Last Night's Debate Was a Flop

It's the one thing I dislike the most about Trump, even though I support him and will vote for him. I know what his positions are, and I have a good idea what the country will look like if he goes back to the White House for another four years.

But all too often he simply misses golden opportunities to convey certain messages Americans need to hear. Especially those who are independent or undecided voters.

The debate last night was mediocre at best. I don't think it served to do much to change the course or move any needles. For either candidate, by the way. This was not really a debate for Democrats or Republicans who have already made up their minds. This debate was for those who are still on the fence.

To be fair, this debate was more for those voters who are mostly on the fence about Harris more than Trump. People already know who Donald Trump is and they have the past four years when he was president to go on. They have heard the messages, seen the interviews, and watched the rallies.

Trump is far from a mystery.

But that leads me to asking what in the hell was on the mind of ABC when they asked the questions? Especially the ones they asked Harris. It's not a mystery that the Kamala Harris front and center today is not the same Kamala Harris we saw for the past 3 1/2 years, and I think ABC should have dug more into that.

What the American people wanted to know was, "What is that you want to say to the American people to separate yourself from...yourself, and the positions you held for so long, and what changed your mind? Are these a change of heart that you are truly committed to now, or did you simply change your positions for political reasons? If you felt, before the nomination, that your positions may be unpopular and perhaps make you unelectable considering how radical some of them were, how can we now be assured you don't still hold these positions personally while stating different positions publicly?"

On top of that, she kept saying, "We're going to do this," and "We're going to do that." But when did ABC challenge her on those statements and ask, "Where were you for the past 3 1/2 years when all of these problems you say are problems happened under your watch alongside Biden?"

Why did they not challenge her about lying to the American people about President Biden's health? Because isn't that an important thing to consider? If you are fit to be Commander in Chief, shouldn't you be able to recognize a grave threat that comes from within the White House itself that poses danger to American lives and the state of the country?

If you would hide that, what else might you hide?

ABC could have and should have challenged her on the "record." For example, they could have asked her about one of the key concerns on most American's minds. Inflation. They could have challenged her on her claims of price gouging which everyone knows was not the reason inflation happened. They could have asked her how she plans to tackle inflation differently than Biden has.

And why did ABC not put her to task more on the border? Another key issue of concern to voters across both aisles. Why did they not press her harder on the disastrous Afghanistan withdrawal which cost American lives and left billions of dollars worth of American military equipment on the ground and in the hands of the Taliban? Why not push her more on what happened and what her thoughts were on the breakdown of communication between her and Putin and Zelinsky that resulted in Putin invading Ukraine anyway?

They didn't ask her much about the economy. And when she made the claim several times that Trump's plans would cost American's $4,000 more a year to afford, why didn't they remind her of the additional $11,000 Americans must spend annually to pay for inflation, and what impact she feels that has had?

Needless to say, many opportunities were lost here. But on both sides. ABC missed the opportunity to give us a better picture of what can only be classified as, "The new and improved Kamala Harris." But Trump missed many opportunities as well to clearly state his differences and convey a stronger message to rebuke many of Harris' claims and position shifts.

Overall, neither candidate did well in my opinion. Still, I think Trump won it. But not on substance. He won it simply because there are fewer questions we need to have answered by Trump than need to be answered by Harris. Harris was the focus here. And we didn't really learn much about her at all. For that reason, I contend she lost, because the things the independents and undecideds wanted to know were simply all questions left unanswered.

She delivered talking points and campaign slogans rather than offer solutions or explanations of her sudden change in ideology on myriad issues.

Fox News has offered an invite for a second debate in October. I think both candidates need to agree to it, because I think both candidates did not accomplish their goal on this one.

Like what I write about or the way I write about it? Follow me on my Facebook page to keep up with the latest writings wherever I may write them.

© 2024 Jim Bauer

The End of the Harris Honeymoon and the Boost of the Kennedy Shift

Let's face it. Kamala Harris may be doing well in the polls against former president, Donald Trump. But are her chances of winning the presidency as good as the media would have us believe? I mean, take into account that she hasn't made any real appearances other than from scripted rallies she can read from a teleprompter at, and she hasn't had any interviews.

There is a good reason for that, and that's because the media is trying to separate Kamala Harris from Kamala Harris.

Wait. What? I know that sounds like a weird thing to say. But think about it. Here we have a vice president, who is now the Democrat nominee for president, who was perhaps the most disliked vice president in American history. How do you change that? 

You pretend like Kamala Harris is now something she wasn't before. You paint a new picture.

They are trying hard to separate her from her very far left liberal positions she held in the past. "That was then, this is now. This is a new and improved Kamala Harris, folks." Only, it's all smoke and mirrors. And if they can keep her on script and reading from a teleprompter, they can avoid the usual word salads she is well known for.

Folks, she hasn't forgotten the recipe for a blockbuster word salad. When someone else is writing the words for her, all she has to do is read them. But eventually she's going to be on her own. Off script with no teleprompter to guide her.

And it will all come back to us. Every muddled word that gets turned into nonsensical gibberish will make a remarkable comeback. It's impossible to avoid. And I think some of that will come back, front and center, on September 10th when the debate happens between her and Donald Trump.

I seriously doubt she will be able to get through that without at least some word salad and inappropriate placement of cackling. Besides, as I have said before, if the right questions are asked (and I have my doubts they will be), how is she going to explain inflation and the border? When she starts going on about price gouging, is anyone going to call her out on that and set the record straight? And if they do, will she be able to respond to it in a way that makes any sense?

I think what happens is that when the real Kamala Harris goes before the people and has to be herself, it's going to be her fall. Because that's a moment when the opportunity to pretend goes away. They can hide her from us (the media and the Democrat party), but she can't hide from herself.

Take into account another very interesting twist happening right now, and that's the possibility that Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. might drop out of the race and, get this, endorse Donald Trump.

That's a rather interesting development considering that RFKJr. staying in the race actually helps Harris' odds of winning. If he jumps out and goes to Trump's side, the tables turn according to recent polling and Trump wins without question. It effectively erases any lead Harris currently has.

If you trust the polls in any event. But that's for another day.

It is also something that makes some sense, if you think about it. I am not going to say that RFKJr.'s positions align with Trump. But there are some similarities. And Trump has even said he'd absolutely consider a cabinet position for RFKJr. if he should come to Trump's side.

The fact is, and RFKJr. knows this full well, that while he can make a case to get at least 5% of the vote, he will never be elected president. It is clear he has not supported what the Democrats are doing and has been a strong voice against the Biden administration, and I think is no fan of Kamala Harris.

His move to the other side would be a logical one, all things considered.

Granted, it doesn't mean all of Kennedy's supporters will rush to vote for Donald Trump. But his strongest supporters just might, and I would contend that pool of supporters is large enough to dramatically turn the tables.

At the end of the day, I think what hurts Kamala Harris' chances the most, really, are the issues. And she's simply not winning on those. Her short-term boost will have to eventually come up against the reality that when it comes to the issues of most concern to the American people, the administration she was part of simply did not deliver the goods. She supported, endorsed and praised the very policies that greatly failed the American people.

The bottom line is that this race is far from over, and while the media is painting the picture of fear and unrest in the Trump campaign, I think the reality is that Trump's only getting started, the American people will not be so easily duped by Harris' "new look," and regardless of what the polls have said to the contrary, Trump's real lead never wavered a bit when Harris stepped to the front.

Like the way I write or the things I write about? Follow me on my Facebook page to keep up with the latest writings wherever I may write them.

© 2024 Jim Bauer

Harris Wants to Ban Price Gouging on Groceries: Clearly, She's Out of Touch with Reality

Is it just me, or is anyone else getting the passing of the buck on inflation that has been dealt time and time again by the Biden administration, and now Harris, as she campaigns following Biden dropping out of the race?

She wants to propose a federal ban on "corporate price gouging" on food and groceries if she is elected.

Sure, some grocers, namely meat packers, have enjoyed record profits. But is that a result of price gouging and greed? The fact is that inflation is here because of the policies that Joe Biden put into effect that caused prices on everything to skyrocket.

You can even pin the damn timeline!

Within hours of Biden taking his oath of office he signed executive orders reversing Trump's energy prices and in March of 2021 he signed the American Rescue Plan into law, and by December 2021 inflation jumped to 10% and has risen year over year since well beyond the desired 2% rate the Fed prefers.

This inflation is not because of corporate greed. It is because of Biden's policies, which presumably would become Harris' policies if she is elected. What it should tell voters is that her eye is not on the ball. If she won't admit responsibility for the inflation, how can we expect her to have the right ideas to solve the issue?

To my mind, it's just the wrong focus and someone needs to call her out on this, and hard and fast. Perhaps Trump will do that and lay out exactly why we have inflation, which is for reasons other than the now Harris campaign is trying to sell us on.

I think the silver lining is that most Americans do know where the real blame lies. Based on the polls, Trump is still winning handily on the economy. But the problem is that there are enough haters of the rich who will side with Harris and give her a pass and agree with her.

But it won't solve the problem, of course, because it doesn't get at the heart of the cause. Beyond that, this will only put more restraints on businesses to operate profitably and effectively, and who does that hurt?

It hurts the consumer, and it hurts the workers.

It hurts the consumer because if suddenly a business is accused of gouging, it's going to have to adjust the way it makes its products. Quality may be compromised as recipes are tweaked. Packaging may change to adjust for the accusation.

And of course, if businesses make less profits, they can't pass any of that along to workers in terms of benefits and wages—or even new job creation.

You don't encourage a strong economic environment by stifling growth and progress in business. You encourage it by fostering growth and progress. Beyond that, you have to first prove gouging is happening, and I question how on Earth you do that?

What measure will be used to determine what a fair price is and what isn't? What method will be determined to decide whether a profit is good or exaggerated? How do you tell a business, "This is how much you can legally make on this item?"

It's more dictation and control over things the government has no business controlling or even deciding, for that matter.

The thing is that Harris really has no plan to tackle inflation at all, but because inflation is still here and it's a major concern to Americans, she has to say something. She has to at least look like she is interested in doing something about it.

Even Biden said price gouging was happening. If they truly believed it was, they'd have already done something about it. They haven't because, of course, it is something that only lives in their imagination and they are hoping the American people will join them on their fantasy trip.

Like the way I write or the things I write about? Follow me on my Facebook page to keep up with the latest writings wherever I may write them.

© 2024 Jim Bauer