Press Conference After Debate Was an Expected Nothing

Listening to the White House press conference, which was broadcast from Air Force One in an audio only format was frustrating to say the least, but not unpredictable. I mean, of course White House officials are going to defend their guy. But at the same time, after the terrible debate performance last night and the scathing commentary from even CNN and so many other Democrats, many of whom all but said they were no longer supporting Joe Biden's candidacy, you would think they would be more inclined to do some hard knocks damage control and quell what has become a majority fear.

Instead, what they did was dismiss the night's performance and deflect. How can that be a working strategy? When the American people, especially members of the media who generally have your back, are now asking critical questions about the president, you answer them directly, openly, and honestly.

"What did the American people see last night at that debate?" one reporter asked. 

"We saw Donald Trump tell lie after lie to the American people and speak about his radical agenda for America."

That wasn't the question.

I will admit that they did at least acknowledge that even the president himself was aware it was not a good performance. "But you can't judge the president based on one performance," they said. Only the reality is that the debate was the performance that most voters, especially independents, would actually watch. For all intents and purposes, it needed to be the performance of his life, and to dismiss the performance as just an anomaly speaks volumes about the reality of Biden's ability to lead.

Not only was the debate the performance most voters would see, but many people also watched the media reactions as well. These visuals, more than anything, are going to be the things most permanently etched in their minds.

As the old saying goes, once you see certain things, you can't simply unsee them.

The entire press conference focused on Trump, which is not unusual, nor unexpected. But doesn't that also send a message? You just had an awful night on the debate stage that millions and millions of voters saw, and rather than focus on the performance and do your best to try and explain it, you simply point to the other guy?

But Trump. Did you see what Trump did? Did you hear what he said? Trump, Trump, Trump.

What it actually says to the American people is that you have no explanation, and so in its stead you simply point fingers away from the real question. Perhaps hoping that's enough for someone to give Biden a pass and think, "Yeah. You're right. Trump was really bad, wasn't he?"

To me it just does more to hurt Biden. First of all, in order to solve problems, you have to see them. You have to acknowledge they are there in order to be able to fix them. If the president's performance cannot even be accepted, what does that say about your ability to recognize other issues? 

Especially when the one you are being asked about was glaringly obvious.

I don't know why I was hoping for a better set of answers from the White House. I mean, when have we ever gotten anything straightforward from them? It's all pass the buck, deflect, point fingers, and look the other way.

I do think the American people get it, though. That's probably the silver lining. They don't need to answer the questions, actually. We already know what they are. We just wanted to know what you'd say. You said nothing, and that, above all else, provided the real answer.

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

© 2024 Jim Bauer

Axelrod Says Biden May Have Worse than 50/50 Chance of Winning in 2024

I am no fan of David Axelrod, Obama's former campaign guru, but I agree with him when he recently publicly said that he feels Biden's chances of winning in 2024 are not only basically 50/50, but more likely much worse.

Granted, neither Biden nor Axelrod are fans of each other. Biden publicly called Axelrod a prick once. Either way, you have to at least give Axelrod credit for knowing a thing or two about elections and campaigns. 

Besides, I think one would actually have to be a fool to even consider Biden has any chance at all—despite who he is obviously running against and all the baggage that has been placed on Trump—if you use past history as any indication of what should happen here.

I mean, the guy's had a worse presidency than the worst president of all time, Jimmy Carter for Heaven's sake. It's been a literal disaster for the last four years. I think even many democrats, although they'd not be willing to state it out loud, would even admit things were much better when Trump was around than with Biden mucking the place up.

Nothing's working. That's the bottom line. And Biden's just not liked. Many don't even believe he's pulling the freaking reins here. So, who is? Who knows?

Either way, the country is going to hell in a handbasket and the people who vote simply can't ignore it. Beyond that, even while polls are often terribly unreliable, the polls are showing very strong leads by Trump in key swing states—states that are critical to win in any general.

Why do I find the polls a little bit more reliable in this case?

Two things to observe here. Polls are traditionally heavily weighted to side with democrats and many Trump supporters won't necessarily be openly vocal about their support for him.

So, if the polls are showing Trump leading, you have to run away with the thought that the numbers may be even bigger in support of Trump than the polls could even possibly demonstrate. I mean, I'm not going to call it now and say Trump might win by a landslide in 2024.

But I think Trump is going to win by a landslide in 2024.

Okay, okay. You caught me. I said that about Trump against Hillary in 2016 and that wasn't exactly a landslide. But it was an undeniable strong lead against her even if she ultimately beat him by 2 million votes in the popular vote.

You have a couple of things happening here. One is that Trump's popularity has only gained the more the democrats and the media have gone after him, and really, when you get down to the brass tacks here, there's simply nothing positive for Biden to even run on.

Sure, he can go out there and tout all those jobs he "created." But most people understand those were simply returning workers from the shutdowns. Not new jobs. He can go out there and talk the economy up. But Americans on both sides of the aisle can see their utility bills. They can see the final price at the gas pump higher than it was when Trump was president. They feel the reality of the economy any time they walk into a grocery store and fill their carts.

No matter which side you happen to be on, you have eyes, and you have a brain, and people can see and understand right in front of them that things aren't nearly as peachy as is being painted.

Not only that, but one has to wonder. Is Biden outright lying to us? Or is he just stupid? Maybe it's a little bit of both, actually. Again, who knows? Biden's a liar anyway, and he never did seem too bright. So, it could be anything.

The bottom line here is that it's not just David Axelrod ringing the alarm bells. Even when you look at approval ratings, it's just clear that practically no one thinks Biden is doing a good job. A recent poll also showed that more than 70% of those polled believes Trump is better equipped to handle the economy than Biden is.

And let's face it. The economy is sort of what Biden seems to want to be running on.

He simply has no solid ground to stand on. He can try to sell unicorns and rainbows, but nobody's actually buying it.

Speaking of polls, what's telling as well of Axelrod's rather grim prediction, is that not only is Trump beating Biden in nearly all of them. So are Trump's top 2 rivals. And they aren't small numbers there either. 

Both Ron DeSantis and Nikki Haley beat Biden by several percentage points according to most polls.

Now, there is yet another dynamic to consider as well. That's the never Trumper or anyone who will simply not vote for Trump under any circumstance. This actually puts votes right in Trump's pockets. I mean, look at where RFK Jr. is. He doesn't beat Biden. Not by a longshot. But if he gets 2% or 3% of the vote?

It's curtains for Biden even if Biden has any chance at all without someone contesting him. And yet another poll, among democrats only, says 54% would prefer a different candidate than Biden.

For whatever it's worth, I think it is very clear (even if it still too early to tell) who will be president in 2024. And while I won't say it will be Trump, I can say it won't be Biden. But of course, I have a brain too, and so I think we can all agree it will actually be Trump who takes the win.

David Axelrod may be a prick in the eyes of Joe Biden. But in the eyes of the American people, Biden's a loser.

Like the way I write or the things I write about? Follow me on my Facebook page or follow me on Twitter (X) @jimbauer601. 

Biden Can Win 'Overwhelmingly' Against Trump in 2020?

OKAY, SO OLD UNCLE JOE IS A LIKEABLE GUY. Albeit, based on a number of pictures that have made their course across the Internet, he's also a bit of a creepy old guy. In other words, as horrible as it may sound, keep him away from the kids and the damsels in general.

But, the question is can he win the presidency?

According to ex-DNC chair Ed Rendell, he seems to think so. In his words, "Biden is just the guy the country is looking for."

WHILE I APPLAUD ED RENDELL on his analysis, and while I do also believe that BIDEN WOULD HAVE LIKELY BEEN A MUCH BETTER CHOICE THAN HILARY CLINTON AS THE FRONT RUNNER FOR THE DEMOCRAT PARTY in the last election, and MAY have even given Trump less of an edge, the fact remains that despite what the polls suggest, President Trump is still highly popular after one year into his presidency.

Add in the fact that despite what the lamestream news media will tell you, things are actually getting done, and Biden loses handily in 2020. 

And let's face it folks. The news is only going to get better. The fact is that you cannot argue with something very fundamental in the hearts and minds of the American people, and most importantly the AMERICAN VOTER. 

That's their pocketbooks and wallets if you want to know.

FOR ONE THING, THE NEW TAX LAW WILL BEGIN TO SHOW IT'S IMPACT AS EARLY AS FEBRUARY. That is, that's when the withholding tables are changed to reflect the recently passed new republican tax law. People are going to see a boost in their bottom lines come February, and if you think that won't be noticeable you are living on another planet.

Along with that, nobody can deny that so many economic standards are in territories that have not been seen for at least a decade, and I'd argue not in two of them, people HAVE TO ALREADY BE TAKING NOTICE THAT THE ECONOMY IS IN A MUCH BETTER PLACE THAN IT EVER WAS DURING THE OBAMA TERMS.

GDP is up, Hispanic unemployment is at historical lows, and so is the black unemployment rate. Consumer confidence is up. Jobs, especially in the manufacturing sector are making a bit of a comeback, and there are now more incentives than there have been in a very long time not only for American manufacturers to keep their shops open, but ADD OR REINTRODUCE SHOPS, and for some foreign companies, to LOCATE shops here.

Foxconn, which will be breaking ground in the near future in Wisconsin that will employ better than 13,000 people making over $50,000 a year on average, is a prime example of what's to come. They have never operated in the United States before. So this is quite an amazing development to say the least.

AND REALLY FOLKS, THAT'S JUST THE TIP OF THE ICEBURG. The fact is that there are going to be many more stories like that now that the corporate tax rate has been lowered to much favorable rates. Add in the reduction in costs for things like transporting those goods across oceans and you have a recipe well poised for success. And believe me, JOBS will follow, and Americans WILL take notice of the increased availability of not just jobs. But good ones that support families in terms of wages.

Furthermore then, what does Joe Biden have to run on? How is he going to support what will be the ever more clear failed economic policies of an administration he was part of, downplay what will be ever more clear SUCCESSFUL POLICIES in economic terms under Trump, and position himself as a strong contender better suited for the White House?

UNLESS SOMETHING DRAMATICALLY BAD HAPPENS BETWEEN NOW AND 2020, I think the only rightful conclusion for Joe Biden's viability in 2020, and for Ed Rendell's analysis is wishful thinking.

But it also highlights a continuing disconnect, in my opinion, of the democrat party from reality. They are still unable to acknowledge the real reasons Clinton lost, and they continue to disregard what are real accomplishments and achievements of the Trump administration. They are really disillusioned. They are living in a fantasy world.

Look. Do I think Biden would make a bad president? I'm not saying that. But I AM saying that I think what we are going to see after the first four years is said and done with Trump in the White House is a highly successful presidency with undeniable and provable results that even the most staunch liberals in the lamestream media are not going to be able to deny, much less cover up or slant in their usual way.

Can Biden win against Trump overwhelmingly in 2020? If I am basing the idea on anything current, the answer is a resounding no. Trump will serve two terms. And those two terms are going to be a successful presidency that will mimic former successes like Lincoln, Kennedy, Reagan, and okay...I'll give you Bill Clinton. You can't deny he was a successful president too.

BEYOND ALL THAT, I think based on his age alone, Biden will be a nominee if he decides to run, and I think he just might. But he will never be in the White House again. Trump's going to be too successful, and the clock is not on Biden's side. Just saying.

Flynn Resignation A Sign of Strength in Trump White House

The media is going to, of course, slant the news of President Trump's national security advisor's resignation as a sign of upset and chaos just a month into Donald Trump's administration. It's what they do, just as much as they made former president Obama's administration look like it was just going swell and peachy with nary a hitch.

We all know the truth about that. Well, those of us who were actually alive and had a brain that we actually used.

National security advisor Michael Flynn resigned after it was reported that he misled Vice President Pence about his ties with Russia. He in fact had more than a few ties with Russia, and this of course presents a conflict of interest when it comes to how the Trump administration deals with issues like sanctions, the Russian Syrian relationship, oil and other matters.

Like I said, the media is going to slant this. But those of us who are paying attention are simply seeing exactly what we were told we would see during Trump's campaign. He was going to drain the swamp. No matter how the resignation is reported we all can confidently assume that Flynn did not just simply hand over a resignation letter to the president. He was asked to leave. Essentially he was fired.

This is a sign of strength in Trump White House. Draining the swamp is not limited to people outside of his administration. It is most certainly applied to everything he does, and everyone on his staff. President Trump has said time and time again that part of the problem in Washington are back room negotiations, and politics as usual. He doesn't feel that is effective and he is going to ouster anyone who tries to do it.

And thus, Flynn is out.