Mark Cuban, the billionaire entrepreneur and star of the reality TV show “Shark Tank,” has recently made headlines by endorsing Kamala Harris for president. However, Cuban’s political journey is more complex than a simple party-line stance. In a recent interview with Vivek Ramaswamy, Cuban revealed that he once supported Donald Trump, only to become disillusioned after getting to know him better and examining his track record in both business and politics.
“I actually started off supporting Donald and then I got to know him better. I was like, ‘He’s great, he’s not a typical Stepford candidate.’ I thought that was a positive, and then I got to know him,” Cuban shared during the interview, which was released on X (formerly Twitter) and YouTube. Initially, Trump’s appeal as an outsider who could shake up the political establishment resonated with Cuban. The Dallas Mavericks owner appreciated Trump’s unconventional approach and believed that his outsider status could disrupt what Cuban viewed as a stagnant political scene.
“I didn’t think he had a chance, and so I just wanted to kind of, you know, screw things up in traditional politics that I’m not a fan of,” Cuban added, indicating his initial enthusiasm for Trump was driven more by a desire to challenge the status quo than by a deep alignment with Trump’s policies or character.
However, as Cuban got to know Trump better and scrutinized his business practices and political conduct, his support waned. Cuban pointed to several instances that, in his view, exposed Trump’s unethical behavior. “The bigger point is Trump University. Trump SoHo. Stole $4 million from a friend of mine that had to sue to get it back. Mike Pence,” Cuban stated.
Trump University, the real estate training program that led to numerous lawsuits and a $25 million settlement, was a major turning point for Cuban. He saw it as emblematic of the kind of unethical behavior that he could not support. The controversy surrounding Trump SoHo, a luxury hotel that faced multiple legal and financial challenges, further solidified Cuban’s negative view. The hotel was plagued by issues, including the death of a construction worker and accusations of taking money from Russian backers, ultimately leading to The Trump Organization severing ties with the property, which was later rebranded as “The Dominick.”
Cuban also mentioned former Vice President Mike Pence, whose relationship with Trump became strained after Pence certified the 2020 election results, a move that infuriated Trump. Cuban’s criticism of Trump’s treatment of Pence highlighted his broader concerns about Trump’s ethical compass. “He was unethical then, and he’s still unethical,” Cuban emphasized, underscoring his belief that Trump’s behavior has been consistent over time, in ways that Cuban finds deeply troubling.
This is not the first time Cuban has spoken out against Trump’s ethics. In March, he told Axios that he would choose the Biden-Harris ticket over Trump “all day every day” because he did not want “a snake oil salesperson as president.” This sentiment echoes Cuban’s recent remarks in his conversation with Ramaswamy, where he reiterated his strong opposition to Trump’s return to the White House.
Cuban’s journey from tentative Trump supporter to vocal critic underscores the complexity of political alignments and the impact of personal experience on political beliefs. His disillusionment with Trump reflects a broader trend among some former supporters who, after witnessing Trump’s actions and decisions, have reconsidered their support. Cuban’s endorsement of Kamala Harris marks a clear shift in his political stance, driven by his concerns about ethics, integrity, and leadership.
As the 2024 presidential race heats up, Cuban’s comments add another layer to the ongoing debate about Trump’s legacy and his influence on American politics. Whether or not Cuban’s endorsement will sway voters remains to be seen, but his candid reflections on his political evolution provide a compelling narrative of disillusionment and the search for ethical leadership in a time of deep political division.