Trumps remarkable polling stability thumbnail

Trumps remarkable polling stability

TRUMP’S REMARKABLE POLLING STABILITY. A new poll from the New York Times finds that President Donald Trump has a job approval rating of 43% and a disapproval rating of 54%. That was virtually identical to Trump’s 42% approval and 54% disapproval in the last Times poll, taken in late April.  A lot has happened in the last

A story everyone should know: Harris, Biden, and Gianfranco Torres-Navarro thumbnail

A story everyone should know: Harris, Biden, and Gianfranco Torres-Navarro

A STORY EVERYONE SHOULD KNOW: HARRIS, BIDEN, AND GIANFRANCO TORRES-NAVARRO. If the Trump campaign has any say in it, voters should learn the name of Gianfranco Torres-Navarro. According to U.S. authorities, Torres-Navarro is the leader of a Peruvian crime gang and is thought to be personally responsible for 23 murders. He is a notorious figure in Peru, where he is known as “Gianfranco 23,” clearly “a reference to the number of people he is alleged to have killed,” according to the Associated Press. He has a girlfriend who, also according to the Associated Press, “has a sizable following on the social media platform TikTok where she showed off their lavish lifestyle, including designer clothes, resort vacations and shooting targets at a gun range.” Not to put too fine a point on it, but Torres-Navarro’s gang is known as “Los Killers.”

Here’s why Americans should know who he is. On Wednesday, Torres-Navarro was arrested by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement in Endicott, New York, a village with a population of 13,667 about 190 miles north of New York City. Given that he is a wanted man, wanted for very serious crimes in Peru, one might ask how he made it to the United States.

The answer is: He just walked in. In May, Torres-Navarro crossed illegally into the U.S. near Roma, Texas, in the Rio Grande border sector. He was arrested by U.S. authorities who then…let him go. Like millions of other illegal crossers, he was given a “notice to appear” before an immigration judge at some point far in the future and then sent on his way.

The presence of Torres-Navarro in the U.S., free to go as he pleases, was a direct result of the border policies of President Joe Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris. You’ve heard about their policy of allowing millions into the U.S. unvetted. This is that policy in action. Torres-Navarro is the face of that policy. He is a one-man, walking illustration of the dangerous nature of the Biden-Harris border.

Wait a minute, some Democrats might say. Are you arguing that every person who crosses the border illegally is a murderer? Of course not. What the Torres-Navarro case shows is that U.S. authorities, under Biden and Harris, are not really checking anybody. If they let a man wanted for 23 murders through, they’ll let anybody through. And indeed, they do.

We’ve all seen the examples of horrendous crimes committed by people who crossed illegally into the U.S. during the Biden-Harris years. “In three and a half years, the Biden-Harris administration has released more than 5.4 million illegal aliens into the United States, with an additional at least 1.9 million known ‘gotaways’ escaping into the country,” a newly released report from the House Judiciary Committee said. That’s 7.3 million people so far in this administration. 

As this newsletter noted just a few days ago: “The migrants have spread into cities and towns across the country, burdening municipalities struggling to house and feed them. Some have committed horrendous crimes. Culturally, on top of the nation’s existing immigration process, it is a bad idea to let in so many unassimilated migrants so quickly, since it overwhelms the country’s ability to turn them into Americans. And most fundamentally, the border rush represents an offense against the nation’s sovereignty and the rule of law.” Entirely apart from the basic principle that we shouldn’t let mass murderers in, those are all serious considerations.

We’ve also seen that Biden and Harris have changed the face of illegal immigration. Where at various times in the past the dominant countries of origin were Mexico or the Northern Triangle’s Guatemala, Honduras, and El Salvador, now authorities are seeing more and more illegal crossers from China, Turkey, and a number of countries in Africa, South America, and beyond. When they are admitted into the U.S., like Torres-Navarro, it’s safe to say U.S. authorities don’t know who they are. Among the 7.3 million illegal crossers Biden and Harris have released into the U.S. “are 375 illegal aliens on the U.S. government’s terrorist watchlist,” according to the Judiciary Committee. “That is a more than 3,000 percent increase of watchlisted alien encounters compared to all four years of the Trump administration.”

Torres-Navarro was presumably not on the terrorist watch list. He is just a cold-blooded mass killer involved in standard gang crimes. One might think that would be plenty of reason to keep him out of the U.S., but he was ushered right in.

And that is why the public should know about Torres-Navarro. He is in the U.S. because of the way Biden and Harris chose to run the U.S.-Mexico border. And he is in custody through the work of an agency, ICE, that Harris wanted to “reexamine” and profoundly change, “starting from scratch,” in light of her goal of decriminalizing illegal crossings into the U.S. The border should be a major issue in this presidential campaign, and the story of Torres-Navarro is part of it.

2024-08-16 20:05:00, http://s.wordpress.com/mshots/v1/https%3A%2F%2Fwww.washingtonexaminer.com%2Fopinion%2Fcolumnists%2F3124664%2Fa-story-everyone-should-know-harris-biden-and-gianfranco-torres-navarro%2F?w=600&h=450, A STORY EVERYONE SHOULD KNOW: HARRIS, BIDEN, AND GIANFRANCO TORRES-NAVARRO. If the Trump campaign has any say in it, voters should learn the name of Gianfranco Torres-Navarro. According to U.S. authorities, Torres-Navarro is the leader of a Peruvian crime gang and is thought to be personally responsible for 23 murders. He is a notorious figure in,

A STORY EVERYONE SHOULD KNOW: HARRIS, BIDEN, AND GIANFRANCO TORRES-NAVARRO. If the Trump campaign has any say in it, voters should learn the name of Gianfranco Torres-Navarro. According to U.S. authorities, Torres-Navarro is the leader of a Peruvian crime gang and is thought to be personally responsible for 23 murders. He is a notorious figure in Peru, where he is known as “Gianfranco 23,” clearly “a reference to the number of people he is alleged to have killed,” according to the Associated Press. He has a girlfriend who, also according to the Associated Press, “has a sizable following on the social media platform TikTok where she showed off their lavish lifestyle, including designer clothes, resort vacations and shooting targets at a gun range.” Not to put too fine a point on it, but Torres-Navarro’s gang is known as “Los Killers.”

Here’s why Americans should know who he is. On Wednesday, Torres-Navarro was arrested by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement in Endicott, New York, a village with a population of 13,667 about 190 miles north of New York City. Given that he is a wanted man, wanted for very serious crimes in Peru, one might ask how he made it to the United States.

The answer is: He just walked in. In May, Torres-Navarro crossed illegally into the U.S. near Roma, Texas, in the Rio Grande border sector. He was arrested by U.S. authorities who then…let him go. Like millions of other illegal crossers, he was given a “notice to appear” before an immigration judge at some point far in the future and then sent on his way.

The presence of Torres-Navarro in the U.S., free to go as he pleases, was a direct result of the border policies of President Joe Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris. You’ve heard about their policy of allowing millions into the U.S. unvetted. This is that policy in action. Torres-Navarro is the face of that policy. He is a one-man, walking illustration of the dangerous nature of the Biden-Harris border.

Wait a minute, some Democrats might say. Are you arguing that every person who crosses the border illegally is a murderer? Of course not. What the Torres-Navarro case shows is that U.S. authorities, under Biden and Harris, are not really checking anybody. If they let a man wanted for 23 murders through, they’ll let anybody through. And indeed, they do.

We’ve all seen the examples of horrendous crimes committed by people who crossed illegally into the U.S. during the Biden-Harris years. “In three and a half years, the Biden-Harris administration has released more than 5.4 million illegal aliens into the United States, with an additional at least 1.9 million known ‘gotaways’ escaping into the country,” a newly released report from the House Judiciary Committee said. That’s 7.3 million people so far in this administration. 

As this newsletter noted just a few days ago: “The migrants have spread into cities and towns across the country, burdening municipalities struggling to house and feed them. Some have committed horrendous crimes. Culturally, on top of the nation’s existing immigration process, it is a bad idea to let in so many unassimilated migrants so quickly, since it overwhelms the country’s ability to turn them into Americans. And most fundamentally, the border rush represents an offense against the nation’s sovereignty and the rule of law.” Entirely apart from the basic principle that we shouldn’t let mass murderers in, those are all serious considerations.

We’ve also seen that Biden and Harris have changed the face of illegal immigration. Where at various times in the past the dominant countries of origin were Mexico or the Northern Triangle’s Guatemala, Honduras, and El Salvador, now authorities are seeing more and more illegal crossers from China, Turkey, and a number of countries in Africa, South America, and beyond. When they are admitted into the U.S., like Torres-Navarro, it’s safe to say U.S. authorities don’t know who they are. Among the 7.3 million illegal crossers Biden and Harris have released into the U.S. “are 375 illegal aliens on the U.S. government’s terrorist watchlist,” according to the Judiciary Committee. “That is a more than 3,000 percent increase of watchlisted alien encounters compared to all four years of the Trump administration.”

Torres-Navarro was presumably not on the terrorist watch list. He is just a cold-blooded mass killer involved in standard gang crimes. One might think that would be plenty of reason to keep him out of the U.S., but he was ushered right in.

And that is why the public should know about Torres-Navarro. He is in the U.S. because of the way Biden and Harris chose to run the U.S.-Mexico border. And he is in custody through the work of an agency, ICE, that Harris wanted to “reexamine” and profoundly change, “starting from scratch,” in light of her goal of decriminalizing illegal crossings into the U.S. The border should be a major issue in this presidential campaign, and the story of Torres-Navarro is part of it.

, A STORY EVERYONE SHOULD KNOW: HARRIS, BIDEN, AND GIANFRANCO TORRES-NAVARRO. If the Trump campaign has any say in it, voters should learn the name of Gianfranco Torres-Navarro. According to U.S. authorities, Torres-Navarro is the leader of a Peruvian crime gang and is thought to be personally responsible for 23 murders. He is a notorious figure in Peru, where he is known as “Gianfranco 23,” clearly “a reference to the number of people he is alleged to have killed,” according to the Associated Press. He has a girlfriend who, also according to the Associated Press, “has a sizable following on the social media platform TikTok where she showed off their lavish lifestyle, including designer clothes, resort vacations and shooting targets at a gun range.” Not to put too fine a point on it, but Torres-Navarro’s gang is known as “Los Killers.” Here’s why Americans should know who he is. On Wednesday, Torres-Navarro was arrested by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement in Endicott, New York, a village with a population of 13,667 about 190 miles north of New York City. Given that he is a wanted man, wanted for very serious crimes in Peru, one might ask how he made it to the United States. The answer is: He just walked in. In May, Torres-Navarro crossed illegally into the U.S. near Roma, Texas, in the Rio Grande border sector. He was arrested by U.S. authorities who then…let him go. Like millions of other illegal crossers, he was given a “notice to appear” before an immigration judge at some point far in the future and then sent on his way. The presence of Torres-Navarro in the U.S., free to go as he pleases, was a direct result of the border policies of President Joe Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris. You’ve heard about their policy of allowing millions into the U.S. unvetted. This is that policy in action. Torres-Navarro is the face of that policy. He is a one-man, walking illustration of the dangerous nature of the Biden-Harris border. Wait a minute, some Democrats might say. Are you arguing that every person who crosses the border illegally is a murderer? Of course not. What the Torres-Navarro case shows is that U.S. authorities, under Biden and Harris, are not really checking anybody. If they let a man wanted for 23 murders through, they’ll let anybody through. And indeed, they do. We’ve all seen the examples of horrendous crimes committed by people who crossed illegally into the U.S. during the Biden-Harris years. “In three and a half years, the Biden-Harris administration has released more than 5.4 million illegal aliens into the United States, with an additional at least 1.9 million known ‘gotaways’ escaping into the country,” a newly released report from the House Judiciary Committee said. That’s 7.3 million people so far in this administration.  As this newsletter noted just a few days ago: “The migrants have spread into cities and towns across the country, burdening municipalities struggling to house and feed them. Some have committed horrendous crimes. Culturally, on top of the nation’s existing immigration process, it is a bad idea to let in so many unassimilated migrants so quickly, since it overwhelms the country’s ability to turn them into Americans. And most fundamentally, the border rush represents an offense against the nation’s sovereignty and the rule of law.” Entirely apart from the basic principle that we shouldn’t let mass murderers in, those are all serious considerations. We’ve also seen that Biden and Harris have changed the face of illegal immigration. Where at various times in the past the dominant countries of origin were Mexico or the Northern Triangle’s Guatemala, Honduras, and El Salvador, now authorities are seeing more and more illegal crossers from China, Turkey, and a number of countries in Africa, South America, and beyond. When they are admitted into the U.S., like Torres-Navarro, it’s safe to say U.S. authorities don’t know who they are. Among the 7.3 million illegal crossers Biden and Harris have released into the U.S. “are 375 illegal aliens on the U.S. government’s terrorist watchlist,” according to the Judiciary Committee. “That is a more than 3,000 percent increase of watchlisted alien encounters compared to all four years of the Trump administration.” Torres-Navarro was presumably not on the terrorist watch list. He is just a cold-blooded mass killer involved in standard gang crimes. One might think that would be plenty of reason to keep him out of the U.S., but he was ushered right in. And that is why the public should know about Torres-Navarro. He is in the U.S. because of the way Biden and Harris chose to run the U.S.-Mexico border. And he is in custody through the work of an agency, ICE, that Harris wanted to “reexamine” and profoundly change, “starting from scratch,” in light of her goal of decriminalizing illegal crossings into the U.S. The border should be a major issue in this presidential campaign, and the story of Torres-Navarro is part of it., , A story everyone should know: Harris, Biden, and Gianfranco Torres-Navarro, https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/AP24228715355536.webp, Washington Examiner, Political News and Conservative Analysis About Congress, the President, and the Federal Government, https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/cropped-favicon-32×32.png, https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/feed/, Byron York,

Paying the bills is harder than ever. Are voters supposed to feel joy? thumbnail

Paying the bills is harder than ever. Are voters supposed to feel joy?

PAYING THE BILLS IS HARDER THAN EVER. ARE VOTERS SUPPOSED TO FEEL JOY? On Wednesday morning, the Bureau of Labor Statistics will release inflation figures for July. Whatever the numbers turn out to be, this will remain true: Prices are far higher than they were when Joe Biden and Kamala Harris took office. 

Even as the rate of inflation has gone down from its peak in 2022, people have learned an unhappy lesson. When the rate of inflation goes down, prices still go up. They are building upon all the price increases before but at a somewhat slower rate. Yes, very few things go down, but at the same time, others keep rising at a high rate. There’s no relief.

This week, the Wall Street Journal published a striking portrait of how that affects many families. The headline was “Child Care, Rent, Insurance: Where Inflation Hits Hardest Now; Big, fixed costs that are tough to avoid are crushing household budgets.”

“Price increases for lots of items, like cable and shampoo, are indeed cooling,” the Wall Street Journal reported. “Prices for vehicles, gasoline, TVs and plane tickets have even dropped over the past year. … But prices for many of the things that are hard to do without are still posting eye-watering increases. Rent and electricity bills are up 10% or more over the past two years, and car insurance costs are up nearly 40%, according to the Labor Department’s index. Shoppers might be able to trade down from prime steak to cheaper cuts of meat at the supermarket, but they can’t really do the same thing with the water bill.”

The article told the story of one family trying to use less electricity, reduce their home insurance coverage, and cut back on the children’s sports leagues. Another family stopped eating out and deferred any hope of buying a bigger house after being slammed by soaring day care costs. 

The burden is not limited to their particular circumstances. “Households across the country are facing similar struggles,” the Wall Street Journal reported. “According to the Labor Department, essential services such as water, sewer, and trash collection have jumped nearly 11% over the past two years, and electricity has climbed 10%.”

It’s no surprise that 65% of people believe the country is headed in the wrong direction, according to the Real Clear Politics average of polls. Harris and Biden took office in a moment of relative optimism for the country, when just 49% thought the country was on the wrong track. (That’s a pretty low number for the last 20 years.) By mid-2022, with inflation raging, 74% felt the country had gone astray — higher than at any point in the Trump presidency. Now, it’s 65%.

So: When two-thirds of Americans feel the country is on the wrong track, what theme do Harris and running mate Gov. Tim Walz (D-MN) adopt for their presidential campaign? Joy. The Washington Post reported that the two Democrats have “seized on a joyful message.” A New York Times analysis of their “joyful campaign” included the headline: “Harris Used to Worry About Laughing. Now Joy Is Fueling Her Campaign.” MSNBC declared that Harris and Walz “campaign with joy.”

Obviously, Harris and Walz are happy. Why shouldn’t they be? Harris quickly, almost instantly, secured the Democratic nomination after party leaders pushed the aged and infirm Biden aside. Walz has a chance for a bigger job than he ever imagined. That can make a politician joyous.

But what about everybody else? For those families making trade-offs to meet their most basic needs — can joy pay their electric bill? The water bill? The rent? Insurance on the house? Kamala Harris will spend the coming weeks trying to persuade those voters to reward her for the dismal circumstances her time in office has brought. She will have many advocates, in the Democratic Party and in the media, cheering her on. But for millions of voters, the bills are still the bills, and there’s nothing joyous about that.

2024-08-13 17:21:00, http://s.wordpress.com/mshots/v1/https%3A%2F%2Fwww.washingtonexaminer.com%2Fnews%2F3119911%2Fpaying-bills-harder-than-ever-voters-supposed-feel-joy%2F?w=600&h=450, PAYING THE BILLS IS HARDER THAN EVER. ARE VOTERS SUPPOSED TO FEEL JOY? On Wednesday morning, the Bureau of Labor Statistics will release inflation figures for July. Whatever the numbers turn out to be, this will remain true: Prices are far higher than they were when Joe Biden and Kamala Harris took office.  Even as the,

PAYING THE BILLS IS HARDER THAN EVER. ARE VOTERS SUPPOSED TO FEEL JOY? On Wednesday morning, the Bureau of Labor Statistics will release inflation figures for July. Whatever the numbers turn out to be, this will remain true: Prices are far higher than they were when Joe Biden and Kamala Harris took office. 

Even as the rate of inflation has gone down from its peak in 2022, people have learned an unhappy lesson. When the rate of inflation goes down, prices still go up. They are building upon all the price increases before but at a somewhat slower rate. Yes, very few things go down, but at the same time, others keep rising at a high rate. There’s no relief.

This week, the Wall Street Journal published a striking portrait of how that affects many families. The headline was “Child Care, Rent, Insurance: Where Inflation Hits Hardest Now; Big, fixed costs that are tough to avoid are crushing household budgets.”

“Price increases for lots of items, like cable and shampoo, are indeed cooling,” the Wall Street Journal reported. “Prices for vehicles, gasoline, TVs and plane tickets have even dropped over the past year. … But prices for many of the things that are hard to do without are still posting eye-watering increases. Rent and electricity bills are up 10% or more over the past two years, and car insurance costs are up nearly 40%, according to the Labor Department’s index. Shoppers might be able to trade down from prime steak to cheaper cuts of meat at the supermarket, but they can’t really do the same thing with the water bill.”

The article told the story of one family trying to use less electricity, reduce their home insurance coverage, and cut back on the children’s sports leagues. Another family stopped eating out and deferred any hope of buying a bigger house after being slammed by soaring day care costs. 

The burden is not limited to their particular circumstances. “Households across the country are facing similar struggles,” the Wall Street Journal reported. “According to the Labor Department, essential services such as water, sewer, and trash collection have jumped nearly 11% over the past two years, and electricity has climbed 10%.”

It’s no surprise that 65% of people believe the country is headed in the wrong direction, according to the Real Clear Politics average of polls. Harris and Biden took office in a moment of relative optimism for the country, when just 49% thought the country was on the wrong track. (That’s a pretty low number for the last 20 years.) By mid-2022, with inflation raging, 74% felt the country had gone astray — higher than at any point in the Trump presidency. Now, it’s 65%.

So: When two-thirds of Americans feel the country is on the wrong track, what theme do Harris and running mate Gov. Tim Walz (D-MN) adopt for their presidential campaign? Joy. The Washington Post reported that the two Democrats have “seized on a joyful message.” A New York Times analysis of their “joyful campaign” included the headline: “Harris Used to Worry About Laughing. Now Joy Is Fueling Her Campaign.” MSNBC declared that Harris and Walz “campaign with joy.”

Obviously, Harris and Walz are happy. Why shouldn’t they be? Harris quickly, almost instantly, secured the Democratic nomination after party leaders pushed the aged and infirm Biden aside. Walz has a chance for a bigger job than he ever imagined. That can make a politician joyous.

But what about everybody else? For those families making trade-offs to meet their most basic needs — can joy pay their electric bill? The water bill? The rent? Insurance on the house? Kamala Harris will spend the coming weeks trying to persuade those voters to reward her for the dismal circumstances her time in office has brought. She will have many advocates, in the Democratic Party and in the media, cheering her on. But for millions of voters, the bills are still the bills, and there’s nothing joyous about that.

, PAYING THE BILLS IS HARDER THAN EVER. ARE VOTERS SUPPOSED TO FEEL JOY? On Wednesday morning, the Bureau of Labor Statistics will release inflation figures for July. Whatever the numbers turn out to be, this will remain true: Prices are far higher than they were when Joe Biden and Kamala Harris took office.  Even as the rate of inflation has gone down from its peak in 2022, people have learned an unhappy lesson. When the rate of inflation goes down, prices still go up. They are building upon all the price increases before but at a somewhat slower rate. Yes, very few things go down, but at the same time, others keep rising at a high rate. There’s no relief. This week, the Wall Street Journal  published a striking portrait of how that affects many families. The headline was “Child Care, Rent, Insurance: Where Inflation Hits Hardest Now; Big, fixed costs that are tough to avoid are crushing household budgets.” “Price increases for lots of items, like cable and shampoo, are indeed cooling,” the Wall Street Journal reported. “Prices for vehicles, gasoline, TVs and plane tickets have even dropped over the past year. … But prices for many of the things that are hard to do without are still posting eye-watering increases. Rent and electricity bills are up 10% or more over the past two years, and car insurance costs are up nearly 40%, according to the Labor Department’s index. Shoppers might be able to trade down from prime steak to cheaper cuts of meat at the supermarket, but they can’t really do the same thing with the water bill.” The article told the story of one family trying to use less electricity, reduce their home insurance coverage, and cut back on the children’s sports leagues. Another family stopped eating out and deferred any hope of buying a bigger house after being slammed by soaring day care costs.  The burden is not limited to their particular circumstances. “Households across the country are facing similar struggles,” the Wall Street Journal reported. “According to the Labor Department, essential services such as water, sewer, and trash collection have jumped nearly 11% over the past two years, and electricity has climbed 10%.” It’s no surprise that 65% of people believe the country is headed in the wrong direction, according to the Real Clear Politics average of polls. Harris and Biden took office in a moment of relative optimism for the country, when just 49% thought the country was on the wrong track. (That’s a pretty low number for the last 20 years.) By mid-2022, with inflation raging, 74% felt the country had gone astray — higher than at any point in the Trump presidency. Now, it’s 65%. So: When two-thirds of Americans feel the country is on the wrong track, what theme do Harris and running mate Gov. Tim Walz (D-MN) adopt for their presidential campaign? Joy. The Washington Post reported that the two Democrats have “seized on a joyful message.” A New York Times analysis of their “joyful campaign” included the headline: “Harris Used to Worry About Laughing. Now Joy Is Fueling Her Campaign.” MSNBC declared that Harris and Walz “campaign with joy.” Obviously, Harris and Walz are happy. Why shouldn’t they be? Harris quickly, almost instantly, secured the Democratic nomination after party leaders pushed the aged and infirm Biden aside. Walz has a chance for a bigger job than he ever imagined. That can make a politician joyous. But what about everybody else? For those families making trade-offs to meet their most basic needs — can joy pay their electric bill? The water bill? The rent? Insurance on the house? Kamala Harris will spend the coming weeks trying to persuade those voters to reward her for the dismal circumstances her time in office has brought. She will have many advocates, in the Democratic Party and in the media, cheering her on. But for millions of voters, the bills are still the bills, and there’s nothing joyous about that., , Paying the bills is harder than ever. Are voters supposed to feel joy?, https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/kamala-harris-bidenomics.webp, Washington Examiner, Political News and Conservative Analysis About Congress, the President, and the Federal Government, https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/cropped-favicon-32×32.png, https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/feed/, Byron York,

The Kamala Harris boom-and-bust cycle thumbnail

The Kamala Harris boom-and-bust cycle

THE KAMALA HARRIS BOOM-AND-BUST CYCLE. If the polls are right, support for Vice President Kamala Harris, the new Democratic nominee for president, is booming. After months of President Joe Biden trailing former President Donald Trump in the RealClearPolitics average of national polls, Harris now narrowly leads Trump. The last six polls in the average show Harris ahead. Although this is exactly what Trump’s pollster predicted would happen in the immediate aftermath of the Biden-Harris switch, it is still disheartening for Republicans.

How happy are Democrats and their allies in the press? Consider this, from a longtime contributor to MSNBC’s Morning Joe on Wednesday: “Watching the VP, it was mesmerizing in the sense I’ve never seen a rally like that, either on TV or in person. And watching it, you could just sense the power in the all — and it was the power of joy, the power of laughter, the power of hope for the future.” That’s happy.

But GOP strategists might take heart in what could be called the Harris boom-and-bust cycle, established the only other time Harris ran for national office. She was a candidate for the 2020 Democratic presidential nomination, but her campaign began and ended in 2019. Still, in one brief period, she shot up from back in the pack to close to the lead, only to disappear just as quickly. 

Harris declared her candidacy in January 2019. By April, her support stood at 5% in the CNN poll of the Democratic primary race. (All the numbers here are from subsequent CNN polls, conducted with the same methodology.) By May, Harris had climbed to 8%. Then, in the June poll, she jumped up to 17%. There was no poll in July, but by August, Harris was back down to 5%. She meandered around after that — 8% in September, 6% in October, 3% in November — and by December, she was out of the race.

Harris’s brief boom came after a Democratic debate in which she accused Biden of racism for opposing school busing back in the 1970s. For a moment, Harris became a progressive hero, until, with increased exposure after the debate, voters got a closer look at her. They didn’t really like what they saw, and her fall began.

What does that experience mean for the presidential race today? First, the situation is different in that this time, Harris has the entire Democratic Party, the entire Democratic establishment, and almost all of the media backing her up. For them, she is the whole game. They will not let her fail if success is at all possible.

In addition, in the 2019 Democratic primary, when a voter tired of Harris, he or she could switch support to another Democrat. When Harris began to wear badly — and it happened very quickly — the Democrats who supported her simply moved on to another Democrat.

Now, if Harris begins to wear badly on voters, there is no other Democratic candidate to go to. Would those Democratic voters then decide to vote for Trump? That seems highly unlikely. So Harris might benefit from the fact that her supporters have nowhere else to go.

On the other hand, a significant part of Harris’s rise appears due to new support from independent voters. A recent CBS News poll in July found Trump leading Biden among independents 54% to 44%. Now, Harris is tied with Trump among independents, 49% to 49%. It is those voters who might become disillusioned with Harris. If they switched from Trump to Harris in recent polls, they might switch again.

Of course, Democrats are determined to make sure that doesn’t happen. Why do you think Harris has not taken a single question from a journalist since Biden endorsed her and she became the instant presumptive nominee on July 22? Harris is doing rallies, speaking off a teleprompter. She’s appearing with her new running mate, Gov. Tim Walz (D-MN). But she’s not going into any situation where she might face some unexpected factor, and her reaction might offer voters a closer look at her as a person and a candidate. That is what happens in the long, grueling process of running for president. This time, after the Big Democratic Switch, party strategists know that if they can just keep Harris away from any unexpected exposure, away from any surprises, the honeymoon might keep going for 90 days, long enough for Harris to win. 

So look for Democrats to keep Harris under wraps as long as possible. It’s their best bet to keep history from repeating itself.

2024-08-08 14:15:00, http://s.wordpress.com/mshots/v1/https%3A%2F%2Fwww.washingtonexaminer.com%2Fdaily-memo%2F3114949%2Fthe-kamala-harris-boom-and-bust-cycle%2F?w=600&h=450, THE KAMALA HARRIS BOOM-AND-BUST CYCLE. If the polls are right, support for Vice President Kamala Harris, the new Democratic nominee for president, is booming. After months of President Joe Biden trailing former President Donald Trump in the RealClearPolitics average of national polls, Harris now narrowly leads Trump. The last six polls in the average show Harris,

THE KAMALA HARRIS BOOM-AND-BUST CYCLE. If the polls are right, support for Vice President Kamala Harris, the new Democratic nominee for president, is booming. After months of President Joe Biden trailing former President Donald Trump in the RealClearPolitics average of national polls, Harris now narrowly leads Trump. The last six polls in the average show Harris ahead. Although this is exactly what Trump’s pollster predicted would happen in the immediate aftermath of the Biden-Harris switch, it is still disheartening for Republicans.

How happy are Democrats and their allies in the press? Consider this, from a longtime contributor to MSNBC’s Morning Joe on Wednesday: “Watching the VP, it was mesmerizing in the sense I’ve never seen a rally like that, either on TV or in person. And watching it, you could just sense the power in the all — and it was the power of joy, the power of laughter, the power of hope for the future.” That’s happy.

But GOP strategists might take heart in what could be called the Harris boom-and-bust cycle, established the only other time Harris ran for national office. She was a candidate for the 2020 Democratic presidential nomination, but her campaign began and ended in 2019. Still, in one brief period, she shot up from back in the pack to close to the lead, only to disappear just as quickly. 

Harris declared her candidacy in January 2019. By April, her support stood at 5% in the CNN poll of the Democratic primary race. (All the numbers here are from subsequent CNN polls, conducted with the same methodology.) By May, Harris had climbed to 8%. Then, in the June poll, she jumped up to 17%. There was no poll in July, but by August, Harris was back down to 5%. She meandered around after that — 8% in September, 6% in October, 3% in November — and by December, she was out of the race.

Harris’s brief boom came after a Democratic debate in which she accused Biden of racism for opposing school busing back in the 1970s. For a moment, Harris became a progressive hero, until, with increased exposure after the debate, voters got a closer look at her. They didn’t really like what they saw, and her fall began.

What does that experience mean for the presidential race today? First, the situation is different in that this time, Harris has the entire Democratic Party, the entire Democratic establishment, and almost all of the media backing her up. For them, she is the whole game. They will not let her fail if success is at all possible.

In addition, in the 2019 Democratic primary, when a voter tired of Harris, he or she could switch support to another Democrat. When Harris began to wear badly — and it happened very quickly — the Democrats who supported her simply moved on to another Democrat.

Now, if Harris begins to wear badly on voters, there is no other Democratic candidate to go to. Would those Democratic voters then decide to vote for Trump? That seems highly unlikely. So Harris might benefit from the fact that her supporters have nowhere else to go.

On the other hand, a significant part of Harris’s rise appears due to new support from independent voters. A recent CBS News poll in July found Trump leading Biden among independents 54% to 44%. Now, Harris is tied with Trump among independents, 49% to 49%. It is those voters who might become disillusioned with Harris. If they switched from Trump to Harris in recent polls, they might switch again.

Of course, Democrats are determined to make sure that doesn’t happen. Why do you think Harris has not taken a single question from a journalist since Biden endorsed her and she became the instant presumptive nominee on July 22? Harris is doing rallies, speaking off a teleprompter. She’s appearing with her new running mate, Gov. Tim Walz (D-MN). But she’s not going into any situation where she might face some unexpected factor, and her reaction might offer voters a closer look at her as a person and a candidate. That is what happens in the long, grueling process of running for president. This time, after the Big Democratic Switch, party strategists know that if they can just keep Harris away from any unexpected exposure, away from any surprises, the honeymoon might keep going for 90 days, long enough for Harris to win. 

So look for Democrats to keep Harris under wraps as long as possible. It’s their best bet to keep history from repeating itself.

, THE KAMALA HARRIS BOOM-AND-BUST CYCLE. If the polls are right, support for Vice President Kamala Harris, the new Democratic nominee for president, is booming. After months of President Joe Biden trailing former President Donald Trump in the RealClearPolitics average of national polls, Harris now narrowly leads Trump. The last six polls in the average show Harris ahead. Although this is exactly what Trump’s pollster predicted would happen in the immediate aftermath of the Biden-Harris switch, it is still disheartening for Republicans. How happy are Democrats and their allies in the press? Consider this, from a longtime contributor to MSNBC’s Morning Joe on Wednesday: “Watching the VP, it was mesmerizing in the sense I’ve never seen a rally like that, either on TV or in person. And watching it, you could just sense the power in the all — and it was the power of joy, the power of laughter, the power of hope for the future.” That’s happy. But GOP strategists might take heart in what could be called the Harris boom-and-bust cycle, established the only other time Harris ran for national office. She was a candidate for the 2020 Democratic presidential nomination, but her campaign began and ended in 2019. Still, in one brief period, she shot up from back in the pack to close to the lead, only to disappear just as quickly.  Harris declared her candidacy in January 2019. By April, her support stood at 5% in the CNN poll of the Democratic primary race. (All the numbers here are from subsequent CNN polls, conducted with the same methodology.) By May, Harris had climbed to 8%. Then, in the June poll, she jumped up to 17%. There was no poll in July, but by August, Harris was back down to 5%. She meandered around after that — 8% in September, 6% in October, 3% in November — and by December, she was out of the race. Harris’s brief boom came after a Democratic debate in which she accused Biden of racism for opposing school busing back in the 1970s. For a moment, Harris became a progressive hero, until, with increased exposure after the debate, voters got a closer look at her. They didn’t really like what they saw, and her fall began. What does that experience mean for the presidential race today? First, the situation is different in that this time, Harris has the entire Democratic Party, the entire Democratic establishment, and almost all of the media backing her up. For them, she is the whole game. They will not let her fail if success is at all possible. In addition, in the 2019 Democratic primary, when a voter tired of Harris, he or she could switch support to another Democrat. When Harris began to wear badly — and it happened very quickly — the Democrats who supported her simply moved on to another Democrat. Now, if Harris begins to wear badly on voters, there is no other Democratic candidate to go to. Would those Democratic voters then decide to vote for Trump? That seems highly unlikely. So Harris might benefit from the fact that her supporters have nowhere else to go. On the other hand, a significant part of Harris’s rise appears due to new support from independent voters. A recent CBS News poll in July found Trump leading Biden among independents 54% to 44%. Now, Harris is tied with Trump among independents, 49% to 49%. It is those voters who might become disillusioned with Harris. If they switched from Trump to Harris in recent polls, they might switch again. Of course, Democrats are determined to make sure that doesn’t happen. Why do you think Harris has not taken a single question from a journalist since Biden endorsed her and she became the instant presumptive nominee on July 22? Harris is doing rallies, speaking off a teleprompter. She’s appearing with her new running mate, Gov. Tim Walz (D-MN). But she’s not going into any situation where she might face some unexpected factor, and her reaction might offer voters a closer look at her as a person and a candidate. That is what happens in the long, grueling process of running for president. This time, after the Big Democratic Switch, party strategists know that if they can just keep Harris away from any unexpected exposure, away from any surprises, the honeymoon might keep going for 90 days, long enough for Harris to win.  So look for Democrats to keep Harris under wraps as long as possible. It’s their best bet to keep history from repeating itself., , The Kamala Harris boom-and-bust cycle, https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/kamala-harris-tim-walz-1.webp, Washington Examiner, Political News and Conservative Analysis About Congress, the President, and the Federal Government, https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/cropped-favicon-32×32.png, https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/feed/, Byron York,

The short, strange life of ‘weird’ thumbnail

The short, strange life of ‘weird’

THE SHORT, STRANGE LIFE OF “WEIRD.” For a brief moment, every Democratic talker in the United States was calling former President Donald Trump and running mate Sen. J.D. Vance (R-OH) “weird.” They’re still doing it now, but in the last 24 hours or so, the vogue of “weird” appears to be dwindling. And that leaves the question: What was that about?

Several press accounts suggest it got started last week when Gov. Tim Walz (D-MN), who just happens to be on presumptive nominee Vice President Kamala Harris’s short list for running mate, “called Trump and Vance ‘just weird’ in an MSNBC interview, which the Democratic Governors Association, of which Walz is chair, amplified in a post on X,” according to ABC News. 

Then the Harris campaign, just days in existence, began calling Trump and Vance “weird” on every occasion it could. Last Friday, the campaign sent out a press release headlined “JD Vance Is a Creep (Who Wants to Ban Abortion Nationwide).” The first sentence of the release: “JD Vance is weird.”

Subscribe today to the Washington Examiner magazine that will keep you up to date with what’s going on in Washington. SUBSCRIBE NOW: Just $1.00 an issue!

By the weekend, shows on MSNBC and CNN were talking about it, giving Walz credit. The head of the Democratic National Committee predicted victory in November in part because its Republican opponents are “weirdos.” Later, Gov. Gretchen Whitmer (D-MI), who pulled herself out of the vice presidential pool, claimed the “weird” talking point was breaking through because of the Republican agenda and “the way they address people, it is bizarre. It’s weird. It is weird. … And weird is a kind of a funny phrase to use because it’s bizarre.”

By then, it seemed that every Democratic official and every Democratic ally in the press was calling the Trump-Vance ticket “weird.” Look at this collection of clips to see one after the other after the other after the other.

Does it work? Who knows? The Democrats speaking in unison obviously believe it does. But here’s one very odd thing about it: President Joe Biden, who was the 2024 Democratic candidate until he was deposed by a group of party insiders, based his campaign on the threat he claimed former President Donald Trump posed to democracy. Say what you will about it — and it was basically malarkey, as the president might say — it was serious malarkey. It was a big, deeply solemn accusation. 

And now? Oooh, they’re weird. As a whole, on cue, the Democratic Party changed the focus of the campaign from saving democracy to saying the other side has cooties. That was an extraordinary decision, to say the least.

A few days ago, Politico suggested that Democrats may have de-emphasized democracy in favor of “weird” because democracy just wasn’t selling. Biden, Politico reported, “believed deeply in making the issue of democracy a central theme of the campaign. But the president’s remarks on the subject often featured a grave tone and a heaviness that, more than three years after the January 6, 2021 insurrection, the country had seemingly tuned out. Polls showed voters rated Biden and Trump roughly evenly on questions of which candidate would be better to protect democracy.”

That is a big, serious question. With Biden’s charge in mind, voters could see the sitting president advocate removing Supreme Court justices because he did not like their decisions; they could see his Justice Department indicting his opponent not once but twice; they could see Biden’s supporters trying to remove Trump from presidential ballots — they could see all of that and reasonably wonder which candidate would better protect democracy. No wonder people got a little tired of things. So the Harris team thought it might be better to just dump the big, serious Biden campaign theme in favor of … “weird.”

There are those who argue that “weird” itself is a serious message. The Atlantic’s David Frum suggested that it was a shrewd campaign appeal directed at millions of women, who will get the anti-Trump, pro-Harris message even if Trump supporters don’t. “‘Weird’ is code for ‘expresses obsessive hostility to women, including the women in his own personal life,’” Frum wrote, “and because MAGA Republicans don’t get the code, they don’t understand why they are losing the argument.”

Maybe. A huge gender gap has characterized this entire campaign, with Trump having a big lead among men and Biden having a big lead among women. Through the ouster of Biden, Trump’s lead was a bit bigger than Biden’s, meaning Trump led in polls both nationwide and in key swing states. Maybe “weird” will be the magic word that turns any women who do not already support Trump against the former president. Or maybe not.

In any event, now, although it’s never a good idea to speak too soon, it appears the “weird” wave might have crested. Some Trump supporters started posting images of the Biden administration’s celebration of transgenderism, men dressed in women’s clothing reveling on the White House lawn, alongside photos of Vance and his family with the caption “JD Vance is weird.” That led to other sorts of pushback on the “weird” theme. And then the Harris campaign released its first big ad, and it was an entirely conventional case for her candidacy — no “weird,” no memes, just a straight old-fashioned campaign commercial. And now “weird” doesn’t seem to be popping up every second on some media outlets and in social media. So maybe we are approaching the point where it all seems overdone. And then, voters can hope, the campaign can move on to being a campaign.

2024-07-30 23:02:00, http://s.wordpress.com/mshots/v1/https%3A%2F%2Fwww.washingtonexaminer.com%2Fdaily-memo%2F3105253%2Fthe-short-strange-life-of-weird%2F?w=600&h=450, THE SHORT, STRANGE LIFE OF “WEIRD.” For a brief moment, every Democratic talker in the United States was calling former President Donald Trump and running mate Sen. J.D. Vance (R-OH) “weird.” They’re still doing it now, but in the last 24 hours or so, the vogue of “weird” appears to be dwindling. And that leaves the,

THE SHORT, STRANGE LIFE OF “WEIRD.” For a brief moment, every Democratic talker in the United States was calling former President Donald Trump and running mate Sen. J.D. Vance (R-OH) “weird.” They’re still doing it now, but in the last 24 hours or so, the vogue of “weird” appears to be dwindling. And that leaves the question: What was that about?

Several press accounts suggest it got started last week when Gov. Tim Walz (D-MN), who just happens to be on presumptive nominee Vice President Kamala Harris’s short list for running mate, “called Trump and Vance ‘just weird’ in an MSNBC interview, which the Democratic Governors Association, of which Walz is chair, amplified in a post on X,” according to ABC News. 

Then the Harris campaign, just days in existence, began calling Trump and Vance “weird” on every occasion it could. Last Friday, the campaign sent out a press release headlined “JD Vance Is a Creep (Who Wants to Ban Abortion Nationwide).” The first sentence of the release: “JD Vance is weird.”

Subscribe today to the Washington Examiner magazine that will keep you up to date with what’s going on in Washington. SUBSCRIBE NOW: Just $1.00 an issue!

By the weekend, shows on MSNBC and CNN were talking about it, giving Walz credit. The head of the Democratic National Committee predicted victory in November in part because its Republican opponents are “weirdos.” Later, Gov. Gretchen Whitmer (D-MI), who pulled herself out of the vice presidential pool, claimed the “weird” talking point was breaking through because of the Republican agenda and “the way they address people, it is bizarre. It’s weird. It is weird. … And weird is a kind of a funny phrase to use because it’s bizarre.”

By then, it seemed that every Democratic official and every Democratic ally in the press was calling the Trump-Vance ticket “weird.” Look at this collection of clips to see one after the other after the other after the other.

Does it work? Who knows? The Democrats speaking in unison obviously believe it does. But here’s one very odd thing about it: President Joe Biden, who was the 2024 Democratic candidate until he was deposed by a group of party insiders, based his campaign on the threat he claimed former President Donald Trump posed to democracy. Say what you will about it — and it was basically malarkey, as the president might say — it was serious malarkey. It was a big, deeply solemn accusation. 

And now? Oooh, they’re weird. As a whole, on cue, the Democratic Party changed the focus of the campaign from saving democracy to saying the other side has cooties. That was an extraordinary decision, to say the least.

A few days ago, Politico suggested that Democrats may have de-emphasized democracy in favor of “weird” because democracy just wasn’t selling. Biden, Politico reported, “believed deeply in making the issue of democracy a central theme of the campaign. But the president’s remarks on the subject often featured a grave tone and a heaviness that, more than three years after the January 6, 2021 insurrection, the country had seemingly tuned out. Polls showed voters rated Biden and Trump roughly evenly on questions of which candidate would be better to protect democracy.”

That is a big, serious question. With Biden’s charge in mind, voters could see the sitting president advocate removing Supreme Court justices because he did not like their decisions; they could see his Justice Department indicting his opponent not once but twice; they could see Biden’s supporters trying to remove Trump from presidential ballots — they could see all of that and reasonably wonder which candidate would better protect democracy. No wonder people got a little tired of things. So the Harris team thought it might be better to just dump the big, serious Biden campaign theme in favor of … “weird.”

There are those who argue that “weird” itself is a serious message. The Atlantic’s David Frum suggested that it was a shrewd campaign appeal directed at millions of women, who will get the anti-Trump, pro-Harris message even if Trump supporters don’t. “‘Weird’ is code for ‘expresses obsessive hostility to women, including the women in his own personal life,’” Frum wrote, “and because MAGA Republicans don’t get the code, they don’t understand why they are losing the argument.”

Maybe. A huge gender gap has characterized this entire campaign, with Trump having a big lead among men and Biden having a big lead among women. Through the ouster of Biden, Trump’s lead was a bit bigger than Biden’s, meaning Trump led in polls both nationwide and in key swing states. Maybe “weird” will be the magic word that turns any women who do not already support Trump against the former president. Or maybe not.

In any event, now, although it’s never a good idea to speak too soon, it appears the “weird” wave might have crested. Some Trump supporters started posting images of the Biden administration’s celebration of transgenderism, men dressed in women’s clothing reveling on the White House lawn, alongside photos of Vance and his family with the caption “JD Vance is weird.” That led to other sorts of pushback on the “weird” theme. And then the Harris campaign released its first big ad, and it was an entirely conventional case for her candidacy — no “weird,” no memes, just a straight old-fashioned campaign commercial. And now “weird” doesn’t seem to be popping up every second on some media outlets and in social media. So maybe we are approaching the point where it all seems overdone. And then, voters can hope, the campaign can move on to being a campaign.

, THE SHORT, STRANGE LIFE OF “WEIRD.” For a brief moment, every Democratic talker in the United States was calling former President Donald Trump and running mate Sen. J.D. Vance (R-OH) “weird.” They’re still doing it now, but in the last 24 hours or so, the vogue of “weird” appears to be dwindling. And that leaves the question: What was that about? Several press accounts suggest it got started last week when Gov. Tim Walz (D-MN), who just happens to be on presumptive nominee Vice President Kamala Harris’s short list for running mate, “called Trump and Vance ‘just weird’ in an MSNBC interview, which the Democratic Governors Association, of which Walz is chair, amplified in a post on X,” according to ABC News.  Then the Harris campaign, just days in existence, began calling Trump and Vance “weird” on every occasion it could. Last Friday, the campaign sent out a press release headlined “JD Vance Is a Creep (Who Wants to Ban Abortion Nationwide).” The first sentence of the release: “JD Vance is weird.” Subscribe today to the Washington Examiner magazine that will keep you up to date with what’s going on in Washington. SUBSCRIBE NOW: Just $1.00 an issue! By the weekend, shows on MSNBC and CNN were talking about it, giving Walz credit. The head of the Democratic National Committee predicted victory in November in part because its Republican opponents are “weirdos.” Later, Gov. Gretchen Whitmer (D-MI), who pulled herself out of the vice presidential pool, claimed the “weird” talking point was breaking through because of the Republican agenda and “the way they address people, it is bizarre. It’s weird. It is weird. … And weird is a kind of a funny phrase to use because it’s bizarre.” By then, it seemed that every Democratic official and every Democratic ally in the press was calling the Trump-Vance ticket “weird.” Look at this collection of clips to see one after the other after the other after the other. Does it work? Who knows? The Democrats speaking in unison obviously believe it does. But here’s one very odd thing about it: President Joe Biden, who was the 2024 Democratic candidate until he was deposed by a group of party insiders, based his campaign on the threat he claimed former President Donald Trump posed to democracy. Say what you will about it — and it was basically malarkey, as the president might say — it was serious malarkey. It was a big, deeply solemn accusation.  And now? Oooh, they’re weird. As a whole, on cue, the Democratic Party changed the focus of the campaign from saving democracy to saying the other side has cooties. That was an extraordinary decision, to say the least. A few days ago, Politico  suggested that Democrats may have de-emphasized democracy in favor of “weird” because democracy just wasn’t selling. Biden, Politico reported, “believed deeply in making the issue of democracy a central theme of the campaign. But the president’s remarks on the subject often featured a grave tone and a heaviness that, more than three years after the January 6, 2021 insurrection, the country had seemingly tuned out. Polls showed voters rated Biden and Trump roughly evenly on questions of which candidate would be better to protect democracy.” That is a big, serious question. With Biden’s charge in mind, voters could see the sitting president advocate removing Supreme Court justices because he did not like their decisions; they could see his Justice Department indicting his opponent not once but twice; they could see Biden’s supporters trying to remove Trump from presidential ballots — they could see all of that and reasonably wonder which candidate would better protect democracy. No wonder people got a little tired of things. So the Harris team thought it might be better to just dump the big, serious Biden campaign theme in favor of … “weird.” There are those who argue that “weird” itself is a serious message. The Atlantic’s David Frum suggested that it was a shrewd campaign appeal directed at millions of women, who will get the anti-Trump, pro-Harris message even if Trump supporters don’t. “‘Weird’ is code for ‘expresses obsessive hostility to women, including the women in his own personal life,’” Frum wrote, “and because MAGA Republicans don’t get the code, they don’t understand why they are losing the argument.” Maybe. A huge gender gap has characterized this entire campaign, with Trump having a big lead among men and Biden having a big lead among women. Through the ouster of Biden, Trump’s lead was a bit bigger than Biden’s, meaning Trump led in polls both nationwide and in key swing states. Maybe “weird” will be the magic word that turns any women who do not already support Trump against the former president. Or maybe not. In any event, now, although it’s never a good idea to speak too soon, it appears the “weird” wave might have crested. Some Trump supporters started posting images of the Biden administration’s celebration of transgenderism, men dressed in women’s clothing reveling on the White House lawn, alongside photos of Vance and his family with the caption “JD Vance is weird.” That led to other sorts of pushback on the “weird” theme. And then the Harris campaign released its first big ad, and it was an entirely conventional case for her candidacy — no “weird,” no memes, just a straight old-fashioned campaign commercial. And now “weird” doesn’t seem to be popping up every second on some media outlets and in social media. So maybe we are approaching the point where it all seems overdone. And then, voters can hope, the campaign can move on to being a campaign., , The short, strange life of ‘weird’, https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/kamala-byron-weird.webp, Washington Examiner, Political News and Conservative Analysis About Congress, the President, and the Federal Government, https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/cropped-favicon-32×32.png, https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/feed/, Byron York,

TRUMP: ‘I’M NOT SUPPOSED TO BE HERE’ thumbnail

TRUMP: ‘I’M NOT SUPPOSED TO BE HERE’

TRUMP: ‘I’M NOT SUPPOSED TO BE HERE‘: Former President Donald Trump can’t stop thinking about the way he moved his head in the split second before a gunman, intent on assassinating him, pulled the trigger during the former president’s speech in Pennsylvania Saturday evening. Trump was standing at the podium and began to refer to a large screen, hanging to his right, that showed statistics about immigration. To better see the screen, Trump turned his head to the right and a little up, and at the millisecond in which his head was at just the right angle for the bullet to graze his ear but not enter his skull — at that moment, the bullet whizzed by. Trump suffered a bloody wound to his ear, but no other injuries. It seemed like a miracle.

“The most incredible thing was that I happened to not only turn but to turn at the exact right time and in just the right amount,” Trump said Sunday afternoon in a talk aboard his 757 as he flew to Milwaukee for the start of the Republican National Convention. “If I only half-turn, it hits the back of the brain. The other way goes right through [the skull]. And because the sign was high, I’m looking up. The chances of my making a perfect turn are probably one tenth of one percent, so I’m not supposed to be here.”

“I had to be at the exact right angle,” Trump said at another point in the conversation, which included the New York Post’s Michael Goodwin. “Because the thing was an eighth of an inch away. That I would turn exactly at that second, where he [the gunman] wouldn’t stop the shot is pretty amazing. Pretty amazing. I’m really not supposed to be here.”

Dressed in a dark suit with no tie and a gauze bandage taped to his ear, Trump spoke highly of the Secret Service agents who covered him while he was down on the stage. At one point, he rolled up his right sleeve and showed a deep red and black bruise where the agents made sure he stayed down. “That’s just from a guy grabbing me,” Trump said. “You know how strong you have to be to do that?” Trump also said he insisted on getting up and walking off the stage under his own power. “I said, I’ve got to walk out, I have to walk out,” Trump continued. “I did not want to be carried out. I’ve seen people being carried out, and it’s not good. And I had no problem with walking.”

I said that watching the video, it appeared that after being shot, surrounded by agents shielding him from any further threat, Trump actually wanted to return to the microphone to continue speaking. Indeed he did. “I wanted to keep speaking — I wanted to keep speaking, but I just got shot,” Trump said with a little laugh. “It’s a very surreal experience, and you never know what you’re going to do until a thing like that happens.”

It was obvious that Trump was still processing what had happened. Who wouldn’t be? It is something that will stay with him for the rest of his life. At the moment, he is grappling with the feeling that something very big has changed in his life and in the presidential race. When I asked him, “Does this change your campaign?” he immediately answered, “Yes.”

Trump explained that before Saturday night, he had finished the speech he planned to give later this week at the Republican convention. “I basically had a speech that was an unbelievable rip-roarer,” he said. “It was brutal — really good, really tough. [Last night] I threw it out. I think it would be very bad if I got up and started going wild about how horrible everybody is, and how corrupt and crooked, even if it’s true. Had this not happened, we had a speech that was pretty well set that was extremely tough. Now, we have a speech that is more unifying.”

Trump did not mean that a new speech has been fully written, but parts of it have already been drafted, starting in the hours after the assassination attempt. The idea is to reframe the intense conflicts Trump has engaged in during his years in national politics. “I’ve been fighting a group of people that I considered very bad people for a long time, and they’ve been fighting me, and we’ve put up a very good fight,” Trump said. “We had a very tough speech, and I threw it out last night, I said I can’t say these things after what I’ve been through.”

Some of the people Trump talks to around the world of politics and business have suggested to him that he could use the assassination attempt as a starting point to try to be a more unifying candidate. Given the history of the last eight years, it’s an idea that seems wildly improbable. But an assassination attempt is a very big thing. There hasn’t been one of a president in more than 40 years, and there hasn’t been one of a leading presidential candidate in longer. It is hard to predict what effect it will have. But Trump suspects the chances of fundamental political change coming from the Pennsylvania attack are probably not great.

“I’d love to achieve unity if you could achieve unity, if that’s possible,” Trump said. “There are many good people on the other side…But there are also people who are very divided. Some people actually want open borders and some people don’t want open borders. The question is can those two sides get together? Can sides where you have people who want to see men play in women’s sports, and you have a side that doesn’t understand even the concept of allowing that to happen [get together]?”

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER

Trump knows it’s a long shot. “It has an impact,” he said of the assassination attempt. “Now, maybe the impact will wear off if the other side gets nasty.” It seems quite likely that that is exactly what will happen and the fighting will resume, even though both Trump and President Joe Biden are talking about unity.

But even if it does not bring lasting political change, a brush with death has had an obvious effect on Donald Trump. He survived “by luck or by God,” he said. Once the trigger was pulled, the chances of Trump avoiding a fatal injury seemed infinitesimally small. And yet that is what happened. “I’m not supposed to be here,” Trump said yet again. “It did have a lot of impact.”

Rhetoric and the Trump assassination attempt thumbnail

Rhetoric and the Trump assassination attempt

RHETORIC AND THE TRUMP ASSASSINATION ATTEMPT. The gunman who tried to assassinate former President Donald Trump was a 20-year-old Pennsylvania man named Thomas Matthew Crooks, according to the FBI. News reports say Crooks had registered to vote as a Republican but also gave $15 to the anti-Trump group Progressive Turnout Project. Obviously, there is more to learn about him and his motives.

Among the many issues that will prompt discussion in the coming days is the role incendiary rhetoric played, or did not play, in the attempted assassination. The most prominent recent example of that rhetoric, specifically aimed at Trump, came from President Joe Biden. The president, of course, has been trying to deflect attention from his infirmities after the disastrous June 27 debate with Trump. Last Monday, during a private call with donors, he said, “We’re done talking about the debate. It’s time to put Trump in a bullseye.”

In light of what happened, it’s safe to say that the president’s words look ill-considered. And so do the words of many on the anti-Trump side who have used what might be called maximalist rhetoric against the former president.

It is not unusual to hear, on the left and in mainstream discussion, the claim that Trump’s election would literally bring the end of American democracy. It would be the end of the United States. It would be the last election in more than 200 years of U.S. history. Some characterize Trump as an American Hitler — just look at this recent magazine cover. Many on the left have said simply that Trump must be stopped. Some critics of this kind of commentary have pointed out that such talk has the possible effect of justifying extreme action against Trump. If he is that dire a threat — an American Hitler — would any action be unjustified in neutralizing that threat?

Last December the conservative writer and commentator Mollie Hemingway wrote that “This extreme and dangerous genre — of claiming Trump is Hitler — should probably be given the name ‘Assassination Prep.’” 

Back in 2011, during the Obama years, an insane gunman shot Democratic Rep. Gabby Giffords at an event in Arizona. Much media commentary in places like the New York Times, Washington Post, and the cable networks focused on an ad that former vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin had released featuring a map of the United States with small crosshairs scattered around the country where there were tight congressional races. Giffords’ district was one of them, although Palin did not name any of the candidates.

After the shooting, there were many calls for Republicans and conservatives to denounce the “rhetoric of violence” that commentators said Palin’s words represented. “Swearing off the rhetoric of violence: Will any prominent conservatives denounce ‘reload’ and ‘crosshairs’ imagery?” asked the left-wing journalist Joan Walsh. Her sentiments were echoed by many Democrats.

Now, there has been a great amount of what could be called the rhetoric of violence directed at Trump. After all, it appears that the multiple Democratic prosecutions and lawsuits directed at Trump, while damaging, will not keep him from running for president. In addition, after the debate, Biden’s much-discussed age-related infirmities have contributed to a continuing Trump lead in national polls. Democrats have thrown about everything they can at the former president, and so far, it has not worked. Frustration is high among Democrats.

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER

After the shooting, Trump senior advisor Chris LaCivita posted, “For years, and even today, leftists, activists, Democrat donors and now even Joe Biden have made disgusting remarks and descriptions of shooting Donald Trump. It’s high time they be held accountable for it. The best way is through the ballot box.”

By the way, the assassination attempt happened less than three months after House Democrats introduced a bill that would remove Secret Service protection for “individuals who otherwise qualify for it upon sentencing following conviction for a federal or state felony.” The bill, sponsored by Jan. 6 Committee Chairman Bennie Thompson, would have affected one person and one person only: Donald Trump.