WASHINGTON, D.C.  – Trump scored a big win this week when a new U.S. economic report brought some welcome news. The Consumer Price Index (CPI) showed inflation easing to 2.4% in January, down from 2.7% in December. That’s the lowest reading since mid-2025.

At the same time, the Bureau of Labor Statistics said employers added 130,000 jobs. That beat forecasts near 70,000. The unemployment rate also ticked down to 4.3%.

Both reports arrived after a short delay tied to a partial federal government shutdown. Even so, the message was clear. Hiring stayed steady, and price growth cooled. The White House pointed to the combination as a sign that workers are gaining purchasing power, since wages have been rising faster than inflation.

Inflation Slips as Energy Falls and Last Year’s Price Spikes Fade

January’s CPI rose 0.2% from the prior month, under the 0.3% increase many economists expected. Over the past year, the headline rate slowed to 2.4%, the softest pace in eight months. Core CPI, which removes food and energy, eased to 2.5% year over year.

Several categories helped pull inflation lower:

• Energy prices dropped 1.5% for the month, with gasoline down 7.5%.
• Shelter costs rose 0.2%, while food also increased 0.2%, both in line with a gentler trend.
• Used cars and trucks fell, which helped offset smaller increases in services like airline fares and medical care.

Economists said part of the improvement came from base effects. In other words, the high price jumps from January 2025 no longer weighed on the yearly math. Softer commodity prices also helped. Still, some analysts warned that service costs remain sticky, which could slow progress from here.

For now, the Federal Reserve has kept interest rates steady. Officials want to see inflation keep moving toward the 2% target without stalling the economy.

Hiring Under Trump Beats Expectations, Even as 2025 Gets Marked Down

On the jobs side, January payrolls increased by 130,000. That followed a revised 48,000 gain in December. Private employers added 172,000 jobs, while losses in federal government and financial activities held down the total.

Job growth showed up most in:

• Health care and social assistance, which continued to lead hiring
• Construction, supported by ongoing infrastructure work
• Business and professional services, which stayed firm

Meanwhile, the unemployment rate slipped to 4.3% from 4.4%. Household employment also jumped, which helped explain the lower rate. Wages kept climbing, too. Average hourly earnings have been running around 3.7% higher than a year earlier in recent months.

However, the report also came with a big reset for last year. Annual benchmark revisions cut total 2025 job growth from 584,000 to 181,000, or about 15,000 per month. The update reflected new Census data and changes to modeling assumptions. It also reinforced the idea that 2025 looked like a “low hire, low fire” year, with most net gains concentrated in areas like health care.

White House Highlights Real Wage Gains and Better Purchasing Power

Administration officials moved quickly to frame the numbers as good news for workers. They said real wages have improved as inflation cooled, which helps families stretch each paycheck further. The White House also said some blue-collar industries, including construction, manufacturing, and mining, have seen stronger gains. In some cases, officials suggested inflation-adjusted earnings could rise by $1,300 or more per year.

At the same time, the administration argued that earlier inflation had eroded purchasing power for many households. They credited policy changes, spending restraint, and domestic investment efforts for easing price pressure and supporting wage growth.

“These numbers show American workers are winning big, wages are surging ahead of inflation, restoring the purchasing power families deserve,” a White House spokesperson said in response to the reports.

What It Could Mean for Markets and the Fed

Together, softer inflation and solid hiring created a generally upbeat setup for investors. Stocks gained on hopes that the economy can keep growing without another spike in prices. Bond yields stayed fairly steady as traders weighed the stronger jobs number against the cooler CPI reading.

Many analysts expect the Fed to stay on hold through much of 2026. Policymakers want consistent proof that inflation is staying lower. At the same time, a steady labor market reduces recession worries. Still, it could push rate cuts further out if wage growth stays strong.

For households, the mix of slower inflation and ongoing job creation offers some breathing room. Gas and grocery prices showed signs of relief. Even so, housing and other services continue to put pressure on budgets.

As 2026 moves forward, the focus will stay on whether this early progress holds. The economy still has to work through the after-effects of 2025’s slowdown, along with outside forces such as trade policy shifts.

Related News:

Trump Tariff Revenue Jumps 300% as Supreme Court Fight Nears

WASHINGTON, D.C. – CNN senior data analyst Harry Enten highlighted new Gallup polling that points to a growing problem for Democrats: more voters now see the party as too far left. On “CNN News Central,” Enten told anchor Kate Bolduan that 58% of Americans say the Democratic Party is “too liberal.” That’s the highest figure Gallup has recorded.

Just as important, the share has risen for decades. In other words, this isn’t a one-year blip. It’s a long trend that keeps moving in the same direction.

During the segment, Enten said the numbers show the party’s left wing holds more sway. He also argued that this shift could bring political costs, because most voters say Democrats have gone too liberal.

Gallup’s trend line shows the steady climb:

• 42% in 1996
• 48% in 2013
• 58% in 2025

That’s a 10-point jump since 2013 and a 16-point increase since the mid-1990s. Enten stressed that the view isn’t limited to a small group. Instead, it reflects a broad slice of the electorate, including moderates and many independents.

Inside the Party: Democrats Are Labeling Themselves More Liberal

Enten also pointed to changes inside the Democratic Party itself. Compared with the late 1990s, more Democrats now place themselves on the liberal end of the spectrum. At the same time, fewer call themselves conservative.

Here’s what stood out in the data Enten discussed:

• “Very liberal” Democrats now sit at 21%, or about one in five party members.
• Liberal identification overall (somewhat liberal plus very liberal) adds up to around three in five Democrats.
• Conservative Democrats fell sharply, dropping from 26% in 1999 to 8% today. Enten joked about their disappearance with a quick “adios amigos, goodbye.”

Age also plays a big role. Younger Democrats lean further left than older voters in the party. Among Democrats under 35:

• 42% identify as democratic socialists.
• Across the whole party, about one-third use the same label.

Enten said that the far left used to be a small part of the coalition. Now, he believes it has more influence, including in primaries where progressive challengers push incumbents from the left.

Why the “Too Liberal” Label Matters for Elections

These numbers land at a sensitive time for Democrats. In recent cycles, the party has faced struggles with working-class voters, moderates, and swing-seat districts. If most Americans think Democrats have moved too far left, that perception can make rebuilding those coalitions harder.

Enten warned that the trend could lead to “electoral repercussions.” The issue isn’t only what policies Democrats support. It’s also how voters interpret the party’s direction.

Progressive priorities, such as bigger social programs, climate policy, and social justice efforts, energize the base. However, the Gallup results suggest the party’s image may be drifting away from where many voters sit.

Independents, along with center-leaning Democrats, appear especially uneasy. Also, with fewer conservative Democrats in the mix, the party has fewer internal voices that naturally speak to the middle. As a result, competitive races may get tougher in places where elections are decided by narrow margins.

Bigger Picture and What to Watch Next

The Gallup findings fit into a wider story of polarization in American politics. Republicans have seen their own ideological sorting, too. Still, Enten’s focus here stayed on Democrats and how quickly the public now sees the party moving left.

After the segment, Enten posted a clip online and summed up the takeaway in plain terms: 58% of voters say Democrats are too liberal, and one in three Democrats identify as democratic socialists.

With the 2026 midterms ahead, the message is clear. Democratic leaders may need to keep progressives engaged while also easing concerns among moderates. Voters often care most about day-to-day issues like the economy, public safety, and practical governance. If the party can’t close the image gap, the “too liberal” label could become a real drag at the ballot box.

For now, Enten’s analysis highlights a simple reality: a majority of Americans think Democrats have gone too far left, and that view could shape the party’s political fortunes in the next election cycle.

Related News:

CNN Delivers Stark Reality Check to Democrats Over Voter ID

Democrats’ Stance on Voter ID Described as Racist by Many Blacks

WASHINGTON, D.C. – President Donald Trump appeared with Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Lee Zeldin on Thursday to announce a major policy shift, the formal repeal of the 2009 “endangerment finding.”

That Obama-era determination said greenhouse gases threaten public health and welfare. Trump and Zeldin called the move the largest deregulatory action in US history. They also said it removes the federal government’s main legal basis for regulating carbon dioxide and other heat-trapping emissions under the Clean Air Act.

Inside the White House Roosevelt Room, Trump criticized the policy as government overreach. “We are officially terminating the so-called endangerment finding, a ridiculous Obama-era policy,” he said. He added that the change would end greenhouse gas emissions standards for vehicles for model years 2012 through 2027 and later. Trump described the repeal as the biggest deregulation effort the country has ever seen.

Zeldin, a former New York congressman, backed up Trump’s message and aimed at previous administrations. He called the 2009 finding “the Holy Grail of federal regulatory overreach.” He also accused the Obama and Biden teams of using it to push strict climate rules that, in his view, raised costs and hurt the economy.

Trump signed an executive order

“Today, the Trump EPA has finalized the single largest act of deregulation in the history of the United States of America,” Zeldin said. He claimed the repeal would save taxpayers more than $1.3 trillion, about $3,800 per person, by expanding consumer choice, helping the auto industry, and reducing everyday costs.

The endangerment finding dates back to December 2009. The EPA issued it after the Supreme Court’s ruling in Massachusetts v. EPA (2007). At the time, the agency concluded that six greenhouse gases, including carbon dioxide, methane, and nitrous oxide, pose risks to health and the environment.

Since then, the finding has served as the legal backbone for many federal climate rules. Those include tailpipe limits for cars and trucks, power plant standards, and other climate-related programs. By pulling it back, the Trump administration undercuts the legal support for those rules and could make it harder to regulate emissions from vehicles, factories, refineries, and other sources going forward.

The announcement ends a fast-moving review that started early in Trump’s second term. On his first day back in office, Trump signed an executive order directing the EPA to re-examine the finding’s legal basis.

Zeldin moved the process forward in March 2025 with a formal proposal to reconsider it, then advanced a repeal plan in July. Thursday’s final action came after public comment periods and internal legal work that referenced recent Supreme Court decisions, including Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo and West Virginia v. EPA.

Supporters in the energy sector and among conservative lawmakers cheered the decision. They say the original finding stretched the Clean Air Act past what Congress intended. In their view, the resulting mandates drove up energy costs and limited domestic production. They also argue the repeal will support US oil and gas development, bring back auto jobs, and end what Zeldin has described as an “ideological crusade” against fossil fuels.

Climate Alarmists to Sue

Environmental groups and other critics responded with sharp opposition. They argued the repeal rejects well-established climate science and protects big polluters while putting public health at risk. Organizations, including the Natural Resources Defense Council and the Environmental Defense Fund, said they plan to challenge the move in court.

Former EPA officials and scientists said the evidence linking greenhouse gases to harm has only grown since 2009. They also pointed to recent years of record or near-record heat and costly extreme weather.

“This rule doesn’t change the reality of climate change, it just denies it,” said one former Biden-era EPA adviser. The Sierra Club called the repeal a “brazen assault” on American families.

The group warned it could lead to higher health costs tied to dirtier air, along with worse storms and floods, plus rising insurance bills. Meanwhile, legal analysts expect lawsuits from states, environmental organizations, and possibly cities. Those fights could push the issue back to the Supreme Court.

The ripple effects could reach far beyond vehicle rules. For example, the repeal may wipe out limits on emissions from power plants and industrial sites. It could also slow or scrap Biden-era vehicle standards. In addition, it may tie the hands of future administrations that want to address climate pollution without new legislation from Congress, which remains difficult in a divided Washington.

The move also tracks with conservative policy plans, including Project 2025, that have urged limits on federal climate authority.

As reactions pour in, the repeal highlights the country’s deep divide over climate policy. For Trump and Zeldin, it’s a win for deregulation and cost relief. For opponents, it’s a major setback in efforts to curb warming and reduce climate risks. Legal challenges now look likely, so the final impact may take months or years to sort out.

Related News:

Trump Takes Aim at China’s Critical Minerals Control With Project Vault