Displaying posts categorized under

ELECTIONS

A Forgettable Warped Debate The sappy Harris won the visuals; the grouchy Trump likely the issues. But the real losers were ABC and its two partisan moderators, Muir and Davis. By Victor Davis Hanson

https://amgreatness.com/2024/09/12/a-forgettable-warped-debate/

The September 10th presidential debate went down as expected. Summed up, it was Sappy and the Blob pile on Grouchy.

The swarmy and evasive Kamala Harris preened, posed, and proffered empty platitudes.

The ABC moderators proved they were predictably and shamelessly biased.

And an irate Donald Trump confirmed that he was too touchy and easily triggered.

Harris’s instructions were not to explain her agenda. She never defended disowning policies that she had embraced as a lifelong, self-confessed, “woke” “radical.”

Instead, Harris’s threefold strategy was simple enough—and it mostly worked.

One, goad Trump as a coward and racist. Then smile and call for unity, kindness, and an end to such name-calling.

Harris’s orders were to zero in on hair-trigger irrelevancies that would incite and sidetrack the thin-skinned Trump.

So, Harris claimed his massive rallies were failures, crackpot—and worst of all, boring!—as she falsely added that weary attendants left early.

All that was missing from her adolescent putdowns was Barack Obama’s earlier convention speech obscenity that Donald Trump supposedly suffered from undersized genitalia.

In Harris’s upside-down, projectionist world, ex-president Trump caused the Biden-Harris disastrous skedaddle from Afghanistan.

He was accused of being mostly responsible for the effects of the global COVID-19 plague that killed over 100 million.

Liz Cheney Has It Backward: Never-Trumpers Would Have Hated Reagan, Too

https://issuesinsights.com/2024/09/12/absolutely-no-chance-cheney-and-other-never-trumpers-would-have-supported-reagan/

Liz Cheney – who recently endorsed Kamala Harris, a person Cheney described as a “radical liberal” just four years ago – now says there is “absolutely no chance” that Ronald Reagan would support Donald Trump.

She has it exactly backward. It’s people like Liz Cheney and the cabal of other never-Trumpers who never would have supported Reagan when he ran in 1980.

“Donald Trump doesn’t stand for any of the things that Ronald Reagan did,” Cheney said. “It’s another place where I would urge my Republican colleagues … to really look at Donald Trump’s policies, to really look at the danger that he presents,” Cheney said in an interview on ABC News’ “This Week.”

Cheney’s claim that Reagan didn’t support Trumpian policies is demonstrably false.

In his first term, Trump enacted pro-growth tax cuts, started eliminating regulations, and built up the nation’s military after years of neglect by Democrats. He appointed conservatives to the Supreme Court. He championed the working class.

In Reagan’s first term, he did likewise.

Reagan called the Heritage Foundation’s 1980 “Mandate for Leadership” – a massive guide to conservative policymaking – the bible for guiding his administration and handed it out to every Cabinet official. Trump enacted two-thirds of the recommendations contained in Heritage’s 2016 “Mandate.”

Here’s the fact check that ABC didn’t give Kamala Harris

https://nypost.com/2024/09/11/opinion/heres-the-fact-check-that-abc-didnt-give-kamala-harris/?utm_campaign=iphone_nyp&utm_source=mail_app

During Tuesday night’s debate, ABC News moderators David Muir and Linsey Davis interrupted Donald Trump five times to “fact-check” his answers.

They did the same to Kamala Harris … never.

The vice president was allowed to skate through the debate without substantive follow-up questions or pushback on some of her obviously false claims.

So since ABC didn’t do its job, here are some of the fact checks they should have made:

Vice President and Democratic presidential candidate Kamala Harris listens as former President and Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump speaks during a presidential debate at the National Constitution Center in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, on September 10, 2024.AFP via Getty Images

Kamala claim: “As of today, there is not one member of the United States military who is in active duty in a combat zone in any war zone around the world, the first time this century.”

Fact check: Our troops in Middle East are absolutely in a combat zone, under attack from Iran, which the Biden-Harris administration has allowed to grow more aggressive in its use of proxies. In January this year, three US soldiers in Jordan were killed by a drone attack from an Iran-aligned group, and dozens of others have been wounded in similar strikes.

Kamala claim: “What you’re going to hear tonight is a detailed and dangerous plan called Project 2025 that the former president intends on implementing if he were elected again.”

Fact check: The Heritage Foundation, an independent think tank, produced Project 2025, not the Trump campaign. Trump has repeatedly said he wasn’t involved in its writing, does not believe in its policies and won’t implement it.

Fact-Checking 22 Claims Made in Trump-Harris Debate

https://www.dailysignal.com/2024/09/10/fact-checking-claims-made-in-trump-harris-debate/

The rules in this debate were the same as the June debate. Candidates’ microphones were silenced while the opponent answered questions.

1. Trump: We had no inflation

Trump repeatedly said he “had no inflation” during his tenure in the White House. While inflation grew much faster under Biden and Harris, prices also rose under Trump.

Prices overall rose 19% over the first 42 months of Biden’s term compared with 6% during Trump’s first 42 months, according to Forbes. Year-over-year inflation peaked under Biden at a four-decade hgh of 9% in 2022.

2. Opportunity economy

Harris said she is the only candidate promoting an opportunity economy, but Trump’s Tax Cuts and Jobs Act gave the 82% of middle-income earners a tax cut that averaged about $1,050, according to FactCheck.org.

“I was raised in a middle-class home,” Harris said, “And I am actually the only person on the stage who has a plan to lift up the middle class and the working people, and when you look at his economic plan, it’s all about tax breaks for the richest people.” 

But even the Biden-Harris administration’s Treasury secretary, Janet Yellen, acknowledged that Trump’s 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act cut taxes for all.

The year following the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, new job openings surged, and about 83,000 more Americans voluntarily left their jobs for better opportunities at the end of 2019, compared with the trend before the reform.

3. Trump: Harris’ father Is a Marxist professor

The claim that Harris’ father is a Marxist was fact-checked by Snopes as “true” after a viral X post from political economist Maxine Fowé.

Donald Harris, a now-retired professor of economics at Stanford University, was the author of a 1978 book, “Capital Accumulation and Income Distribution.” It features ideas on Karl Marx’s theory of capital. “His book, ‘Capital Accumulation and Income Distribution’, published in 1978 and dedicated to Kamala and her sister, examines the pitfalls of relying on profit-seeking capitalists to direct an economy,” writes The Economist. The New Yorker wrote of Donald Harris being “a renowned Marxist economist from Jamaica who taught at Stanford University for decades.”

4. Border ‘Security’ Bill

With the border and illegal immigration being one of the most important issues among voters in the 2024 presidential election, it’s no surprise moderators raised the issue early on in the debate.

Muir began by asking Harris why the Biden administration waited “until six months before the election” to take action on the border, referring to Biden’s recent executive order limiting illegal border crossings.

Harris answered by touting her work prosecuting “transnational criminal organizations,” before attacking Trump for opposing a controversial border bill that failed in the Senate twice.

Harris said the failed bill “would have allowed us to stem the flow of fentanyl” coming into the U.S., and would have provided “more resources to prosecute transnational criminal organizations.”

The failed bill directed the Department of Homeland Security to close the southern border “during a period of seven consecutive calendar days, [if] there is an average of 5,000 or more aliens who are encountered each day.”

Over 1.8 million illegal aliens a year still would have been permitted to enter the United States under the now twice-failed legislation.

Harris blamed Trump for the bill’s failure, saying the former president “got on the phone” and told Republican members of Congress to “kill the bill.”

Trump, and many GOP members of Congress, were clear about their opposition to the proposed border security bill, arguing it would enshrine harmful border policies into law.

The Senate border bill “codified Joe Biden’s open border,” Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, said of the bill in February.

Sen. James Lankford, R-Okla., led the way in negotiating the terms of the bill with Democrats. Lankford was one of the few Republicans who voted in favor of advancing the border and foreign aid bill, along with Republican Sens. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, Susan Collins of Maine, and Mitt Romney of Utah.

Even if the Senate had successfully passed the bill, House Speaker Mike Johnson said the bill would have been “dead on arrival” in the House.

China Casting the Decisive Vote in U.S. Election by Gordon G. Chang

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/20930/china-casting-the-decisive-vote-in-us-election

[W]hat about similar efforts of the far larger People’s Republic of China?

Attorney General Merrick Garland mentioned China in passing in remarks on the 4th—he promised to be “relentlessly aggressive” against foreign powers interfering in American elections and undermining democracy—but there were no indictments or other actions by his department, Treasury, or State against the Chinese regime for election-interference offenses.

It is clear that China, at this moment, is doing the same things as Russia, only on a larger scale.

“China’s trolls are conducting one of the world’s largest covert online influence operations. Its attack element is the group called ‘Spamouflage,’ and it is impersonating U.S. voters to denigrate U.S. politicians and push divisive messages ahead of the November 5 election.” — Kerry Gershaneck, former U.S. counterintelligence official, to Gatestone, September, 2024

The operation, reported Jack Stubbs, Graphika’s chief intelligence officer, was attempting “to portray the U.S. as this declining global power with weak political leadership and a failing system of governance.” The effort was comprehensive. As Stubbs said, this operation was run by “Chinese state-linked actors.”

This election cycle, Spamouflague achieved its greatest success on TikTok. That is probably not a coincidence as the Wall Street Journal “found TikTok pushing thousands of videos with political lies and hyperbole to its users.”

So, what are federal authorities doing about China now? Said Canfield: “Nothing, zero, zilch, nada.”

The Justice Department on September 4 announced it was seizing 32 internet domains “used in Russian government-directed foreign malign influence campaigns colloquially referred to as ‘Doppelganger.'” DOJ also announced criminal charges against two Russian media executives.

Trump Debates ABC News A debate with an establishment, not with a candidate. by Daniel Greenfield

https://www.frontpagemag.com/debate/

What was supposed to be a presidential debate between former President Trump and Vice President Kamala Harris hosted by ABC News, instead became a debate between the former president, his current challenger, and ABC’s two moderators: David Muir and Linsey Davis.

Even as Kamala Harris lied about her positions on fracking, gun control, and Israel, Muir and Davis repeatedly jumped in to argue with Trump under the guise of ‘fact-checking’ him.

The 3-on-1 debate format may very well mark the end of mainstream media presidential debates. It also represented a new low in not just media bias, but election interference.

The media marks each year by giving the public new reasons to distrust it, and ABC News, Muir, and Davis were clearly so insecure about the performance of their candidate that they repeatedly felt called on to argue with Trump instead of letting Kamala rebut him.

ABC News, Muir, and Davis also had no trust in the voters to decide for themselves. 

And so what was supposed to be a debate between two candidates instead became a debate between the establishment and an insurgent. Paradoxically this cut against efforts by the Kamala campaign to brand her an “underdog: and an insurgent candidate swimming upstream.

Trump debate performance panned as well-prepped Harris gets help from ABC moderators: ‘3 on 1’ By Steven Nelson and Diana Glebova

https://nypost.com/2024/09/11/us-news/trump-debate-performance-panned-as-well-prepped-harris-gets-help-from-abc-moderators-three-on-one/

PHILADELPHIA — Former President Donald Trump repeatedly found himself on the back foot Tuesday night during his debate with Vice President Kamala Harris — as Republicans seethed over repeated fact-checks of the GOP candidate and a noticeably lighter touch for the Democrat’s own disputed statements.

Harris, 59, arrived well-prepared to rattle Trump by claiming that military leaders had told her that the Republican nominee and 45th president was a “disgrace,” that world leaders were “laughing” at him and even asserting that “people start leaving his rallies early out of exhaustion and boredom” after he was “fired by 81 million people” in 2020.

Trump, 78, found himself having to answer not only Harris’ repeated and pointed attacks on both his pride and policy, but also a pair of moderators who quibbled with some of his statements despite what his supporters viewed as a lack of even-handedness.

When Trump argued that crime in the US is increasing because of migrants allowed into the country on Harris’ watch, “World News Tonight” anchor David Muir interjected: “President Trump, as you know, the FBI says overall violent crime is actually coming down.”

Kamala Harris won the debate — and it wasn’t close The vice president was controlled and effective where Trump was angry, defensive and rambling Charles Lipson

https://thespectator.com/politics/kamala-harris-won-debate-philadelphia-2024/

If Kamala Harris is elected president — and that’s a big “if” since the race is still tight — she won it on the debate stage in Philadelphia Tuesday night. True, her answers were often vague, but they were also inspirational and forward-looking. She avoided the “word salads” that have so often marred her (rare) comments without a teleprompter. She was clear and articulate throughout. 

Harris showed the skill of a professional politician as she avoided being pinned down on her most extreme policy pronouncements from 2019-2020, often denying she ever made them. Trump could have pressed her on those but seldom did. 

Harris effectively stressed her winning position on “women’s right to choose” and damned Trump for his position. (She misstated his views on in-vitro fertilization, but he rebutted her on that.) She also underscored her support for Obamacare, a smart position nationally, and tied it to John McCain’s vote, a smart position in the swing-state of Arizona. 

Most important of all, Harris displayed the control, sureness and coherence voters demand of their president and commander-in-chief. Demonstrating her ability to occupy the Oval Office was job number one in the debate — and Kamala Harris accomplished it. 

Donald Trump, by contrast, hurt himself time and again. He was constantly angry and defensive, qualities that engage his rallies but alienate all Democrats and many Independents, especially women. On the plus side, he repeatedly emphasized his main points on immigration, crime and endless wars — all winning issues for him. He made a strong case that he would encourage fracking, a vital issue in Pennsylvania, and that a Harris administration would kill it. (She denied it.)

For Republican Candidates, Media Hit Jobs Are a Fact of Life By Becket Adams

https://www.nationalreview.com/2024/09/for-republican-candidates-media-hit-jobs-are-a-fact-of-life/

Media outlets took J. D. Vance’s words out of context and made him look heartless as a result. Should we be surprised?

The press’s coverage of Republican vice-presidential nominee J. D. Vance has a peculiar quality to it.

Marc Caputo, national political reporter for the Bulwark, last week put it well: The reporting is not merely “negative” but “reliably” so.

Case in point: The Associated Press on September 5 grossly misrepresented the Ohio senator’s response to a school shooting in Georgia in which four people were murdered.

“JD Vance says school shootings are a ‘fact of life,’ calls for better security,” said an AP headline.

The Hill likewise declared, “JD Vance calls for tightened school security, calls school shootings a ‘fact of life.’”

Here’s what Vance actually said (my emphasis):

I don’t like to admit this. I don’t like that this is a fact of life. But if you are a psycho and you want to make headlines, you realize that our schools are soft targets. And we have got to bolster security at our schools. We’ve got to bolster security, so if a psycho wants to walk through the front door and kill a bunch of children, they’re not able.

There’s Nothing New About Kamala’s ‘New Way Forward’ — Except Stuff She Stole From Trump

https://issuesinsights.com/2024/09/10/theres-nothing-new-about-kamalas-new-way-forward-except-stuff-she-stole-from-trump/

Fifty days after Joe Biden quit his re-election campaign – and one day before she debates Donald Trump — Kamala Harris finally posted an “Issues” page on her website, detailing her plans if she wins the election in November. Now we know why she waited so long.

She calls this “A New Way Forward.” But it’s actually just the Biden plan with a few added wrinkles — which either have been widely panned or were stolen from Donald Trump.

The day after Biden made his announcement, Harris had her own campaign website set up. And it included an “Issues” page, which was a copy of what Biden had put up on his campaign website. You can still find this page on the Wayback Machine. (To the left is a screenshot of that page. The Harris campaign deleted it after a few days, and it remained blank until Monday.)

Her new Issues page is a bit more fleshed out than Biden’s, but looking through the proposals, you see that she is offering nothing new at all. It’s just stuff copied over from the Biden plan, with a few added details. Examples:

Harris says she’ll “cut taxes for middle-class families” and make “the wealthiest Americans and the largest corporations pay their fair share.”  Biden-Harris said they “are fighting to give tax cuts to the middle class while making the ultra-wealthy and big corporations finally pay their fair share.”
She promises that “no one earning less than $400,000 a year will pay more in taxes.” Biden-Harris promised that “Under their plan, nobody earning less than $400,000 will pay an additional penny in federal taxes.”
She says she “will make affordable health care a right, not a privilege by expanding and strengthening the Affordable Care Act.” Biden-Harris said they “believe health care is a right, not a privilege” and are “fighting to expand affordable care.”