RUTHFULLY YOURS

https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2023/12/14/trump-biden-primary-electability-00131616

Joe Biden has done Donald Trump the enormous favor of collapsing before our eyes.

As the 2024 GOP presidential race heads into the first contests, Biden’s abysmal run of polling has boosted Trump and undercut his Republican opponents by hanging a neon sign on our politics reading, “TRUMP CAN WIN.”

It may be that Trump, such is his hold on GOP voters, didn’t need any help establishing a dominant position in the fight for the Republican nomination, but two exogenous events have boosted him.

First, the indictments from the Justice Department and Democratic prosecutors created a predictable rally-around-Trump effect that put him on a fundamentally higher trajectory in the race, and second, Biden’s execrable polling has completely eliminated any possibility of making an electability argument against Trump.

There’s picking your opponent through underhanded ads — something Democrats did to help get vulnerable MAGA opponents in 2022 — and then there’s picking your opponent through your own incredible weakness that makes him look even more alluring to his partisans.

The most salient doubt about Trump among on-the-fence Republicans has never been his policy priorities, governing effectiveness or conduct after the 2020 election, but his ability to win.

Trump’s standing in the party was shaken after the 2022 elections when Republicans underperformed, and he had his fingerprints on the disappointment. The Ron DeSantis landslide in Florida created a contrast that seemingly opened a vista for an intuitive, winning argument — stick with Trump and lose, or go with the young, fresh governor and win.

https://issuesinsights.com/2023/12/11/nearly-half-of-dems-say-charges-against-trump-are-politically-motivated-ii-tipp-poll/

With less than a year to go in the presidential election cycle, most Americans almost always have a good idea of who will be running for president, and who won’t. That’s especially true when an incumbent president is eligible for reelection. As this month’s I&I/TIPP Poll demonstrates, that’s not the case this time around.

While both of the main parties’ likely candidates — President Joe Biden and former President Donald Trump — have healthy leads against potential competitors within their own parties in virtually all polls, it’s still not clear that either will even be on the ballot next year.

The media are full of stories that cite Democratic Party sources and contributors suggesting that the 81-year-old president, who has shown signs of age-related mental impairment in recent years, should drop out of the running. The complaints have become increasingly urgent as Biden’s presidential favorability readings have plunged sharply.

Meanwhile, Trump faces an unprecedented legal assault, with four separate indictments covering 91 allegations of criminal behavior on his part. In normal times, that would be a political disaster.

But these are not normal times.

To better gauge national sentiment, the national online I&I/TIPP Poll asked 1,301 registered voters this month a number of questions related to the upcoming primary election season. The poll, taken from Nov. 29-Dec. 1, has a margin of error of +/-2.8 percentage points.

https://pjmedia.com/athena-thorne/2023/12/06/another-election-overturned-due-to-voter-fraud-n4924522

A Louisiana Supreme Court justice has overturned the results of a Nov. 18, 2023, runoff election that was decided by a single vote. And while this case may seem like small potatoes, it could indicate that a sorely needed trend is beginning to emerge in the United States. Namely, unfairly defeated candidates are refusing to accept flawed elections, and more importantly, courageous judges are doing the right thing when faced with clear proof that shenanigans affected the outcome of an election.

The Louisiana election for the position of Caddo Parish Sheriff pitted Democrat candidate Henry Whitehorn against Republican opponent John Nickelson. Whitehorn prevailed by a single vote.

“The unofficial results of the sheriff race between me and my opponent indicated a one-vote margin out of more than 43,000 votes,” observed Nickelson at the time. “That’s something that hasn’t happened as far as we can tell in more than a century in this country, it’s truly unprecedented.”

Furthermore, “Many, dozens at a minimum, in the small sample of ballots we were able to inspect in the short time we had of these certificates had no signatures at all,” claimed Nickelson. “In other words, ballots had been submitted without a voter signing it,”

A recount was performed, which added three new votes to each candidate’s tally, leaving Whitehorn the victor again by a single vote. Mickelson then filed suit, contesting the results and calling for a new election.

On Tuesday, Louisiana Supreme Court justice Joseph Bleich ruled that the election results were null and void. “It was proven beyond any doubt that there were at least 11 illegal votes cast and counted,” explained Bleich, and therefore, it “is legally impossible to know what the true vote should have been.”

In an interesting side note, Bleich had to come out of retirement to serve as judge “ad hoc” after four justices recused themselves, citing personal friendships with Democrat candidate Whitehorn. This story could have ended like a classic “good ol’ boys” corrupt setup where it’s impossible to achieve justice because everyone is a crony. But instead, everyone did the right thing, and now a new election will be held. 

This is the second noteworthy voided election this year. These cases are blazing a trail forward that other plaintiffs and judges can follow when close elections have been provably affected by voter fraud, ballot harvesting, faulty machines, or other shenanigans or irregularities.

https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/a-desperate-debate-ends-in-a-draw/

What may be the final debate of the Republican primary cycle — indeed, possibly the final debate of the 2024 election cycle — generated more heat than light on Wednesday night. Voters were presented with a Rorschach test. Each candidate hit their notes and met expectations, so voters who watched the debate probably saw exactly what they wanted to see — whatever that meant to them.

Voters who like Ron DeSantis saw him at his best. For the first time in this cycle, DeSantis ran like he was behind in the polls — a prudent calculation, because he very much is. DeSantis didn’t sit back, absorb blows, and stick to his message. Instead, he picked fights, with Nikki Haley in particular, some of which he won. He hammered his closest competitor on transgenderism and the need to prohibit in law access to surgical or pharmaceutical remedies for gender dysphoria in minors. He backed a muscular foreign policy, exhibited his encyclopedic knowledge of policy, and promised convincingly to be a reformer rather than a caretaker in the Oval Office. It was DeSantis’s best primary-debate performance by far.

If you aren’t inclined toward DeSantis, you had plenty to chew on, too. Chris Christie dissected him with the surgical acumen he once applied to Marco Rubio, savaging the governor for being evasive — a charge DeSantis confirmed with his habitual evasions. The Florida governor lent credence to vaccine skepticism, attacked American law-enforcement agencies for prosecuting “one of the biggest abuses of power in our history,” and refused to be pinned down on his commitment to Taiwan’s defense. Even DeSantis’s source of presidential inspiration, Calvin Coolidge, sounded insincere. That nod to the principle of radically limited constitutional government was welcome, but Coolidge’s aversion to the application of state power as a remedy for political controversies or even natural disasters does not bear even a passing resemblance to DeSantis’s record in Florida. That inauthenticity contributed to a conclusion you’ve likely already drawn about the governor.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/democrats-have-no-biden-backup-plan-for-2024-despite-age-concerns/ar-AA1kOhSF

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – The Democratic Party has no Plan B if President Joe Biden decided for any reason to halt his 2024 re-election campaign, and a sudden need to replace him as its standard-bearer would spark a messy intraparty battle.

Despite weak poll numbers and questions, including from some Democrats, about his age, Biden has stuck to his plan to seek a second term after clearing the field of serious Democratic primary challengers when he announced in April that he was running again.

Even if more Democratic candidates were to jump in now, the path forward would be unclear as deadlines to get on the primary ballot in critical states such as Nevada, South Carolina and Georgia have already passed.

Biden loyalists, citing his record in office, argue that the party does not need a backup plan to defeat probable Republican nominee Donald Trump, who Biden beat in the 2020 election.

Among the possible scenarios if the president, 81, did drop out: Democrats could pick another nominee next August at their convention, or even later, in line with party rules.

Reuters spoke to multiple current and former officials who, while making clear they want Biden to succeed, acknowledge the party could face upheaval should the oldest president in U.S. history encounter a health issue or step aside for other reasons during the White House contest.

https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/top-takeaways-real-winner-of-desantis-newsom-debate

Against all expectations, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis absolutely destroyed California’s Gavin Newsom in Thursday night’s Red State-Blue State debate moderated by Sean Hannity on Fox News.

Yes, the governor of Florida had a stronger hand – his state has seen a massive inflow of residents attracted to the better quality of life offered by the Sunshine State, while people have been fleeing California. On issue after issue raised by Hannity, DeSantis could roll out statistics that prove the success of the conservative common-sense policies he has implemented in Florida. 

But the surprise was in his strong and persuasive presentation. DeSantis is generally perceived to be a wooden speaker and campaigner; maybe his run for president has made him more effective. Newsom, on the other hand, is reputed to be the Democrat’s smooth-talking, politically clever president-in-waiting, the likely successor to Joe Biden should the president drop out of the 2024 race.  

The California governor was glib, to be sure, but he turned out to be all fluff — unable to answer questions that he surely saw coming, like why people are fleeing his state or why gasoline prices are $4.85 a gallon compared to $3.17 in Florida and $3.25 nationwide.   

Newsom embarrassed himself by disputing indisputable facts presented by debate moderator Hannity; he had no answers. The California governor could not explain why 750,000 people left his state in the past two years, while 454,000 people moved into Florida, why violent crime is almost twice as high in California as it is in Florida, why taxes are so much loftier, or why homelessness is over three times greater than in Florida. (He actually tried to suggest that the homeless issue had begun under Ronald Reagan’s governorship.). 

Asked about these issues, Newsom mostly skirted the questions, denied the facts or pivoted to talking up President Joe Biden’s record. For instance, he resorted to White House talking points on the large number of jobs added nationally under the Biden administration rather than explain why unemployment is so much higher in California than it is in Florida. On our open border, Newsom blamed Republicans for not backing Biden’s plan for comprehensive immigration reform, rather than admit that the millions of people pouring into our country illegally pose a security threat.

Sometimes, Newsom made up completely non-credible statistics of his own. He claimed, for instance, that more people had moved from Florida to California in the past two years than the other way around. People watching immediately debunked that idea, posting on X, formerly known as Twitter, actual numbers that disproved the governor’s claim.

http://www.swtotd.blogspot.com

Donald Trump is like a battery-operated Hyper Pet Critter Dog that runs helter-skelter around the floor. As long as its battery is charged it will annoy most everyone except its owner. Trump’s battery life appears inexhaustible, but is it, and who or what is responsible?

Since January 6, 2021, it has become common for Democrats to claim democracy is under attack, with Donald Trump as prima facie evidence. In a speech on November 2, 2022, shortly before the midterms, President Biden said: “In our bones, we know democracy is at risk.” Just over two months ago, and citing the January 6 attack, he repeated the warning: “We know how damaged our institutions of democracy – our judiciary, the legislature, the executive – have become in the eyes of the American people, even the world, from attacks within, the past few years.” It is a message that resonated with voters in 2022. Will it succeed again in 2024? In that same 2023 speech, he warned that democracies “can die when people are silent – when they fail to stand up or condemn threats to democracy.” While he did not refer to him by name, he was speaking of Donald Trump.

The impetus for his remarks was January 6, and the “attack” on the Capital by Trump supporters. But in both remarks Biden failed to mention that democracy did survive – that the only fatality was that of Ashli Babbitt who was shot dead by a Capital policemen and that Vice President Michael Pence certified the election results, which made Joe Biden President. Nor did he acknowledge that the people were not silent – that the “attack” was condemned by Democrats and Independents – and by many Republicans – and all of mainstream media. More than 1,100 rioters have been charged with close to 300 having been given prison sentences, ranging from six months to eighteen years. The people have not been silent about January 6.

https://pjmedia.com/paula-bolyard/2023/11/30/desantis-dominates-in-red-state-vs-blue-state-debate-with-newsom-n4924384#google_vignette

I was not among those who said a debate between the governors of Florida and California—Ron DeSantis and Gavin Newsom, respectively—was a bad idea. I’d actually like to see more debates—more good debates, that is, not the bread-and-circus shows we’ve seen on network and cable television in recent years. If it were up to me, we’d switch to a Lincoln-Douglas debate format. Back then, there weren’t TV executives rigging the debates to ensure maximum eyeballs, profits, and mud-slinging. They’re designed to make money, not reveal what the candidates would do if they were elected.

This brings us to tonight’s Red State/Blue State debate in Alpharetta, Ga., moderated by Sean Hannity on Fox News. 

Hannity promised at the beginning of the debate that he would not tip the scales in favor of one candidate, but the questions he asked and the graphics he displayed definitely favored DeSantis. He debated Newsom several times, which I wish he hadn’t done. DeSantis proved more than capable of handling Newsom on his own. In fact, he wiped the floor with Newsom, who wouldn’t know a truthful statement if it hit him in the head. Over and over again, the Florida governor used facts to back up his claims and called out Newsom for saying things that were not true. 

The first question was about net migration from California to Florida. DeSantis explained why people are leaving and coming to Florida. “You almost have to try to mess California up,” he quipped. 

When it was Newsom’s turn to answer, he completely ignored the question and rambled about all the great things California has, like Silicon Valley (which no doubt carts a truckload of cash over to Newsom’s campaign every other month). 

https://issuesinsights.com/2023/12/01/forget-the-red-v-blue-state-debate-this-was-a-great-debate/

Who won – and lost – Thursday night’s primetime clash between mega-Governors Ron DeSantis, Republican of the Free State of Florida, and Gavin Newsom, Democrat of the Golden State?

On this scorecard, the winners were the American people. And the losers: one and the same.Why was America writ large the winner? 

Because though the event was billed as Great Red State v. Blue State Debate, a nationwide audience was actually privileged to see a just-plain great debate between two attractive and transcendently talented politicians.

America took in more substance, more facts, more clear contrasts, more smart thrusts and parries, and more rhetorical skill, intellectual heft and displays of energy in the first five minutes of this MMA-quality cage match than in the entire series of Republican contests to date. 

The no-holds-barred, mano-a-mano square-off was the Thrilla to those debates’ Vanilla.

Your commentator will leave fact-checking to the “fact-checkers.” Because what mattered much more was the quality and skill of the participants.

Face it, folks. This Newsom guy is good. Surprisingly good, even to this jaded observer.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/gavin-newsom-ron-desantis-fox-news-debate-florida-california-239e637b?mod=opinion_lead_pos1

Gavin Newsom and Ron DeSantis are set to square off Thursday evening in a Fox News debate, and it should be instructive. Besides offering voters a look of the alternatives to Joe Biden and Donald Trump, the showdown between the California and Florida governors could provide a revealing policy contrast.

Sacramento has rushed to the left in recent decades while Tallahassee has moved to the right. Since winning election in 2018, Messrs. Newsom and DeSantis have advanced sharply different policies on Covid lockdowns, taxes, school choice and climate regulation, among other things. In case you’ll be keeping track at home, here is a scorecard of policy results.

• Employment. Since January 2019, employment has increased by 1,031,030 in Florida while declining by 85,438 in California. Amid Mr. Newsom’s prolonged Covid lockdowns, businesses and workers moved to places with a lower tax burden and cost of living. Florida’s population is 22.2 million and rising, while California’s is 39 million and falling.