messages.

"They're speaking to a different electorate in the primary than they are in the general," Grossman said.
What does this mean for the midterms?

It's unclear how much of an impact immigration will have on the November elections, analysts said. A lot can happen by the time voters head to the polls. And in each district, voters' priorities are different.

The YouGov poll conducted in late June and early July found that cost of living, inflation and the economy were the top issues for voters – not immigration, which ranked below healthcare policy and international military conflicts. Recent polling from Pew Research Center and Marquette Law School showed similar results.

But like immigration, public support for Trump's handling of the economy and the Iran war has waned, giving Republican candidates limited options for a positive messaging strategy heading into November, analysts said.

The price of gasoline is displayed at a gas station near the highway in Encinitas, California, U.S., April 30, 2026.

Experts suspect Republican candidates will focus their messaging on their opponents in coming months.

"Their current positive sign, as [Republicans] see it, is Democrats are nominating more extreme candidates," Grossman said, speaking about the wave of progressives who've won Democratic primaries across the country. "That might mean more negative campaigns going into the fall."

GOP leadership has already begun employing this tactic

.

President Donald Trump speaks during an event promoting his administration's recent tax-relief initiative at Red Rock Casino Resort and Spa in Las Vegas on Aug. 5, 2026.

During an Aug. 5 speech focused on the economy and how his policies have lowered costs for Americans, Trump repeatedly turned to the progressive wing of the Democratic Party.

"These people are dangerous and, frankly, lunatics," Trump told the crowd at a Las Vegas casino. "They're crazy, and we can't let them get into office."

Christopher Cann is a national reporter for USA TODAY. Contact him by email at ccann@usatoday.com.

This article originally appeared on USA TODAY