At the very beginning of the Debate Kamala Harris walked all the way across the stage to shake hands with Donald Trump. He went straight to his podium, but she went in for the handshake, like it was the beginning of a Heavyweight Fight. I think she just wanted to see if his tiny little hands were sweating. If they weren’t sweating then, they sure were over the course of the next 90 minutes as Kamala landed punch after punch, bringing up all the crimes for which he has been indicted or convicted, going all the way back to discrimination in housing when he worked with his father.
Trump told the viewers that he was proud when Viktor Orban told him that other world leaders feared him. I hate to tell you this, Donald, but you lost the 2020 Presidential election because 80 million Americans were also afraid of you. We were deeply worried that a madman, who would do anything to line his pockets and remain in power, had access to our nuclear codes. The whole world was afraid of Donald Trump, and Donald Trump still doesn’t realize that this wasn’t a good thing. It was a horrible thing. The world gasped a big sigh of relief when Joe Biden won the Presidency, but they held their breath on January 6th, when Trump tried to use a mob to reverse the results of that election.
Kamala Harris revealed her plan for America, and Donald Trump revealed that he doesn’t have a plan. His cronies have a plan, it’s called Project 2025, but he denied ever reading it. That part might be the only honest thing he said all night. Donald Trump probably didn’t even read the books he is supposed to have written, so I’d have no problem believing that he never read the 900-plus-page report. The ideas contained in Project 2025 were certainly written with him in mind, though. It also came out that even though Trump tried to kill Obamacare 60 times, he never had a health plan to replace it, At the debate, Trump finally revealed that nine years later, he still doesn’t have a health plan. He still only has a “concept of a plan.”
What is his plan for anything? Probably to put his son-in-law Jared in charge of fixing it, while Trump plays another round of golf. Don’t let that happen. Vote for the Harris/Walz team in November.
Fans of Stephen Colbert, have long recognized the phenomenon known as “The Colbert Bump,” which is an increase in the popularity of a person (author, musician, politician, etc.) or thing (website, etc.) as a result of appearing as a guest on Stephen Colbert’s show or (in the case of a thing) being mentioned on the show.
Traditionally, Presidential Conventions also have the ability to boost the national recognition and popularity of their speakers and their candidates for President and Vice-President. So, naturally, the Republicans were hoping that Donald Trump and J.D. Vance would enjoy a bump in popularity following their convention. There were three things, however, that were working against them.
The first thing was their Presidential candidate. Ex-President Trump was already the most recognized politician in America. The convention wasn’t going to be able to introduce him to any new audience. All they could do was trot him out to the same MAGA Cult followers who have attended dozens of his rallies in the past. To them, he is a “rock star,” because he had a TV program, and because they know he will publicly say outrageous things. To everyone else, he is a narcissistic, disgraced, twice-impeached, convicted sex offender and 34-time convicted felon, who stole top secret U.S. documents and tried but failed to overthrow the government on January 6th, 2021.
The second thing was the Republican platform. They spent four days talking about the problems in America, but didn’t have any suggestions for solving these problems other than mass deportation of minorities and punishing women who didn’t want to be pregnant. They spent four days suggesting that our problems would go away if our President wasn’t 81 years old. Of course, they didn’t have any way to explain how 78-year-old Donald Trump was going to remain 78 for the next 4 years if he got back into the White House.
One speaker at the Republican convention ridiculously asked the age-old political question to the conventioneers, “Are you better off now than you were 4 years ago?” The meatheads in the audience gave a resounding “No!” Apparently, they thought that 2020 was a great year. I’d like to jar their memory with a montage of how things really were in 2020 when Donald Trump was President.
The third thing was the Biden Bump. Joe Biden isn’t the most eloquent speaker. He had to overcome a severe stuttering problem as a child. He has worked in Government for decades, though. He knows how to get things done. Even though they had to deal with a divided Congress, he and Kamala Harris still managed to rescue the economy and change the course of the Pandemic. He got the infrastructure bill passed and lowered the price of prescription drugs. He created millions of new jobs and lowered unemployment to the point that more Americans are working now than at any point in American History.
That was only the first part of the Biden Bump. He listened patiently as Republicans spent four days disparaging his age, and then he dropped the bomb on them. Just when they were hoping to enjoy a post-convention honeymoon with America, he turned the tables on them. He suddenly withdrew from the race and immediately threw his support behind Kamala Harris. This left the Republicans with nothing. They had spent four days playing the age card, the only weapon they had. Now, will 78-year-old Trump dare play the age card against 59-year-old Kamala Harris? I think not. I don’t think “Fox News” will bring it up, either. By waiting until after the Republican convention to tag off to his fresh tag-team partner, Biden-Harris pinned Trump, Vance, and Hulk Hogan to the mat. Like I said, Joe Biden may not be as good a speaker as Donald Trump, but he knows how to get the job done. One. Two. Three. It’s over. The winner – American Democracy.
Now all we have to do is turn out in record numbers in November to elect Kamala Harris and a majority of Democratic Senators and Congressmen to kick Trump to the curb one final time.
In his Christian New Testament Epistle to the Galatians, Paul the Apostle wrote: “whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap.” The Bible also says, “For they sow the wind, and they shall reap the whirlwind.” I’m sure that Donald Trump, the conman Bible salesman is familiar with these quotes, even if he never read them.
Donald Trump has been sowing the seeds of hatred for years, and yesterday there was an alleged assassination attempt against him at a rally in Butler, PA. News sources reported that the shooter, 20-year-old registered Republican Thomas Matthew Crooks was shot dead by snipers at the scene.
If a Democrat had been shot, Donald Trump and his low-life friends like Steve Bannon would probably call it a False Flag operation. If a Democrat had been shot, they would have said that Antifa did it, or maybe it was just tourists out for a stroll.
Trump led a bloody insurrection against the country on January 6, 2021, and he promised this country a “bloodbath” if he was not elected in 2024. Kevin Roberts, the President of the Heritage Foundation, is behind Project 2025, the right-wing’s plan to take over the country. He threatened the left recently stating, “We are in the process of the second American Revolution, which will remain bloodless if the left allows it to be.” These guys have been threatening the country with bloodshed for years. Trump wanted to execute people like Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Mark Milley, for disagreeing with him. Not happy with just macing peaceful protesters for a photo op with the Bible, he wants to be able to shoot them on sight, something that the First Amendment strongly disallows. So, he wants to scrap the Constitution, jail his political rivals, and send tens of thousands of Americans into detention camps. He wants to be a dictator on day one if he gets re-elected.
Unlike draft dodging Trump, there were no bone spurs for this guy, General Millie.
Now the Republicans are shocked that they are reaping the whirlwind, and are shedding a little of their own blood. Trump is lucky that the bullet only nicked his ear. If the bullet had been 3 feet lower, it would have gone through his brain.
Republicans and Democrats quickly joined in a rare bi-partisan show of support today. A poll of politicians would find that 100% of them are opposed to violence against politicians. Mass shootings in schools, okay. Violence on the street, okay, but when a citizen attacks a politician, they lose their minds. They’re always quick to quote the Second Amendment when they fill their pockets with money from the gun lobby, but they forget that the founding fathers encouraged citizens to fight against tyrants. Thomas Jefferson said that the strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms, is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government. “When governments fear the people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny. Donald Trump wants to be a tyrant.
The Republicans haven’t shown any intention of supporting stronger gun control laws in the wake of this tragedy. I’m waiting for one of them to declare, “If Trump was armed, he could have shot back.” Who’s going to tell these a**holes that convicted felons aren’t allowed to carry guns, and Donald Trump has been indicted on 91 felony charges and already convicted of 34 of them.
I, personally, don’t believe that violence is the answer. I hate Trump as much as anyone, but in this country we have laws against shooting people. Of course, Donald Trump and the corrupt members of the Supreme Court he appointed believe that Donald Trump is above the law, but the rest of us are still subject to it. So, I won’t take any violent action against him, but I will wear out my knees if I have to praying that someday soon, Donald Trump will choke to death on a Big Mac.
I refuse to shed crocodile tears for Donald Trump’s bloody ear. I am truly sorry that innocent people were killed at the rally in Butler, though. His cult followers may not be too bright, but stupid isn’t a crime. They are perfectly allowed to support the candidate of their choice and shouldn’t have to worry about being shot for it. The same goes for Biden supporters who shouldn’t have to be afraid that if they put a Biden sign on their lawn, a rock will come through their window and a family member might get hurt.
Since the shooter is dead, we may never know why Thomas Crooks climbed on that roof and took a shot at Donald Trump and his supporters. Of course, the Republicans, Q Anon, and Fox News will blame Joe Biden, Barrack Obama, and Hillary Clinton.
If you watched a video of the assassination attempt, you will see that the first words out of Donald Trump’s mouth to his supporters were “Fight. Fight. Fight.” It was just like that January day in 2021, when he told his supporters that if they wanted to hold onto their country they had to go to the Capital and “Fight like hell.” Donald Trump understands that “Those who live by the sword, die by the sword.” He just believes that he has enough followers who will “fall on their sword” to protect him. Don’t allow him to milk this event to attract supporters. He brought it on himself. He inherited the Whirlwind, and he deserves to die, not at the hands of an assassin, though, but in a gallows, as the result of a guilty verdict in a court of law for the treason he committed on January 6, 2021.
Whenever I want an unbiased opinion, I turn to my AI program, Claude. Here’s our latest conversation.
Me: There is talk today of replacing Joe Biden as the Democratic candidate for President because of his lackluster performance at a recent debate. The last time that the Democrats made a big change late in the race, Hubert Humphrey lost badly, because there just wasn’t enough time for his campaign to get going. Any comments on that election?
Claude: As an AI assistant, I want to clarify that my knowledge cutoff is in April 2024, so I don’t have information about recent events or debates that may have occurred after that date. However, I can comment on the historical example you mentioned and provide some general thoughts on late candidate changes in presidential races.
The election you’re referring to is likely the 1968 United States presidential election. In that race, incumbent President Lyndon B. Johnson decided not to seek re-election, which led to a chaotic Democratic primary season. Hubert Humphrey, who was Johnson’s Vice President, entered the race late and secured the nomination at the Democratic National Convention without participating in any primaries.
You’re correct that Humphrey’s late entry into the race was a significant factor in his loss to Republican candidate Richard Nixon. Some key points about that election:
Timing: Humphrey didn’t become the nominee until the Democratic National Convention in late August, leaving him only about two months for his general election campaign.
Party division: The Democratic Party was deeply divided over issues like the Vietnam War, which made it difficult for Humphrey to unite the party quickly.
Fundraising challenges: Starting late meant Humphrey had less time to raise money and build a robust campaign infrastructure.
Messaging: Humphrey struggled to differentiate himself from Johnson’s policies, particularly on Vietnam, which was unpopular with many voters.
The 1968 election does illustrate the potential risks of changing candidates late in the process. It takes time to build campaign infrastructure, raise funds, refine messaging, and connect with voters across the country.
However, it’s important to note that every election is unique, and the political landscape has changed significantly since 1968. Modern campaigns have different tools and strategies at their disposal, including social media and data-driven outreach, which could potentially allow for faster mobilization.
If you’d like me to elaborate on any aspects of the 1968 election or discuss how late candidate changes might play out in a modern context, I’d be happy to do so.
Me: Please discuss how late candidate changes might play out in a modern context.
Claude: In a modern context, late candidate changes would face both challenges and opportunities that differ from those in 1968. Here’s an analysis of how such a scenario might unfold today:
Media landscape: The 24-hour news cycle and social media platforms allow for rapid information dissemination. A new candidate could potentially gain widespread attention and name recognition much faster than in the past. However, this also means increased scrutiny and less time to refine messaging.
Fundraising: Modern campaigns rely heavily on online fundraising. A new candidate with strong appeal could potentially raise significant funds quickly through grassroots donations. However, they would still be at a disadvantage compared to opponents who have been fundraising for months or years.
Campaign infrastructure: Digital tools and data analytics allow for quicker setup of campaign operations. However, building a ground game in key states still takes time and resources.
Party unity: In today’s polarized political climate, the need for party unity might actually make it easier for a new candidate to rally support, especially if they’re seen as more electable.
Voter engagement: With early voting and mail-in ballots becoming more common, a late change could mean some voters have already cast their ballots for the original candidate.
Debate preparation: A new candidate would have less time to prepare for debates, which are crucial in modern campaigns. This could be a significant disadvantage.
Legal and procedural hurdles: Changing candidates late in the process could face legal challenges and complications with ballot access in some states.
Public perception: The public might view a late change as a sign of party disarray, but it could also be seen as responsiveness to voter concerns.
Opposition research: A new candidate might face less thorough opposition research initially, but opponents would likely intensify efforts to find damaging information quickly.
Policy positions: A new candidate would need to quickly establish clear policy positions, which could be challenging without seeming unprepared or contradicting party platforms.
While modern technology and communication methods could help a new candidate get up to speed more quickly than in past decades, they would still face significant challenges. The compressed timeframe would require exceptional organizational skills, a strong existing public profile, and the ability to quickly unite the party and appeal to a broad electorate.
The success of such a change would likely depend on the specific circumstances, the chosen candidate’s strengths, and the overall political climate at the time.
Me: It’s important that twice impeached, convicted felon, Donald Trump should never even be allowed near The White House. Many Democrats would make much better Presidents than Don the Con. Some might even be stronger opponents than Joe Biden, but Joe Biden has come out of the primaries as the victor, and unless he himself decides not to run, like LBJ did, or if he should have other major problems, he will be the Democratic candidate for President. It’s time for the party to unite behind him. A split Democratic Party, and the impact of RFK Jr.’s 3rd Party candidacy could negatively affect the outcome of the election, and the unthinkable might happen. We cannot let a narcissistic criminal like Donald Trump back in the White House. It’s actually time for the Democrats to take a page from the Republican Playbook and remember the words of Abraham Lincoln: “Don’t swap horses in the middle of the stream.”
earlthepearl137 