The narrative of widespread “Trump regret” has officially hit the wall of cold, hard data. In a refreshing moment of clarity on CNN, polling analyst Harry Enten dismantled one of the media’s most cherished myths: that a large chunk of Trump voters are secretly wishing they had filled in the bubble for someone else in 2024.
According to Enten, only about two percent of Republican voters say they would change their vote if given the chance. That’s not a groundswell of remorse—that’s a rounding error. And it completely shreds the idea that the MAGA movement is crumbling under second thoughts.
CNN data guru Harry Enten nukes the narrative that Trump supporters regret voting for him, despite the media’s insistence that Republican voters with buyer’s remorse are many. pic.twitter.com/KJN4vE0umO
— Rusty (@Rusty_Weiss) April 16, 2025
Despite relentless fear-mongering over the economy, threats to democracy, and theatrical “Save the Republic” rallies, Trump’s supporters have remained unshakable.
Enten made it plain: “Very few of them regret what they did back in 2024.” And when he compared those numbers to voters for Kamala Harris, the regret levels were nearly identical. In other words, no one’s switching sides in droves. The battle lines have been drawn—and they’re holding.
Enten also reached back to the 2016 election and found a similar pattern: Trump voters don’t look back. That’s something legacy media outlets still haven’t come to grips with. MSNBC, Buzzfeed, and others have been publishing dubious anecdotes and cherry-picked testimonials—often without names, context, or even evidence—hoping to float a narrative that simply doesn’t exist in real data.
Ana Navarro: “I keep waiting for Trump voters to have regrets. No. They are all gleeful.” pic.twitter.com/3Y8MqSMo3f
— End Wokeness (@EndWokeness) March 21, 2025
Buzzfeed’s infamous list of “regretful Trump voters”? Sixteen alleged individuals, fifteen of whom were anonymous, and the one who wasn’t went by the username “zery.”
That’s not analysis—that’s fiction. And it underscores the broader problem: legacy media outlets have grown increasingly comfortable substituting online noise for national sentiment.
