It looks like the debate is on with muted mics. I am glad for the muted mics; I do not want to hear his interruptions. His rambling will likely be evident without the mics being on.
Harris wants the mics to be unmuted to show just how unhinged Trump really is. It works to her advantage, she thinks, because she is quick thinker. She would run circles around his debate style.
I am not sure if I missed the question or if there was not one in particular. If I vote, I always vote democrat. I’m very much anti conservatism. The general stances on issues between the two leaves me leaning liberal every time. I am
Surprised , and angered and saddened that Trump did not end up guilty, charged and tossed in prison. But I don’t vote since I live in Alabama. It’s always a red state. I just find it pointless to cast my time to vote in a state where it just does not matter at that level.
I am not sure if I missed the question or if there was not one in particular. If I vote, I always vote democrat. I’m very much anti conservatism. The general stances on issues between the two leaves me leaning liberal every time. I am
Surprised , and angered and saddened that Trump did not end up guilty, charged and tossed in prison. But I don’t vote since I live in Alabama. It’s always a red state. I just find it pointless to cast my time to vote in a state where it just does not matter at that level.
But you can vote for all the other things on the ballot. School board members are crucial, for example. Even if it’s mainly to vote against the worst ones… I’m in Florida, so believe me, I relate.
I am not sure if I missed the question or if there was not one in particular. If I vote, I always vote democrat. I’m very much anti conservatism. The general stances on issues between the two leaves me leaning liberal every time. I am
Surprised , and angered and saddened that Trump did not end up guilty, charged and tossed in prison. But I don’t vote since I live in Alabama. It’s always a red state. I just find it pointless to cast my time to vote in a state where it just does not matter at that level.
If all the people who felt like you voted, would Alabama still be red? If the DNC, DCCC et al saw the blue vote start to pick up, would they then devote time, money and energy to turning Alabama purple? Georgia was deep red once. So was Texas.
Latest polling shows Harris gaining in the Southern States. Florida is turning pink. But as pointed out, there are a number of down ballot positions. Your vote is still crucial. I am in a deep blue state, but I live in a Congressional District that has gone red for the last 20 years. I am hoping we can break that this year. And there are a number of initiatives on the ballot that will be decided.
I am not sure if I missed the question or if there was not one in particular. If I vote, I always vote democrat. I’m very much anti conservatism. The general stances on issues between the two leaves me leaning liberal every time. I am
Surprised , and angered and saddened that Trump did not end up guilty, charged and tossed in prison. But I don’t vote since I live in Alabama. It’s always a red state. I just find it pointless to cast my time to vote in a state where it just does not matter at that level.
If all the people who felt like you voted, would Alabama still be red? If the DNC, DCCC et al saw the blue vote start to pick up, would they then devote time, money and energy to turning Alabama purple? Georgia was deep red once. So was Texas.
Yes. It would still be very red. I know because I’m 35 and have voted out of here for most of my life since I was 18. For sure, with electoral college voting, it’s a fact my vote means nothing in Alabama for presidential elections. All I do is miss work, spent hours waiting in line listening to toxic arguments, vote and then head back to work and it’s still going towards whoever is conservative.
The southern states that are turning purple or purple-ish all have big metropolitan areas which generate jobs that attract educated young people, who are more ethnically diverse, more liberal, more likely to vote Democrat. Alabama doesn't have anything like the large metro areas that Georgia, Texas, and Florida have, and it's not even close to turning a bit purple. Harris and Walz are campaigning in Savannah (second biggest city in Georgia) and some of the more rural areas of Georgia, but their big numbers will come from the Atlanta metroplex. It would be a total waste of money and time for them to campaign in Alabama. Biden lost Alabama by 25 percentage points; there aren't that many left-leaning people who stayed home. Just like they won't campaign in California -- presidential candidates only come here for fundraisers.
And then there's the gerrymandering of Congressional districts, but I'm not up on the details of what's going on with that in Alabama.
But I don’t vote since I live in Alabama. It’s always a red state. I just find it pointless to cast my time to vote in a state where it just does not matter at that level.
I live in a very red part of my state (Florida), which has multitudes of Trump flags, bumper stickers, and signs of every sort, along with f... Biden banners in many places. I put my 'Harris for President' sign in my front yard, not knowing if it or my property would be destroyed, but hoping to encourage folks in my neighborhood who must believe somewhat like me. Almost immediately I heard from people who are afraid to put such signs on their property for fear of retaliation, but who were very very encouraged by my small effort!
You never know how much you might be a beacon to others!
(And, I know about Alabama voters. My sister and her husband used to live there, and couldn't vote for the evil Republican who was running, but refused to vote for the Democratic candidate who had a wonderful reputation. It was so very frustrating to me.)
I will not share the evil of the Alabama Republican candidate because of Epiphanic principals.
Well, the Dems have taken back patriotism, so maybe the anti-Dems (because they sure ain't Republicans like I grew up with) are trying to take back calling people weird?
I do think the Dems taking back patriotism is interesting. Patriotism got problematic for Democrats during the Vietnam War, when I was a child, and it adds a level of difficulty to convincing people you should be running the country when you can't claim to be unequivocally patriotic.* But there is a big shift in the rhetoric coming from the party, away from identity politics - Harris never talks about being the first Black and South Asian woman to have a serious shot at the presidency - and toward an inclusive patriotism: we're all Americans, we all love it, and we want the country to work for all of us.
*I've been waiting for years for Republicans to run into trouble convincing people they should be running the government when they so clearly don't believe in it, but not liking government is not the same as having a complicated relationship with patriotism.
I think Harris is very smart not to talk about identity politics. Those of us who would be glad to have a Black South Asian woman as our president have already noticed and there's no advantage to pushing it in the faces of the guys who are struggling with that.
I think (hope?) that the Republican theory of running a government they don't believe in may be harder in the post-Trump era, whatever that looks like. His thing has been vote for me and I'll run the government into the ground. But once we're past him, I think that will not work as well, particularly if he leaves by losing again.
I've been waiting for years for Republicans to run into trouble convincing people they should be running the government when they so clearly don't believe in it, . . . .
And when they so clearly can’t do it. The Republican/Trump Party of recent years has been a case study in inability to govern and inability to get their own agenda enacted (with the exception of tax cuts for the wealthy), even when they controlled the White House and Congress.
This was an unusual event for the army to get involved in saying anything. The U.S. Army has weighed in on the scandal surrounding Trump’s visit to Arlington National Cemetery for a campaign photo op. You would think he would learn. Remember when he stood in front of the Episcopal church holding a Bible? That did not work out very well.
This was an unusual event for the army to get involved in saying anything. The U.S. Army has weighed in on the scandal surrounding Trump’s visit to Arlington National Cemetery for a campaign photo op.
I am given to understand from a typically reliable source that ads will start to air sometime after Labor Day (first Monday in September, and the traditional start of the campaign season, for non-US shipmates) in which various retired generals will say Trump is unfit to be commander in chief. Trump just keeps giving them stuff to work with.
I'm seeing a lot of stuff today about VP Harris flip-flopping on the southern border wall, EVs, and Fracking. Watch out, everybody, she's a flip-flopper-er.
I'm seeing a lot of stuff today about VP Harris flip-flopping on the southern border wall, EVs, and Fracking. Watch out, everybody, she's a flip-flopper-er.
I'm gonna go out on a limb here and say it's all hogwash.
Based on how reliable everything else that comes out of the Trump campaign...
This wasn't a Tr*mp campaign effort. It's media spin, and there's a kernel of truth in it, but the whole truth is nuanced, very much in the details, and not at all an overt, tactical effort by VP Harris.
i.e. the border wall: VP Harris said she'd sign the bipartisan border security legislation that Tr*mp had Senate Republicans kill. In that legislation is a continuation of border wall construction and maintenance that began during the Tr*mp Admin. Harris isn't creating or doing anything new, but the media is calling that a flip-flop on Tr*mp's wall, since she's on record as having been against it.
This was an unusual event for the army to get involved in saying anything. The U.S. Army has weighed in on the scandal surrounding Trump’s visit to Arlington National Cemetery for a campaign photo op. You would think he would learn. Remember when he stood in front of the Episcopal church holding a Bible? That did not work out very well.
Because this is the first time the Arlington National Cemetery dust-up has been mentioned on this site, let me give a brief run-down to those who aren't au courant with presidential campaigning minutiæ.
On Monday (August 26) Donald Trump attended a wreath laying at Arlington National Cemetery (ANC). This was the third anniversary of the Abbey Gate bombing during the evacuation of Kabul and the family of one of the soldiers killed in that incident invited Trump to participate. So far, so good. Unfortunately for Trump and his entourage it's against both federal law and Arlington National Cemetery policy to use photos or videos of recent military dead for campaign purposes, and Trump's whole reason for showing up was to use the war dead as props, claiming that Joe Biden and Kamala Harris were responsible for that soldier's death. Section 60, the portion of ANC reserved for deceased veterans of Iraq and Afghanistan where this all went down, definitely falls within the restriction on using recent war dead as campaign props. When Trump's people were informed of this they did the only rational thing; physically assault a cemetery worker and take the photos anyway. The photo I've seen shows Trump standing over the grave with that mirthless rictus he thinks is a smile giving a "thumbs up" of approval, presumably to the grave. The descriptions that have come out since portray the assault as shoving.
This news was broken the following day by NPR, who also included the Trump campaign's claim that the cemetery worker (originally identified by them as some random interloper) was mentally ill and that they had video which would prove their innocence. To the best of my knowledge no such video has not been released by the Trump campaign, despite multiple requests by various news outlets.
“Participants in the August 26th ceremony and the subsequent Section 60 visit were made aware of federal laws, Army regulations and DoD policies, which clearly prohibit political activities on cemetery grounds. An ANC employee who attempted to ensure adherence to these rules was abruptly pushed aside,” the Army spokesperson said in the statement on Thursday. Section 60 is an area in the cemetery largely reserved for the graves of those who served in Iraq and Afghanistan.
“This incident was unfortunate, and it is also unfortunate that the ANC employee and her professionalism has been unfairly attacked. ANC is a national shrine to the honored dead of the Armed Forces, and its dedicated staff will continue to ensure public ceremonies are conducted with the dignity and respect the nation’s fallen deserve,” the statement said.
Ever helpful, running mate JD Vance decided to pick a fight with the Army saying "You guys in the media, you're acting like Donald Trump filmed a TV commercial at a grave site". Yes JD, the media are acting like that because that's what Trump did.
I have to admit I didn't have "desecrate a military grave" or "assault cemetery worker" on my Trump campaign 2024 bingo card, but here we are.
Trump is now kinda-sorta implying that he'll vote in favor of the ballot measure repealing Florida's six week abortion ban. For those who don't want play the video and to listen to his voice (and I don't blame you), when asked how he will vote on the measure he says "well I think the six week are too short, it has to be more time, and so that's and I told them that I want more weeks" and when prompted again he says "I'm voting, I am going to be voting that we need more than six weeks". So that's not a direct answer, but the only way that anyone gets a deadline longer than six weeks is to vote in favor of the referendum. Unlike so much in Trump's life there's no bespoke rich guy way to custom tailor generally applicable laws. So he's trying to give an answer without giving an answer. I don't think this will play well with the anti-abortion crowd.
I have to admit I didn't have "desecrate a military grave" or "assault cemetery worker" on my Trump campaign 2024 bingo card, but here we are.
That's very remiss of you. It's totally in line with his previous statements and behaviour.
Yeah, I know. Using violence to procure a photo op is totally consistent with the guy who ordered the tear gassing of peaceful protesters so he could have his picture taken holding a Bible upside down outside a church, but I guess I wasn't thinking far enough outside the box.
I have to admit I didn't have "desecrate a military grave" or "assault cemetery worker" on my Trump campaign 2024 bingo card, but here we are.
That's very remiss of you. It's totally in line with his previous statements and behaviour.
I always think that I can't expect anything but awfulness from Trump, but then he goes and does/says some new thing that's shocking, and ... well, I don't think I'm shocked that he would do it, but I'm shocked by the thing itself being done. Ugh.
I have to admit I didn't have "desecrate a military grave" or "assault cemetery worker" on my Trump campaign 2024 bingo card, but here we are.
That's very remiss of you. It's totally in line with his previous statements and behaviour.
I always think that I can't expect anything but awfulness from Trump, but then he goes and does/says some new thing that's shocking, and ... well, I don't think I'm shocked that he would do it, but I'm shocked by the thing itself being done. Ugh.
Yes, I think the appropriate reaction is to be shocked and yet not surprised.
I have to admit I didn't have "desecrate a military grave" or "assault cemetery worker" on my Trump campaign 2024 bingo card, but here we are.
That's very remiss of you. It's totally in line with his previous statements and behaviour.
Yeah, I know. Using violence to procure a photo op is totally consistent with the guy who ordered the tear gassing of peaceful protesters so he could have his picture taken holding a Bible upside down outside a church, but I guess I wasn't thinking far enough outside the box.
And desecrating a military grave is totally consistent with a guy who’s called soldiers killed in war “losers” and “suckers.”
Of the many disturbing aspects of Trump’s episode at Arlington National Cemetery is that the ANC employee who was shoved by Trump’s personnel has decided not to press charges, although she has the right to. And who can blame her? It’s too risky, given how that man’s followers have acted out against anyone who dares go up against him. It makes me sick to think that people just doing their jobs (and by extension, the rest of us) are at his mercy.
It is not all that unusual for a person to change their position on a given issue, given new or more information about the issue. Harris helped negotiate the bipartisan border bill. Yes, it allowed the building of more barriers on the border, it would tighten the rules of evidence for asylum claims, and it would give the president more authority to restrict crossings on the border. Both sides, though, made compromises. That is the way governing should work,"
She has continued to say her basic principle of protecting the environment has not changed. It seems she is able to allow franking because she was likely shown there is no other way to access those deposits. Look for changes in the procedures, though.
Flip flopping is when a certain orange guy says he does not support the six-week period for abortions in Florida and then back tracks and says he will support it.
It seems she is able to allow franking because she was likely shown there is no other way to access those deposits. Look for changes in the procedures, though.
(my bold)
I assume you mean fraking, as "franking" has to do with legislators being able to send mailings for free to their constituents.
It seems she is able to allow franking because she was likely shown there is no other way to access those deposits. Look for changes in the procedures, though.
(my bold)
I assume you mean fraking, as "franking" has to do with legislators being able to send mailings for free to their constituents.
Harris and Trump Have Housing Ideas. Economists Have Doubts.
The two presidential nominees are talking about their approaches for solving America’s affordability crisis. But would their plans work?
That's the headline. The article goes on to discuss Harris' proposal of tax cuts for new construction and a lump sum financial benefit for first time home buyers. So far, so good. Then we get to what the Times calls Trump's "plan".
Mr. Trump’s plan is garnering even more doubt. He pledges to deport undocumented immigrants, which could cut back temporarily on housing demand but would also most likely cut into the construction work force and eventually limit new housing supply. His other ideas include lowering interest rates, something that he has no direct control over and that is poised to happen anyway.
So the Times looks at Trump's proposed fascist round up, sees this as an excuse to seize property (this sounds horribly familiar), and pitches the idea to the public as a form of housing policy? Seriously, WTF NYT?
Harris and Trump Have Housing Ideas. Economists Have Doubts.
The two presidential nominees are talking about their approaches for solving America’s affordability crisis. But would their plans work?
That's the headline. The article goes on to discuss Harris' proposal of tax cuts for new construction and a lump sum financial benefit for first time home buyers. So far, so good. Then we get to what the Times calls Trump's "plan".
Mr. Trump’s plan is garnering even more doubt. He pledges to deport undocumented immigrants, which could cut back temporarily on housing demand but would also most likely cut into the construction work force and eventually limit new housing supply. His other ideas include lowering interest rates, something that he has no direct control over and that is poised to happen anyway.
So the Times looks at Trump's proposed fascist round up, sees this as an excuse to seize property (this sounds horribly familiar), and pitches the idea to the public as a form of housing policy? Seriously, WTF NYT?
They seem to have a grudge against Biden's administration which extents to Harris. It's really odd. They are making themselves totally non-credible to any serious potential readers.
It's also deeply foolish. If Trump wins, do they really think he'll be anything other than vile to them? Moreover, serious infringements of the 1st Amendment may follow from a man who thinks he's immune to everything (and a Court that has basically told him to give it go...) We're used to this kind of ridiculousness from the Press in the UK but is Trump wins, historians will not be kind.
Critics of the Daily Mail in the UK often quote one of their most famous headlines from the 1930s. They deserve to be reminded of it. I think the NYT is heading for similar infamy. Unless they are very sure that Trump is gonna lose, it's a stupid and dangerous game and deeply unprofessional. The opposite of journalism.
This is the Daily Mail headline from 1934, by the way... you see the point.
It seems Trump has finally identified those responsible for the Arlington National Cemetery fiasco: the parents of the dead soldier!
Q: Should your campaign have put out those videos and photos?
Trump: Well we have a lot of people, you know, we have people TikTok people you know we're leading the internet, that was the other thing. We're so far above her on the internet.
Q: But on that hallowed ground should they have put out the images of those . . .
Trump: Well, I don't know what the rules and regulations are. I don't know who did it, and it could have been them, it could have been the parents, it could have been somebody.
Q: It was your campaign's TikTok that put out the video.
Dude, you were president* for four years! If you don't know the "rules and regulations" for how to behave at Arlington National Cemetery by now, that's on you. This whole thing is like an onion of depravity. When you peel back one layer (using military dead as campaign props) there's always something even more depraved (blaming the parents of a dead soldier, who are supporters of your campaign, for setting you up) underneath.
It sounds like either a Dungeons and Dragons magical object ("I use the Onion of Depravity on the goblin!" "Okay, roll a D20...") or possibly something from one of the early Church Fathers ("My children, when you cook with the Potatoes of Righteousness, do not include...").
It sounds like either a Dungeons and Dragons magical object ("I use the Onion of Depravity on the goblin!" "Okay, roll a D20...") or possibly something from one of the early Church Fathers ("My children, when you cook with the Potatoes of Righteousness, do not include...").
Or something out of Monty Python—“And bring ye forth the Onion of Depravity, peeling ye of its layers . . . .”
It sounds like either a Dungeons and Dragons magical object ("I use the Onion of Depravity on the goblin!" "Okay, roll a D20...") or possibly something from one of the early Church Fathers ("My children, when you cook with the Potatoes of Righteousness, do not include...").
Or something out of Monty Python—“And bring ye forth the Onion of Depravity, peeling ye of its layers . . . .”
Either way, it does have a tendency to make people cry....
Voting in the 2024 presidential election theoretically started today (September 6). This is the day when North Carolina sent out mail-in ballots to any of its voters who requested one, the first state to do so.
Voting in the 2024 presidential election theoretically started today (September 6). This is the day when North Carolina sent out mail-in ballots to any of its voters who requested one, the first state to do so.
No, mailing of absentee ballots in North Carolina starts Friday, September 6 (60 days before the election).
Comments
Harris wants the mics to be unmuted to show just how unhinged Trump really is. It works to her advantage, she thinks, because she is quick thinker. She would run circles around his debate style.
Surprised , and angered and saddened that Trump did not end up guilty, charged and tossed in prison. But I don’t vote since I live in Alabama. It’s always a red state. I just find it pointless to cast my time to vote in a state where it just does not matter at that level.
But you can vote for all the other things on the ballot. School board members are crucial, for example. Even if it’s mainly to vote against the worst ones… I’m in Florida, so believe me, I relate.
If all the people who felt like you voted, would Alabama still be red? If the DNC, DCCC et al saw the blue vote start to pick up, would they then devote time, money and energy to turning Alabama purple? Georgia was deep red once. So was Texas.
Yes. It would still be very red. I know because I’m 35 and have voted out of here for most of my life since I was 18. For sure, with electoral college voting, it’s a fact my vote means nothing in Alabama for presidential elections. All I do is miss work, spent hours waiting in line listening to toxic arguments, vote and then head back to work and it’s still going towards whoever is conservative.
And then there's the gerrymandering of Congressional districts, but I'm not up on the details of what's going on with that in Alabama.
I live in a very red part of my state (Florida), which has multitudes of Trump flags, bumper stickers, and signs of every sort, along with f... Biden banners in many places. I put my 'Harris for President' sign in my front yard, not knowing if it or my property would be destroyed, but hoping to encourage folks in my neighborhood who must believe somewhat like me. Almost immediately I heard from people who are afraid to put such signs on their property for fear of retaliation, but who were very very encouraged by my small effort!
You never know how much you might be a beacon to others!
(And, I know about Alabama voters. My sister and her husband used to live there, and couldn't vote for the evil Republican who was running, but refused to vote for the Democratic candidate who had a wonderful reputation. It was so very frustrating to me.)
The dirty dishes in the background -- Kamala looking like a little girl in a chair too small for her -- Tim Walz hulking over her in the power seat
Does someone on the Vice President's media team not like her that much?
I do think the Dems taking back patriotism is interesting. Patriotism got problematic for Democrats during the Vietnam War, when I was a child, and it adds a level of difficulty to convincing people you should be running the country when you can't claim to be unequivocally patriotic.* But there is a big shift in the rhetoric coming from the party, away from identity politics - Harris never talks about being the first Black and South Asian woman to have a serious shot at the presidency - and toward an inclusive patriotism: we're all Americans, we all love it, and we want the country to work for all of us.
*I've been waiting for years for Republicans to run into trouble convincing people they should be running the government when they so clearly don't believe in it, but not liking government is not the same as having a complicated relationship with patriotism.
I think (hope?) that the Republican theory of running a government they don't believe in may be harder in the post-Trump era, whatever that looks like. His thing has been vote for me and I'll run the government into the ground. But once we're past him, I think that will not work as well, particularly if he leaves by losing again.
I'm gonna go out on a limb here and say it's all hogwash.
Based on how reliable everything else that comes out of the Trump campaign...
i.e. the border wall: VP Harris said she'd sign the bipartisan border security legislation that Tr*mp had Senate Republicans kill. In that legislation is a continuation of border wall construction and maintenance that began during the Tr*mp Admin. Harris isn't creating or doing anything new, but the media is calling that a flip-flop on Tr*mp's wall, since she's on record as having been against it.
Because this is the first time the Arlington National Cemetery dust-up has been mentioned on this site, let me give a brief run-down to those who aren't au courant with presidential campaigning minutiæ.
On Monday (August 26) Donald Trump attended a wreath laying at Arlington National Cemetery (ANC). This was the third anniversary of the Abbey Gate bombing during the evacuation of Kabul and the family of one of the soldiers killed in that incident invited Trump to participate. So far, so good. Unfortunately for Trump and his entourage it's against both federal law and Arlington National Cemetery policy to use photos or videos of recent military dead for campaign purposes, and Trump's whole reason for showing up was to use the war dead as props, claiming that Joe Biden and Kamala Harris were responsible for that soldier's death. Section 60, the portion of ANC reserved for deceased veterans of Iraq and Afghanistan where this all went down, definitely falls within the restriction on using recent war dead as campaign props. When Trump's people were informed of this they did the only rational thing; physically assault a cemetery worker and take the photos anyway. The photo I've seen shows Trump standing over the grave with that mirthless rictus he thinks is a smile giving a "thumbs up" of approval, presumably to the grave. The descriptions that have come out since portray the assault as shoving.
This news was broken the following day by NPR, who also included the Trump campaign's claim that the cemetery worker (originally identified by them as some random interloper) was mentally ill and that they had video which would prove their innocence. To the best of my knowledge no such video has not been released by the Trump campaign, despite multiple requests by various news outlets.
After this the Department of the Army felt it was necessary to address the matter publicly:
Ever helpful, running mate JD Vance decided to pick a fight with the Army saying "You guys in the media, you're acting like Donald Trump filmed a TV commercial at a grave site". Yes JD, the media are acting like that because that's what Trump did.
I have to admit I didn't have "desecrate a military grave" or "assault cemetery worker" on my Trump campaign 2024 bingo card, but here we are.
That's very remiss of you. It's totally in line with his previous statements and behaviour.
Yeah, I know. Using violence to procure a photo op is totally consistent with the guy who ordered the tear gassing of peaceful protesters so he could have his picture taken holding a Bible upside down outside a church, but I guess I wasn't thinking far enough outside the box.
Definitely.
I always think that I can't expect anything but awfulness from Trump, but then he goes and does/says some new thing that's shocking, and ... well, I don't think I'm shocked that he would do it, but I'm shocked by the thing itself being done. Ugh.
Yes, I think the appropriate reaction is to be shocked and yet not surprised.
She has continued to say her basic principle of protecting the environment has not changed. It seems she is able to allow franking because she was likely shown there is no other way to access those deposits. Look for changes in the procedures, though.
Flip flopping is when a certain orange guy says he does not support the six-week period for abortions in Florida and then back tracks and says he will support it.
(my bold)
I assume you mean fraking, as "franking" has to do with legislators being able to send mailings for free to their constituents.
Ex-presidents are also permitted franking. That may be the only frank thing about Donald Trump.
That's the headline. The article goes on to discuss Harris' proposal of tax cuts for new construction and a lump sum financial benefit for first time home buyers. So far, so good. Then we get to what the Times calls Trump's "plan".
So the Times looks at Trump's proposed fascist round up, sees this as an excuse to seize property (this sounds horribly familiar), and pitches the idea to the public as a form of housing policy? Seriously, WTF NYT?
They seem to have a grudge against Biden's administration which extents to Harris. It's really odd. They are making themselves totally non-credible to any serious potential readers.
It's also deeply foolish. If Trump wins, do they really think he'll be anything other than vile to them? Moreover, serious infringements of the 1st Amendment may follow from a man who thinks he's immune to everything (and a Court that has basically told him to give it go...) We're used to this kind of ridiculousness from the Press in the UK but is Trump wins, historians will not be kind.
Critics of the Daily Mail in the UK often quote one of their most famous headlines from the 1930s. They deserve to be reminded of it. I think the NYT is heading for similar infamy. Unless they are very sure that Trump is gonna lose, it's a stupid and dangerous game and deeply unprofessional. The opposite of journalism.
This is the Daily Mail headline from 1934, by the way... you see the point.
AFZ
I am getting a suspicious warning on this one.
A google on "infamous Daily Mail headline 1934" gets you
Don't know what I did there... Hey-ho. Wanted to link to an image of the page:
https://www.alamy.com/english-article-by-rothermere-1934-336-rothermere-hurrah-for-the-blackshirts-image211465556.html
Dude, you were president* for four years! If you don't know the "rules and regulations" for how to behave at Arlington National Cemetery by now, that's on you. This whole thing is like an onion of depravity. When you peel back one layer (using military dead as campaign props) there's always something even more depraved (blaming the parents of a dead soldier, who are supporters of your campaign, for setting you up) underneath.
It sounds like either a Dungeons and Dragons magical object ("I use the Onion of Depravity on the goblin!" "Okay, roll a D20...") or possibly something from one of the early Church Fathers ("My children, when you cook with the Potatoes of Righteousness, do not include...").
Either way, it does have a tendency to make people cry....
I'll get m' coat.
https://youtu.be/tQLllnGww8M?si=fQ90frGHP2EXaplZ
I need that rolling about with laughter emoji ...