Let’s begin with the simplest and most obvious observation: A majority of Americans prefer what Donald Trump has been selling over Kamala Harris. It’s hard to stomach, because this election offered a pretty clear choice between a cheerful and humane future and a rapturously brutish one. But the latter won out. More Americans wanted the 1939 German-American Bund–style hate rally at Madison Square Garden than the big-tent party with high ideals about the American constitutional order. And we can no longer reassure ourselves, as we did in 2016, that Trump voters didn’t precisely know what they were getting or that much of what he promised to do was not to be taken seriously. We know what he’s about now, and a majority of voters clearly want it.
The country is set to change in stark ways, as Project 2025 jumps from the pages of a far-right dream journal into our lives. There will be big rollbacks in the civil rights many of us have come to enjoy, causing disproportionate pain to women and members of the LGBTQ community. I feel terribly for all the people who voted to protect reproductive freedoms in their states because the effort may be all for naught. As we have relentlessly explained on TNR’s pages, Trump’s Department of Justice can create a national abortion ban by enforcing the Comstock Act, thus bypassing the legislative process and the will of voters entirely. Wherever reproductive rights have managed to secure a haven in a state constitution, those rights will be fought over in inhospitable venues, like the Supreme Court.
Trump’s signature policy proposal is a mass deportation scheme that will target legal citizens for “remigration” alongside the undocumented. The regulatory state will be transformed into something that serves corporations instead of the public. The civil service, as I have mentioned before, will be reconfigured into something that, at best, may look like the “spoils system” of yesteryear; more likely it will exist to dole out punishments to Trump’s political opponents. Imagine a world in which blue states don’t receive disaster relief; where Democrats don’t get their Social Security checks.
Part of Trump’s second-term agenda includes a plan to crush left-liberal organizing. The movement to end the war in Gaza, which was highly effective in shifting public opinion on Israel’s ongoing military assault, will feel this hammer blow first. Trump has been lately dogged by generals who opposed his fascist inclinations; his future generals will be much less reluctant. Supreme Court Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito will retire and be replaced by younger versions of themselves. Probably worst of all, the timeline on permanent climate catastrophe has moved up—it’s not unfair to say that we may soon arrive at a point of no return (though my strong suspicion is that we have reached it already).
At the moment, I can’t exactly figure out what kind of Democratic Party emerges from the wreckage of this election. Harris ran a distinctly centrist style of politics, for which influential members of the punditocracy and the party’s most entrenched elites had long agitated. This approach flopped, badly. This brand of politics makes complete sense on paper to a lot of people who now need to contend with the fact that the voters that Democrats need the most to win presidential elections are rejecting it in substantial numbers.
But these failures are not the biggest problem Democrats face. The real crisis is that all the roads ahead are fraught with peril. The country has clearly tacked to the right in substantial ways. It’s going to make sense to a lot of Democrats to keep chasing the electorate in that direction. But a party that, in 2024, was only really defending a narrow portfolio of traditionally Democratic principles ceases to be the Democratic Party in any meaningful sense if they abandon those few battlements which they’ve retained the courage to defend. Tacking right might be a path to power, but we should dispense with the delusion that a Democratic Party choosing this path would continue to be a liberal party. Rather, it would come to reside in the same ideological province of the pre-Trump Republican Party—and remember, that’s a movement that Trumpism dispatched far more rapidly and soundly than the Democrats.
At the same time, organizing the party around a bolder, leftward direction is difficult to fathom. A more leftist set of domestic policy prescriptions requires its proponents to run the sort of piping-hot, high-spending economy that Biden attempted—and probably to a greater extent than Biden was willing to go. The failure of Bidenomics to impress the very voters it strove so mightily to help will make politicians extremely skittish about taking that approach again anytime soon. But even if Democrats were brave enough to let it rip, bolder policies also require a functioning administrative state to administer them. Right now, the Supreme Court is not committed to the administrative state’s survival and is more likely to keep dismantling it. So a Democratic Party that shifts in this direction is destined to make a ton of near-term promises that it can’t fulfill and risk making voters more cynical about government, which helps strongmen like Trump stay in power.
All that said, Trump might very well run up against the problem of unfulfillable promises a lot sooner than the Democrats. Trumpism has always been a slow march into the thickets of its own policy paradoxes, and this will only grow more pronounced as all the reins and fetters that impeded Trump’s first-term ambitions come off in the second. Here, the laws of gravity snap back with a vengeance. Trump cannot deport millions of people without sending the economy into a doom spiral. He can’t create a more efficient government by asking a noodlehead failure like Elon Musk to manage it. He can’t put a quack like Robert F. Kennedy Jr. in charge of public health without people getting a lot sicker. You can’t make America great again while destroying the regulatory regime that keeps a staggering range of everyday harms at bay: coal ash spills and E. coli and shoddy building construction and, lest we forget, pandemics. And, no, you can’t arrest climate change by pretending it’s not happening.
The problem, of course, is that the rug-pull always arrives too late for the conned to prevent. While we are waiting for these bills to come due, however, Trump will probably manage to keep two of his promises: He will duck accountability for the malfeasances for which he’s already facing judgment in various legal fora (and likely extend this privilege to a grip of bad actors, beginning with the January 6 rioters), and he will hurt the people he deems to be his enemy. Those supporters who are inclined to dole out punishments of their own will feel a freer hand to do so. This is going to be an immediately more dangerous country to reside in for lots of Americans.
This has, unfortunately, been the cauldron in which recent Democratic electoral successes have been conjured: The collapsed reality and widespread destruction wrought from GOP misrule provokes a backlash that drives up enough public support for a change. This is how we got Barack Obama and Joe Biden to the White House. This is also the widening gyre in which we’re now trapped: Republican failures, and the intense period of crisis management that follows, have made it harder for Democrats to build anything of their own that’s truly enduring, which in turn gives them little to run on. I’m left with the strong impression that the only thing most people know about Democrats is that they didn’t want Trump to be president.
As Talking Points Memo’s Josh Marshall noted on election night, “Incumbent parties have been losing in basically every industrial democracy since the pandemic.” Perhaps this outcome was predetermined. But it wasn’t our fate to end up with, as Marshall described, “Trump, with his degenerate, autocratic ways” as the alternative. That a cruel president is returning to office on the promise of doubling down on the cruelty speaks to something really unpleasant about ourselves. There was a notion, once, that Obama’s election indicated that the United States was closer than ever to becoming the nation we were always destined to be. With Trump’s reelection, we should reckon with the dreadful possibility that New York Times columnist Jamelle Bouie is correct when he says, “Most of us will probably die living in the political order that will emerge out of this election.”
Ballot measures deliver big wins for progressive policy priorities
From education to abortion rights, minimum wage to family leave, progressive policy measures fared quite well in 2024, even amid Republican victories.
By Steve Benen – November 8, 2024
As the dust settles on the 2024 election cycle and the scope of Republican successes comes into view, some observers are drawing a predictable conclusion: If voters backed GOP candidates in such large numbers, it must be because the electorate agrees with the party on the major issues of the day.
Mark Penn, a former adviser to Bill and Hillary Clinton, for example, published a flawed election assessment to social media, which began, “America is a center right country at heart. Only 25 per cent are liberal and the other 75 per cent won’t be ruled by the 25.”
At a superficial level, I can appreciate how some arrive at conclusions like these. If most voters supported Donald Trump and Republican congressional candidates, the argument goes, then it stands to reason that voters prefer conservative ideas to progressive ideas.
But a closer look at some of the election results suggest the ideological lines aren’t nearly that clean. Trump and his party, for example, championed private school vouchers. But as The New York Times reported, voters in three states — including two red states where Trump won easily — rejected voucher schemes.
In Kentucky, nearly two-thirds of voters defeated a proposal to allow state tax dollars to fund private and charter schools. In Nebraska, 57% of voters approved a ballot initiative that repealed a small program intended to give low-income families tax dollars to pay for private-school tuition. In Colorado, votes are still being counted. But it looks likely that voters have narrowly rejected a broadly worded ballot measure that would have established a “right to school choice,” including in private schools and homeschool settings.
Note, Nebraska voters backed the GOP ticket by more than 20 points. In Kentucky, the margin was more than 30 points. But those same voters nevertheless took a good look at one of the Republican Party’s top educational priorities and said, “No thanks.”
What’s more, it wasn’t just vouchers. Voters in 10 states considered abortion-rights initiatives this year, and they passed in seven — including in some states Trump carried. (In Florida, a majority of voters supported an abortion-rights measure, but it wasn’t a large enough majority to pass.)
In ruby-red Missouri, where Republicans such as Trump and Sen. Josh Hawley won easily, voters also easily approved measures to raise the minimum wage and require employers to provide paid sick leave. Voters in Alaska, which also supported the GOP ticket by a wide margin, did the same thing, increasing the state’s minimum wage to $15 per hour and requiring employers to provide paid sick leave.
A few weeks before Election Day, YouGov conducted an interesting survey in which it asked respondents for their opinions about Trump’s and Kamala Harris’ policy priorities — except the twist was that participants weren’t told which policies were associated with which candidates.
The results were remarkable: Harris’ agenda was far more popular than Trump’s, but many people had no idea that the Democrat’s priorities were, in fact, her priorities.
Asked what they wanted, voters backed Harris’ vision. Asked who they wanted, voters backed the candidate offering the opposite of her vision.
To be sure, there’s room for a broader conversation about why many Americans who support progressive policies end up also supporting candidates who’ll reject those same progressive policies. But on a variety of key fronts, it’s nevertheless true that a true center-right nation, filled with an electorate where conservatism was ascendent, probably wouldn’t have backed quite so many progressive ballot measures.
The exact thing that helped Trump win could become a big problem for his presidency
Analysis by Matt Egan – November 7, 2024
Donald Trump rode a powerful wave of discontent over the cost of living back to the White House.
Voters, fed up with high prices on everything from groceries to car insurance, have ousted Democrats from power in Washington.
Trump reminded voters often that inflation wasn’t a problem when he was calling the shots. And he has promised to attack high prices by shaking things up.
But if he’s not careful, Trump could have an inflation problem of his own.
Not only that, but the bond market is already getting nervous about Trump’s plans to add trillions to the national debt. Bond yields have climbed sharply, a situation that will make it more expensive to get a mortgage or home equity loan and finance the purchase of a car.
“The lesson of this election shouldn’t go unnoticed by Republicans – inflation doesn’t sit well with voters, and they won’t forget,” Ryan Sweet, chief US economist at Oxford Economics, told CNN.
Of course, it’s far too early to know which of Trump’s campaign promises will become a reality. For now, Wall Street seems largely unfazed by the inflation warnings.
Investors appear to be betting that Trump won’t actually go forward with plans to impose tariffs on all $3 trillion of US imports, or that he won’t be able to deport millions of undocumented workers. And they may be right.
After all, there’s a long history of presidential candidates softening their approach once the votes are done being counted and the business of governing begins.
America’s affordability crisis
Voters made clear Tuesday their frustrations with the state of the economy.
Two-thirds (67%) of voters described the US economy as not good or poor, according to CNN exit polls.
Despite historically low unemployment, just 32% rated the economy as excellent or good.
And this proved to be pivotal in the outcome.
Among those who described the economy as not good or poor, 69% voted for Trump. Likewise, 40% of Latino voters indicated the economy was the No. 1 issue. Trump decisively carried Latino voters who picked the economy as the No. 1 issue.
The findings illustrate just how angry voters are about the cost of living.
Yes, the rate of inflation is down sharply. It peaked at a four-decade high of 9.1% in June 2022 when gas prices spiked above $5 a gallon.
But no, prices are not down.
“Though economists focus on the rate of price changes, consumers focus on the level of prices,” Sweet said. “The American consumer generally has a short memory, except for when it comes to prices. Many can tell you the price of gasoline, milk and bread down to the penny today versus four years ago.”
Prices vs. paychecks
And all too often, Americans are spending much more than they were when President Joe Biden took office.
Each month, the typical US household must spend $1,120 more than in January 2021 just to buy the same goods and services, according to Moody’s Analytics.
Paychecks are up by about the same amount ($1,192 more per month, on average) but that means many people must spend all their pay hikes just to get by. They’re treading water, not getting ahead.
And keep in mind, these are averages. For many others, wages have not kept up with inflation.
As CNN’s Phil Mattingly noted, Trump flipped multiple counties in Pennsylvania where wages have failed to keep up with prices.
On the campaign trail, Trump promised to not just get the rate of inflation down but to make prices plunge by deporting millions of undocumented people and unleashing fossil fuel production. In August, Trump said he would to get prices to “come down fast.”
“The price level for many consumer goods and services aren’t going to plunge,” Sweet said. “The level of prices for many things is permanently higher.”
Tariffs and deportations could lift prices
Not only that, but elements of the Trump agenda could spike prices – if they were enacted. Trump has held up tariffs as a magical fix to almost any problem, describing these taxes on imports as “the greatest thing ever invented.” He’s threatened to impose unthinkably high tariffs on friend and foe alike.
Trump’s promises to impose massive tariffs, deport millions of undocumented workers and potentially influence the Federal Reserve would weaken growth, boost inflation and lower employment, according to a recent working paper released by the Peterson Institute for International Economics. Inflation would climb to at least 6% by 2026, and by 2028, consumer prices would be 20% higher, the researchers found.
Trump has insisted that his trade agenda will not be inflationary, noting that price increases were modest during his administration even as he lobbed massive tariffs on China.
Still, Trump’s calls for across-the-board tariffs have alarmed mainstream economists. They point to study after study that shows Americans bore almost the entire cost of Trump’s tariffs on China.
Trump’s tariff proposals would cost the typical US household over $2,600 a year, according to a separate analysis from the Peterson Institute.
Slapping tariffs on apparel, toys, furniture, household appliances, footwear and travel goods alone would cost Americans at least $46 billion a year, according to the National Retail Federation, a trade group that represents retailers.
“We’re going to create the worst of both worlds: We’re going to have higher domestic prices for goods and some services…and we’re going to have no overall improvement to the jobs picture or the wage picture,” Daniel Alpert, managing partner at Westwood Capital, told CNN’s Allison Morrow.
Even Stephen Moore, a conservative economist who has been very supportive of the overall Trump agenda, recently told CNN he’s “not a big fan” of tariffs like what Trump has proposed.
“When Trump uses tariffs as a negotiating tool, I’m fine with that,” Moore said during a phone interview in late October. “But I don’t want to see us dramatically raise tariffs on imported goods. Tariffs are taxes. And my worry is, if you take it too far, you’re going to get into a tit-for-tat situation.”
And that raises one of the paramount economic questions of this next Trump era: Will he soften his economic proposals to avoid reigniting prices? Or will he triple-down on tariffs in a way that invites a return of inflation?
The New York Times editorial board is a group of opinion journalists whose views are informed by expertise, research, debate and certain longstanding values. It is separate from the newsroom.
The Sun endorses Kamala Harris and Tim Walz to lead the nation
The Las Vegas Sun – October 20, 2024
Democratic presidential nominee Vice President Kamala Harris and running mate Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz join hands during a rally at the Thomas & Mack Center Saturday, Aug. 10, 2024.
The upcoming presidential election presents a pivotal moment for the United States, offering a choice between preserving democracy or sliding into autocracy.
The Republican Party has nominated a womanizing narcissist and aspiring dictator as its candidate. He and his supporters believe in trampling on the rights of women, providing greater protections to guns than schoolchildren, silencing the history and existence of people of color and LGBTQ+ people, forcing working class families and seniors to choose between food and medicine and ceaselessly attacking the immigrants who dream of a better life.
The Democratic Party, on the other hand, has nominated a leader who will fight to preserve the rights and institutions that have made the United States the envy of the world while championing the promise of the American dream. She believes in fighting for the rights of women to choose what happens to their body, protecting children from criminals armed with weapons of war, preserving Social Security and health care programs that Americans have paid into their entire lives, giving a helping hand to those in need and creating pathways to citizenship for immigrants who contribute to our economy and our communities.
Kamala Harris represents a bridge between the measured approach of Joe Biden and the hunger for change that drove millions to support Donald Trump. While we understand the belief held by many Americans that they are being left behind, Trump is not the answer. His disregard for democratic institutions, tarnishing of the judiciary and inability to conceive of a government that serves anyone or anything beyond his personal interests are the hallmarks of an aspiring dictator. Harris, on the other hand, offers the stability and confidence of a veteran public servant and the bold vision, energy and adaptability that is needed in a rapidly evolving world.
As vice president, Harris has proven herself a capable ambassador who will strengthen America’s alliances and project a position of strength to our adversaries. For a nation still recovering from the damage to its international standing under Trump, Harris represents a return to stronger ties to our allies, determined resistance to our enemies, principled diplomacy and a strong defense of democratic values. She will not coddle our enemies and betray our friends as Trump did.
Harris’ work in the U.S. Senate reinforced her credentials as a champion for middle-class and working families. She supported legislation that aimed to lower health care costs, protect Social Security and Medicare, and expand affordable housing — issues that resonate with older Americans who have spent their lives contributing to society and now seek dignity in their twilight years. Harris’ push for measures to combat climate change, from reducing greenhouse gas emissions to investing in clean energy, aims to address not only immediate health concerns but also an understanding of the long-term effects that current policies will have on future generations.
A former prosecutor and California attorney general, Harris has demonstrated a commitment to public safety while championing reforms that aimed to make the justice system more equitable. Her tenure focused not only on holding wrongdoers accountable but also on creating pathways to rehabilitation — policies that resonate with voters who believe in the Constitution’s promise of safety, security and accountability that are balanced against liberty, fairness and a commitment to second chances for those who earn them.
Yet, it is not just her experience that makes Harris the right choice — it is also her vision. As the child of immigrants and the first woman of color to serve as vice president, she has already made history and inspired a new generation to believe in the promise of American democracy. Those experiences have inspired her vision of a government more representative of the people it serves — no matter their social, cultural, geographic or economic background.
At the Democratic National Convention, she spoke of rebuilding the middle class and creating an “opportunity economy where everyone has the chance to compete and a chance to succeed.” Tellingly, she accepted the nomination for the presidency on behalf of “every American, regardless of party, race, gender or the language your grandmother speaks,” “everyone who has ever set out on their own unlikely journey,” and “people who work hard, chase their dreams and look out for one another.”
This language reflects Harris’ understanding that every American has a story to tell and that many of those stories share the common threads of overcoming hardship through hard work and the strength and support of family and community. She is genuinely interested in those stories, interested in who we are as Americans, what we want our future and our children’s future to look like and what she can do to help realize those dreams.
For American women, the ability to pursue a vision of their own choosing is growing increasingly difficult as dozens of states with GOP-controlled legislatures impose oppressive restrictions on women’s rights to control their own bodies and receive lifesaving medical care.
Beyond reproductive rights, women also continue to bear the brunt of lawmakers’ failure to support paid family leave, affordable child care, an extension of the child tax credit or even the Equal Pay Act. While in the Senate, Harris sponsored or cosponsored legislation championing each of these issues.
Older voters too have a particular stake in a Harris presidency. With Social Security and Medicare facing long-term funding challenges, the nation needs a leader who will protect and strengthen these programs. Harris has pledged to do so while opposing efforts to privatize or cut benefits. Furthermore, her emphasis on affordable prescription drug pricing is an issue of immediate relevance to all of us, but especially seniors who often struggle with high health care costs.
Her vice-presidential running mate, Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz, shares Harris’ vision for leadership and governance that serves all Americans. It’s what inspired him to become a high school teacher, a football coach, an adviser to the school’s gay-straight alliance and a mentor to generations of young people trying to navigate decisions about the next steps in their soon-to-be adult lives. Walz also carried that vision into the governor’s office, where he cut taxes for the middle class, expanded access to prekindergarten and ensured that no child would go hungry at school, all while balancing the state budget.
Just as Harris stands in sharp contrast to Trump, Walz stands in sharp contrast to Trump’s running mate, Ohio Sen. JD Vance. From what we can tell, Vance’s only notable accomplishments since graduating from Yale Law School in 2013 have been helping billionaire venture capitalists make more money; founding a charity that didn’t help anyone except for Vance, who used it as a front for his political ambitions; and serving as an advisory board member for an organization that helped create the Project 2025 plan to destroy democracy and eliminate numerous civil rights.
Some readers might ask why we don’t note Vance’s time in the U.S. Senate among his accomplishments, but the reality is that he has accomplished nothing as a senator. Not even one of the 57 legislative bills Vance authored passed the Senate. Of course, Vance’s failure to do his job while collecting a taxpayer-funded salary is also likely related to his spending the past two years licking the boots of Trump and spreading bizarre and hateful theories about women in American life and inventing disgusting stories about Haitian immigrants. Vance’s bigotry does not appear to have a bottom, nor does his craven opportunism have limits.
The fact that Trump chose Vance as his running mate while Harris chose Walz underscores the differences in their judgment. While Harris seeks a commitment to public service and common good, Trump seeks nothing more than a “yes man” who can fulfill his pathetic need to be surrounded by people who stroke his ego and are willing to hate anyone Trump wants him to hate. Worse, Vance has made it clear that if faced with the same choice that Mike Pence faced when Congress was certifying the Electoral College vote, Vance would soil the Constitution for Trump.
It’s telling that Trump and Vance speak of America in the darkest terms and invent one imaginary crisis after another. They describe a chaotic, violent and evil America that is nothing like the lived experience of our citizens. They are lying. And like a long list of political villains before them, they trade in fear for power’s sake.
Harris and Walz on the other hand, don’t shirk from the challenge to improve policies and programs that need to be improved. But when they look at America and they describe their vision, it is filled with hope, inclusion and mending the wounds that have been inflicted by political vandals like Trump. The contrast could not be more stark: Harris and Walz love this country, its people and its freedom, Trump and Vance only want to own it. Harris looks at Americans and sees promise and opportunity that should be nurtured. This is what this nation needs in a leader.
One can’t ignore the striking differences in economic policies either. Trump’s crazed plan to institute massive tariffs to support his equally crazed plan for multitrillion-dollar tax cuts will doom America to a deep recession and burden future generations with trillions of dollars in additional deficit spending. His tariffs will cause massive inflation as the costs of the tariffs are passed on to American consumers and American companies. They will also result in retaliation from other nations targeting U.S. business and industry, crippling our economy.
We need to be clear-eyed on this: Trump’s tariff plans are not workable and not serious. They will deliver gigantic wealth to the richest Americans today, while saddling future generations with the bill for Trump’s debt. It’s a grift on a multitrillion dollar scale. Trump has bankrupted nearly all of his businesses; his current proposals will bankrupt this country for a generation or more. Virtually every responsible economist who has analyzed Trump’s plans warns of disaster if he’s allowed to get ahold of our economy again.
Harris, meanwhile, wants to ensure the middle class can thrive with detailed proposals to improve home affordability, small business creation and guarantees not to raise taxes on the middle class. While we believe her plans need further refinement in a variety of areas because the deficits are larger than we would like (but a fraction of the deficit spending Trump, the king of bankruptcies, has in mind) we have absolute faith in the idea that Harris will pull together a coalition of the brightest minds to bring about the strong economy that America deserves. When Harris speaks of an “opportunity economy,” she is serious.
In choosing Harris, Americans have an opportunity to elect a candidate who embodies both steadiness and a commitment to optimistic change. Her career is defined by a dedication to justice and equity, and her vision for the country prioritizes the needs of everyday Americans over the interests of the elite. She has shown she can rise to the moment and unite the country across generational and racial divides. Her leadership promises a government that works for all, restoring trust in public institutions while forging a path to a fairer, more sustainable future.
We can, in other words, choose to vote to make life better by putting people in office who believe in America and its people. Or we can vote to put people in office who want to divide further into camps, who have enemies lists, promise to put troops in the street and retaliate for dissent and repression.
That’s not a hard choice.
The country stands at a crossroads. A vote for Harris is a vote for renewal, stability and a government that genuinely serves the people. It is time for a leader who represents progress without abandoning the values that have long defined America. Kamala Harris is ready to take the helm and steer the nation forward. Americans deserve it. America demands it.
Vice President Kamala Harris, before tens of thousands at the Ellipse near the White House, said Tuesday night: “The United States of America is the greatest idea humanity ever devised. A nation big enough to encompass all our dreams, strong enough to withstand any fracture or fissure between us. And fearless enough to imagine a future of possibilities.”
Hmm. Hard to tease out the nuanced distinction between Harris’ graceful rhetoric about the greatness of our country and Trump’s “We suck.” But the difference is there, I promise.
Kamala Harris offers unity and inspiration as Donald Trump divides and demeans
Democratic Presidential nominee Kamala Harris campaigns at the Ellipse near the White House on Oct. 29, 2024, to give her closing arguments before Election Day.
The former president was coming off a weekend rally at Madison Square Garden in New York City that featured vile racism, profanity and enough hate speech to, I would hope, anger God. The “giant garbage can” line has become a part of his schtick, as he paints America as a crime-ridden nation overrun by immigrant gang members, rapists and murderers.
It’s all hogwash, of course, but it’s all he’s got. That and the lies he emits like a flatulent prune-farm dog.
Harris spoke from the same place where Trump, on Jan. 6, 2021, fomented an attack on the U.S. Capitol. The location was wholly intentional, as was her infinitely more mature and unifying message.
“America, for too long we have been consumed with too much division, chaos, and mutual distrust,” she said. “And it can be easy then to forget a simple truth: It doesn’t have to be this way. … It is time to stop pointing fingers. We have to stop pointing fingers and start locking arms. It is time to turn the page on the drama and the conflict, the fear and division.”
Vice President Kamala Harris and second gentleman Doug Emhoff wave to supporters after her presidential campaign speech at the Ellipse near the White House on Oct. 29, 2024.
Chaos and mutual distrust? Conflict, fear and division?
What could she be talking about?
Trump says fellow Americans represent ‘a great evilness’
Earlier in the day, Trump said of Democrats: “This is a sick group of people, I’m telling you. There’s a great evilness. You know, we want to come together as a country, but there’s a lot of evil there.”
At his night rally in Allentown, he continued going after Democrats: “Who the hell can win an election with open borders, transgender everybody, men playing in women’s sports? … Allow millions of people through an open border totally unvetted, totally unchecked, they come from parts unknown, they come from countries you’ve never even heard of, and then you find out that they came from jails and mental institutions, no, no, they cheat like hell and it’s a damn disgrace.”
Former President Donald Trump campaigns for reelection on Oct. 29, 2024, in Allentown, Pa.
Oh, I see, that’s the fear and chaos and divsion Harris referenced.
After hearing Trump’s rambling, I wish she had said, “We have to stop pointing fingers, and also stop using run-on sentences filled with weird fabricated nonsense.”
Harris, by contrast, said this from the Ellipse: “The fact that someone disagrees with us does not make them the enemy within. They are family, neighbors, classmates, co-workers. They are fellow Americans, and as Americans, we rise and fall together.”
She also said: “Unlike Donald Trump, I don’t believe people who disagree with me are the enemy. He wants to put them in jail. I’ll give them a seat at the table.”
Harris’ humility vs. Trump’s hubris
Harris showed humility – something Trump is allergic to – during her speech: “Look, I’ll be honest with you, I’m not perfect. I make mistakes.”
Trump, earlier in the day Tuesday, described people who may or not exist allegedly telling him how wonderful he is: “They said he’s the greatest president we’ve ever had. And then one of them said, ‘Sir, you’re the greatest president of my lifetime.’ … I said, ‘Does that include Abe Lincoln?’ Yes, sir. ‘Does that include George Washington?’ Yes, sir. I said, ‘That’s good.’ ”
The differences are stark as day and night
Harris said: “Donald Trump has spent a decade trying to keep people divided and afraid of each other. That is who he is.”
Fact check: True.
She continued, “But America, I am here to say: That’s not who we are.”
That part will be determined next week. It’s grace vs. the garbage can.
Column: Listen to Trump’s former aides: He’d be far more dangerous in a second term
Doyle McManus – October 28, 2024
Donald Trump “never accepted the fact that he wasn’t the most powerful man in the world — and by power, I mean an ability to do anything he wanted, any time he wanted,” his former chief of staff said. (Alex Brandon / Associated Press)
Yahoo is using AI to generate takeaways from this article. This means the info may not always match what’s in the article. Reporting mistakes helps us improve the experience.Generate Key Takeaways
Donald Trump’s former White House chief of staff, retired Marine Gen. John F. Kelly, broke a long silence and denounced his former boss as a man who fits “the general definition of fascist.”
The conservative, normally taciturn Kelly was moved to speak out after Trump condemned former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Rep. Adam B. Schiff and other Democrats as “the enemy from within” and said he would deploy troops onto the nation’s streets to suppress opposition.
“Using the military on, to go after, American citizens is … a very, very bad thing,” Kelly told the New York Times. “Even to say it for political purposes to get elected, I think it’s a very, very bad thing.”
Kelly wasn’t the only former Trump aide to warn that the GOP candidate shouldn’t be trusted with the nuclear codes. Dozens of people who worked in senior positions in the Trump administration have chimed in. Gen. Mark A. Milley, a former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, called him “fascist to the core … the most dangerous person to the country.” Former national security advisor John Bolton said he was “unfit to be president.”
Trump “never accepted the fact that he wasn’t the most powerful man in the world — and by power, I mean an ability to do anything he wanted, any time he wanted,” Kelly said.
Did those warnings from authoritative sources — eminent figures Trump once appointed to high-ranking jobs — have any effect on his voters as election day approaches?
Readers of this column won’t be surprised to learn that I agree wholeheartedly with Kelly, Milley, Bolton and their colleagues: Trump is a danger to our democracy.
He neither understands nor respects the Constitution. He yearns openly to rule the way China’s Xi Jinping and Russia’s Vladimir Putin do, as an autocrat answerable to no one. “He controls 1.4 billion people with an iron fist,” he said admiringly of Xi.
Some, his hardcore base, agree with everything the former president says right down to the coarsest insults.
Others admit to qualms about Trump’s style but say they support him because they hope he can bring back the low-inflation prosperity of his first two years in office.
But a third group, which includes many independents as well as moderate Republicans, is the most perplexing. Not only do they dislike Trump’s style, they worry about some of his positions: his desire to unravel Obamacare, his threats to deploy the military against domestic opponents, his indiscriminate tariffs, his plan to fire thousands of civil servants and replace them with MAGA loyalists.
But many say they don’t think Trump would — or could — actually make those things happen.
In a focus group last week organized for NBC News by the public opinion consulting firm Engagious, for example, an Atlanta home inspector named Kevin said he worried that Trump’s tariffs would make consumer prices go up.
“It’s a bad idea,” he said. “But I don’t think it’s going to really go anywhere. I think it’ll cost too much money. It’ll be too difficult politically.” He’ll probably vote for Trump anyway, he said.
Pollsters have called this Trump’s “believability gap.” Voters hear what he says, but they discount it — they think that “he’s just talking” or that surely somebody will stop his more outlandish ideas.
But there are two problems with those Trump voters’ self-comforting rationalizations.
The first is that Trump already has a track record of trying to do most of those things. He tried to repeal Obamacare, but a handful of moderate Republican senators got in his way. He issued an executive order that would have enabled him to replace civil servants with political appointees, but time ran out on his term before he could use it.
And when demonstrators assembled across the street from the White House, he urged military officials to deploy troops and shoot protesters in the legs — but Gen. Milley and Defense Secretary Mark Esper stopped him.
“When he starts talking about using the military against people … I think we should take that very seriously,” Olivia Troye, who served as an aide to Trump’s vice president, Mike Pence, told my colleague Noah Bierman recently. “He actually talked about shooting Americans. I was there … I witnessed that.”
The second problem with the “believability gap” is that if Trump gets back to the White House, he will be more likely to get his way.
He has frequently complained that he made a mistake in his first term by appointing aides like Kelly, Milley and Bolton, who believed it was their duty to restrain the president’s ill-considered impulses. If he gets a second term, he’ll surround himself with more people who will do his bidding without raising pesky questions.
He’ll run into less opposition from other institutions too.
Republicans in Congress, who occasionally restrained Trump when he was president, have purged most of the moderates from their ranks. Sen. Mitt Romney of Utah is retiring. Sen. Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, an occasional Trump critic, will no longer be his party’s leader in the Senate.
Federal courts may be more hospitable, too, thanks to judges Trump appointed his first time around.
So moderate Republicans and independents who are tempted to vote for Trump because they hope he will lower taxes or improve the economy should think long and hard about the risks of that bargain.
When Trump says he’ll order prosecutors to go after Joe Biden and “the Pelosis,” he means it. When Trump says he’ll punish businesses like Amazon if he doesn’t like their owners’ views, he means it. When Trump says he believes the Constitution gives him “the right to do whatever I want as president,” he means it.
And this time, he would know better how to turn his wishes into reality. A second Trump term wouldn’t be a benign rerun of the first version. As his former aides are trying their best to warn us, it would be far worse.
Fact check: Debunking 16 false claims Trump made at Madison Square Garden
Daniel Dale, CNN – October 28, 2024
Former President Donald Trump repeated a series of false claims, many of which have long been debunked, about immigration and other subjects in his speech at a Sunday evening rally at Madison Square Garden in New York City.
Here is a fact check of 16 false claims he made in the speech.
FEMA and North Carolina: Trump falsely claimed of the Federal Emergency Management Agency’s response to Hurricane Helene: “They haven’t even responded in North Carolina. They haven’t even responded. There’s nobody, they don’t see any FEMA.” This is not even close to true; FEMA immediately responded to the disaster in North Carolina and said Friday that it had more than 1,700 staff deployed in the state. FEMA said on October 16 that it had approved more than $100 million in individual aid to North Carolina residents.
At a briefing in early October, North Carolina Gov. Roy Cooper, a Democrat, said, “We’re grateful for the quick actions and close communications that we have had with the president and with the FEMA team.” State emergency management director Will Ray said at the briefing: “We’re grateful for the support not just from the 22 states that have sent teams to support us but also from our FEMA team and other members of the federal family.”
FEMA and migrants: Trump falsely claimed that FEMA didn’t respond in North Carolina because “they spent their money on bringing in illegal migrants, so they didn’t have money for Georgia and North Carolina and Alabama and Tennessee and Florida and South Carolina.” He repeated, “They didn’t have any money for them. They spent all of their money on bringing in illegal immigrants.”
FEMA did not spend its disaster relief money on undocumented people. Congress appropriated the agency more than $35 billion in disaster relief funds for fiscal 2024, according to official FEMA statistics, and also gave FEMA a much smaller pool of money, $650 million in fiscal 2024, for a program aimed at helping communities shelter migrants. Contrary to Trump’s claims, these are two separate pots of funds.
Trump’s favorite immigration chart: Trump repeated his long-debunked false claim that his favorite chart about migration numbers at the southern border — which he had fortunately turned his head to look at when a gunman tried to kill him at a campaign rally in July — has an arrow at the bottom pointing to “the day I left office,” when, he said, the US had “the lowest illegal immigration that we’ve ever had in recorded history.”
The chart doesn’t show that. In fact, the arrow actually points to April 2020, when Trump still had more than eight months left in his term and when global migration had slowed to a trickle because of the Covid-19 pandemic. After hitting a roughly three-year low (not an all-time low) in April 2020, migration numbers at the southern border increased each month through the end of Trump’s term.
Harris’ border role: Trump repeated these false claims about Vice President Kamala Harris: “She was the border czar. She was in charge of the border.” Harris was never “border czar,” a label the White House has always emphasized is inaccurate, and she was never in charge of border security, a responsibility of Secretary of Homeland Security Alejandro Mayorkas. In reality, President Joe Biden gave Harris a more limited immigration-related assignment in 2021, asking her to lead diplomacy with El Salvador, Guatemala and Honduras in an attempt to address the conditions that prompted their citizens to try to migrate to the United States.
Migrants, cities and towns: Trump repeated his vow that, if elected, he would liberate every “city and town that has been invaded and conquered” by migrants. This is nonsense; no US town has been conquered by migrants.
Migrants in Springfield, Ohio: Trump falsely claimed: “You take a look at Springfield, Ohio, think of this – where, think of this, where 30,000 illegal migrants were put into a town of 50,000 people.”
This is false in more than one way. While we don’t know the immigration status of each and every Haitian immigrant in Springfield, the community is, on the whole, in the country lawfully. The Springfield city website says, “YES, Haitian immigrants are here legally, under the Immigration Parole Program. Once here, immigrants are then eligible to apply for Temporary Protected Status (TPS).” Republican Ohio Gov. Mike DeWine wrote in a New York Times op-ed about Springfield in September that the Haitian immigrants “are there legally” and that, as a Trump-Vance supporter, he is “saddened” by the candidates’ disparagement of “the legal migrants living in Springfield.”
And while there is no official tally of the number of immigrants in Springfield, Trump’s “30,000” figure exceeds local estimates. The website for the city of Springfield says there are an estimated 12,000 to 15,000 immigrants in the county that includes Springfield, where the total population is about 138,000. Chris Cook, the county’s health commissioner, said in July that his team estimated the best number was 10,000 to 12,000 Haitian residents in the county.
“Missing” migrant children: Trump repeated his regular false claim that, because of Harris, “325,000 children are missing, dead, sex slaves or slaves. They came through the open border and they’re gone. Their parents will most likely never see them again, almost any of them.”
Trump was wildly distorting federal statistics.
He appeared to be referring to an August report from the Homeland Security Department’s Office of Inspector General, which said ICE reported more than 32,000 unaccompanied migrant children failed to appear as scheduled for immigration court hearings after being released or transferred out of custody between fiscal years 2019 and 2023 – a period that, notably, includes two years and four months under the Trump administration. The report also said that 291,000 unaccompanied migrant children during this period were not given notices to appear in court.
The report said that ICE has “no assurances” these children “are safe from trafficking, exploitation, or forced labor.” But it did not definitively assert that any of them were being exploited – let alone that almost all of them have vanished for good.
Aaron Reichlin-Melnick, senior fellow at the American Immigration Council, told CNN in a message this summer: “Long story short, no, there are not 320,000 kids missing. 32,000 kids missed court. That doesn’t mean they’re missing, it means they missed court (either because their sponsor didn’t bring them or they are teenagers who didn’t want to show up). The remaining 291,000 cases mentioned by the OIG are cases where ICE hasn’t filed the paperwork to start their immigration court cases.”
Trump’s rally crowd in Butler, Pennsylvania: Trump repeated his wild exaggeration that there were “101,000 people” at the campaign rally he held earlier this month at the same Pennsylvania site where a gunman tried to kill him in July. CNN affiliate KDKA in Pittsburgh reported that the Secret Service put the crowd at 24,000 people, while the Trump-supporting sheriff of Blair County, Pennsylvania, James Ott, said in his speech at the rally itself (more than three hours before Trump took the stage) that he was looking out at “21,000-plus people.”
Trump and the Nord Stream 2 pipeline: Trump repeated his false claim that he “ended” the Nord Stream 2 gas pipeline from Russia to Germany, adding, “It was dead.” Trump did not kill the pipeline. He signed sanctions related to the project into law about three years into his presidency, when the pipeline was already about 90% complete, and the state-owned Russian company behind the project announced in December 2020 that construction was resuming.
Trump and the defeat of ISIS: Trump repeated his false claim that “it took us like four weeks” to defeat the ISIS terror group even though generals had told him it would take five years. The ISIS “caliphate” was declared fully liberated more than two years into Trump’s presidency.
Trump and inflation: Trump falsely claimed that, when he was president, “we had no inflation.” Cumulative inflation during Trump’s presidency was about 8%.
Harris and inflation: Trump falsely claimed that Harris’ votes to break legislative ties in the US Senate “caused the worst inflation in the history of our country.” Aside from the claim about Harris’ role, it’s not true the US has had its worst inflation ever during the Biden administration; Trump could fairly say that the US inflation rate hit a 40-year high in June 2022, when it was 9.1%, but that was not close to the all-time record of 23.7%, set in 1920. (And the rate has since plummeted. The most recent available inflation rate at the time Trump spoke here was 2.4% in September.)
Harris and law enforcement: Trump touted his endorsements from police officers and law enforcement organizations, then falsely said of Harris: “I don’t think they have one cop. They’re looking for just one cop.” In early September, 101 current and former law enforcement officials, including active sheriffs, police chiefs and other senior officers, released a letter endorsing Harris. A Michigan sheriff gave a televised speech endorsing Harris at the Democratic National Convention in August, as did a former Capitol Police officer who was injured when Trump supporters stormed the Capitol on January 6, 2021.
Trump’s border wall: The former president repeated his false claim that he “built 571 miles of wall” on the southern border. That’s a significant exaggeration; official government data shows 458 miles were built under Trump — including both wall built where no barriers had existed before and wall built to replace previous barriers.
Trump and the military: The former president repeated his false claim that “I rebuilt our military, in total — rebuilt all of our military.”
Trump has previously made clear that he is claiming to have replaced all of the military’s equipment. “This claim is not even close to being true. The military has tens of thousands of pieces of equipment, and the vast majority of it predates the Trump administration,” Todd Harrison, an expert on the defense budget and a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, a conservative think tank, told CNN in November 2023, after Trump made a version of the claim.
Harrison said in an email at the time: “Moreover, the process of acquiring new equipment for the military is slow and takes many years. It’s not remotely possible to replace even half of the military’s inventory of equipment in one presidential term. I just ran the numbers for military aircraft, and about 88% of the aircraft in the U.S. military inventory today (including Air Force, Army, Navy, and Marine Corps aircraft) were built before Trump took office. In terms of fighters in particular, we still have F-16s and F- 15s in the Air Force that are over 40 years old.”
The 2020 election: Trump repeated his false claim that his opponents “used Covid to cheat” in the 2020 election. There is no basis for the claim that the Democrats cheated; many states, including states with Republican election chiefs and Republican governors, modified their election procedures because of the Covid-19 pandemic.
This story has been updated with additional information.
Fact check: 32 false claims Trump made to Joe Rogan
Daniel Dale, CNN – October 27, 2024
Donald Trump sat down Friday with prominent podcast host Joe Rogan for a conversational interview that ran for nearly three hours — and the former president delivered his standard bombardment of false claims, at least 32 in all.
Many of those false claims are lies that were debunked months or even years ago. The claims spanned a variety of topics, including immigration policy, environmental and energy policy, the legitimacy of the 2020 election, Trump’s record in office, Vice President Kamala Harris, crowd sizes, and how schools deal with transgender children.
Here is a fact check of 32 false claims Trump made to Rogan. This is not intended as a complete list of the inaccurate statements Trump uttered in the interview; with just over a week to go until Election Day, we were unable to look into every dubious assertion he made.
Immigration
Migrants and murderers: Trump repeated his frequent false claim that “we had 13,099 murderers dropped in our country over the last three years.” In reality, as the Department of Homeland Security and independent experts have noted, that official figure is about immigrants with homicide convictions in the US today who entered the country over decades, including during Trump’s own administration, not over the past three years or under the Biden administration. You can read more here.
Trump’s border wall: The former president falsely claimed, “You know, I built 570 miles of wall.” That’s a significant exaggeration; official government data shows 458 miles were built under Trump — including both wall built where no barriers had existed before and wall built to replace previous barriers.
Harris’ border role: Trump repeated a regular false claim about Harris: “She was in charge of the border.” She was not and is not; Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas is the Biden administration official in charge of border security. In reality, President Joe Biden gave Harris a more limited immigration-related assignment in 2021, asking her to lead diplomacy with El Salvador, Guatemala and Honduras in an attempt to address the conditions that prompted their citizens to try to migrate to the United States.
The number of migrants: Trump claimed that at least “21 million” people have illegally crossed the border during the Biden administration. Through September, the country had recorded under 11 million nationwide “encounters” with migrants during the Biden administration, including millions who were rapidly expelled from the country; even adding in so-called gotaways who evaded detection, estimated by House Republicans as being roughly 2 million, there’s no way the total is “21 million.”
Elections, campaigns and crowds
The outcome of the 2020 election: Trump repeated his lie that he won the 2020 election, falsely claiming, “I won that second election so easy.” He lost, fair and square, to Biden, who beat Trump 306-232 in the Electoral College and earned over 7 million more votes than Trump.
The legitimacy of the 2020 election: Trump made various specific false assertions about the 2020 election, claiming it was “crooked”; that his opponents cheated using the guise of the Covid-19 pandemic; and, vaguely, that it was marred by “old-fashioned ballot-screwing.” All of this is baseless.
Polling in 2016: Trump told a story about how, he said, a Washington Post/ABC News poll of Wisconsin during his 2016 race against Hillary Clinton showed him “down 17 points the day before the election,” but he knew it was wrong because of the size of his crowds, and he ended up winning the state: “I was down 17 points in Wisconsin and I won; it’s crooked stuff.” This story is false; the poll showing him down 17 the week of the election came during his 2020 race against Biden, and he lost Wisconsin that year — though by less than one percentage point.
The 2020 election and Wisconsin: Trump falsely claimed, “If you take a look at Wisconsin, they virtually admitted that the election was rigged, robbed and stolen.” This did not happen, “virtually” or otherwise; while some Wisconsin Republicans certainly support Trump’s claim that the election was rigged and stolen, the state’s elections authorities have not made such assertions — and as PolitiFact previously reported, even Republican-led election reviews did not find that Trump won the state.
An election ruling in Virginia: Trump falsely claimed that, just before he walked in for the Friday interview, there was a ruling in a legal “case where they found thousands of illegal ballots.” This case did not involve “illegal ballots”; rather, a judge ruled that Virginia had purged voter registrations from its rolls too close to Election Day. You can read more here.
Grocery stores and identification: Calling for strict voter identification laws, Trump spoke of how identification is required in other circumstances, saying, “When you go to a grocery store, you give ID.” This was a little vaguer than his previous declarations that “you need” ID to buy groceries, but it’s nonsense nonetheless; few grocery shoppers are required to provide identification unless they are paying by check or buying alcohol, tobacco or certain medications.
A Carter commission and mail-in ballots: Trump repeated his false claim that a commission led by former President Jimmy Carter published a report whose “primary finding was you cannot have mail-in ballots.” Trump added, “The one thing with Jimmy Carter: He had a very strong commission. It was, no mail-in ballots.”
Though the commission Carter co-chaired was generally skeptical of mail-in ballots, calling absentee voting “the largest source of potential voter fraud,” it did not say, “You cannot have mail-in ballots,” as Trump claimed. In fact, its report highlighted an example of successful mail-only elections — noting that Oregon, a state that has been conducting elections by mail-in voting since the late 1990s, “appears to have avoided significant fraud in its vote-by-mail elections by introducing safeguards to protect ballot integrity, including signature verification.”
The report also offered some recommendations for making the use of mail-in ballots more secure and called for “further research on the pros and cons” of voting by mail (as well as early voting).
Trump’s Las Vegas crowd size: In his latest exaggeration about crowd sizes, Trump claimed there were “29,000 people” at his event the night prior. His rally Thursday night, in Las Vegas, was at an arena with a capacity under 19,000.
Trump’s McDonald’s crowd size: Trump falsely claimed that there were “28,000 people sitting around” the McDonald’s in Bucks County, Pennsylvania, where he held a publicity event last weekend in which he briefly performed some of the duties of an employee (the restaurant was closed to the public). This is fiction; while videos show there was a substantial pro-Trump crowd gathered in the vicinity of the restaurant, it is obvious that it didn’t approach 28,000. A local journalist on the scene, Tom Sofield, the publisher of Bucks County news outlets, wrote on social media Tuesday: “There were several thousand excited supporters nearby, but the figure wasn’t 25,000, as stated by the former president later.”
Harris’ schedule: Trump, criticizing Harris’ work ethic, falsely claimed she “took off yesterday” and “took off the day before,” and also that “she’s going to take off tomorrow or the next day.” Trump is entitled to argue that Harris isn’t campaigning hard, but she was not “off” or scheduled to be off any of these days. On Wednesday, she participated in a CNN town hall in Pennsylvania; on Thursday, she held a rally in Georgia; on Friday, she held a rally in Texas; on Saturday, she held a rally in Michigan; on Sunday, she is scheduled to make a series of campaign stops in Philadelphia.
Foreign policy
Trump and ISIS: Repeating one of his regular false claims, Trump said, “We defeated ISIS in record time. It was supposed to take years, and we did it in a matter of weeks.” The ISIS “caliphate” was declared fully liberated more than two years into Trump’s presidency.
Obama and Kim Jong Un: Trump, touting his relationship with Kim Jong Un, revived his old false claim that the North Korean leader refused to meet with Barack Obama when the then-president sought a meeting: “They wouldn’t meet Obama. He (Obama) tried to meet. They wouldn’t even talk to him about it.”
There is no evidence that Obama ever sought a meeting with Kim. Independent experts on North Korea and former Obama officials told CNN in 2019 that the claim is fictional.
Who pays tariffs: Trump repeated his frequent false claim that, through tariffs, “I took in hundreds of billions of dollars from China.” US importers make the tariff payments, not China, and study after study has found that Americans bore the overwhelming majority of the cost of Trump’s tariffs on China.
Previous presidents and tariffs on China: Trump repeated his frequent false claim that no previous president had imposed tariffs on Chinese imports, saying, “Nobody took in 10 cents, not one other president.” The US was actually generating billions per year in revenue from tariffs on Chinese imports before Trump took office; in fact, the US has had tariffs on Chinese imports since 1789. Trump’s predecessor, Obama, imposed additional tariffs on Chinese goods.
China and Taiwan: Trump repeated an exaggeration about China: “The day I left, they flew 28 bombers over the middle of Taiwan — 28 bombers.”
Trump was wrong about key details of this incident. On the third and fourth days of the Biden presidency, not the day Trump left office, China sent military planes into Taiwan’s air defense identification zone over the Taiwan Strait — not “over the middle of Taiwan,” a major difference. Also, the incident involved 28 Chinese planes but not “28 bombers.” The New York Times reported at the time that the Taiwanese military said eight Chinese bombers were involved; the other planes were fighters, anti-submarine aircraft and a reconnaissance plane.
And it’s worth noting that China also sent planes into Taiwan’s air defense identification zone during Trump’s presidency. In early 2021, Taiwan News reported that, according to a recent report funded by Taiwan’s government, “In 2020, the Chinese military violated Taiwan’s air defense identification zone (ADIZ) more times than in any year since 1996.”
Environment and energy
Global warming and sea level rise: Trump repeated a regular false claim minimizing the threat of climate change: “I watch these poor fools talking about, ‘Our oceans will rise one-eighth of an inch over the next 500 years.’” The global average sea level is rising more per year than Trump claimed that unnamed concerned people say it will rise over 500 years; NASA reported in March that the global average sea-level rise in 2023 was 0.17 inches per year, more than double the rate in 1993.
Electric vehicle charging stations: Trump falsely claimed that the Biden administration spent $9 billion on just eight electric vehicle charging stations: “They built the charger stations, right, in the Midwest. They built eight of them. They cost $9 billion.”
As FactCheck.org and others have noted, Trump was distorting news articles about the slow pace at which $7.5 billion in federal funds allocated for electric charging have been spent. The articles reported that, as of March, only eight charging stations had been built under the program (not all in the Midwest). The articles did not say that these stations had themselves cost the entire $7.5 billion, let alone $9 billion.
The number of charging stations built with this federal funding has increased since March. The Federal Highway Administration told USA Today that, as of October 11, 20 stations had been built with the money, with plans underway for more than 800 additional stations.
California and electricity: Trump, reviving his false claim about the stability of the electric system in California, said, “They want to go to all electric cars, but they have brownouts every weekend.” California does not have “brownouts every weekend.” A spokesperson for Gov. Gavin Newsom told CNN in late August that the state had not had any outages because of electricity demand since 2020, and a spokesperson for the entity that manages the power grid for about 80% of the state said the same.
A LNG plant in Louisiana: Trump revived a false claim he repeatedlymade during his presidency, claiming that he “instantly” secured a key environmental permit to allow for the construction of a massive liquefied natural gas facility in Louisiana after the initiative had been on hold “for 14 years.” In fact, this facility was granted its key permits under the Obama administration, and its construction also began under Obama.
“To quote our friends at PolitiFact, what Trump said in this case qualifies as ‘pants on fire,’” Pavel Molchanov, an energy analyst at Raymond James & Associates, said last year after Trump made the same claim. Molchanov said, “No one was ready to start drilling there, in 2017 or at any other point in time.”
There is no drilling infrastructure in place in the refuge; major oil companies have shown little interest in the site; and the seven leases the Biden administration eventually canceled were all held by the Alaska Industrial Development and Export Authority, a state entity that is not an oil company.
Trump’s record and history
Trump’s response to “lock her up” chants: Trump repeated his false claim that he “never said” the words “lock her up” when his supporters chanted that refrain about his 2016 Democratic rival, Hillary Clinton. He added, “I’d always go, ‘Take it easy. Just relax.’” In fact, Trump repeatedly said the words “lock her up” in both 2016 and 2020, and he also repeatedly called for Clinton’s imprisonment using other language.
Trump and Oprah: Trump repeated a false claim he has been making for at least 11 years, saying he appeared on Oprah Winfrey’s popular television program during “one of her last shows” in “that final week.” In fact, Trump appeared about three and a half months before Winfrey’s show concluded, not during its star-studded final week.
Trump’s tax cuts: Repeating another regular false claim, the former president claimed that he signed the “biggest tax cuts in history.” Independent analyses have found that his tax-cut law was not the biggest in history, either in percentage of gross domestic product or in inflation-adjusted dollars.
Supreme Court appointments: Trump touted the fact that he appointed three Supreme Court justices, then said, “Most people get none,” adding that “even if a president is in there for eight years, oftentimes they never have a chance.” This is false; no president who served for eight years did not get a chance to appoint a single Supreme Court justice. Only four presidents didn’t get a chance to appoint one justice to the Supreme Court, as PolitiFact previously reported, and three of them served for less than a full four-year term, while the other, Carter, served for four years.
Trump’s uncle and MIT: Trump repeated a false claim that his uncle John Trump, whom he has repeatedly invoked as evidence of the smarts of his family, was the “longest-serving” professor in the history of the prestigious Massachusetts Institute of Technology. John Trump was one of the longest-serving professors at MIT, but not the very longest; the school told Newsweek early this year that at least 10 other people were on the faculty for longer.
Miscellaneous
Schools and transgender children: Trump repeated his false claim that schools are sending children for gender-affirming surgeries without parental consent: “Who would want to have — there’s so many — the transgender operations: Where they’re allowed to take your child when he goes to school and turn him into a male — to a female — without parental consent.”
There is no evidence that schools in any part of the United States have sent children for gender-affirming surgeries without their parents’ approval, or performed unapproved such surgeries on-site; none of that is “allowed” anywhere in the country. Even in the states where gender-affirming surgery is legal for people under age 18, parental consent is required before a minor can undergo such a procedure.
Trump’s own campaign has not been able to find a single example of this ever having happened anywhere in the United States. You can read more here.
Alyssa Farah Griffin: Trump told a thoroughly false story about a former official in his administration, Alyssa Farah Griffin, who is now a co-host of the ABC talk show “The View” and a political commentator on CNN. Trump claimed Griffin worked in the administration as “like an assistant press secretary”; that, upon leaving the administration, she “writes me this gorgeous letter,” “the most beautiful letter,” declaring “he was the greatest president”; but then, upon joining “The View,” that she suddenly started “hitting the hell out of me” with criticism.
This is untrue in several ways.
Griffin had the top-tier role of White House communications director and assistant to the president upon her resignation in late 2020, not “assistant press secretary” (she had previously been Pentagon press secretary and Vice President Mike Pence’s press secretary).
Griffin did issue a statement upon her resignation saying, “It’s been the honor of a lifetime to serve in the Trump administration over the last three and a half years,” but did not say that Trump was “the greatest president.” She said Saturday that she has never written Trump a private letter.
And she began sharply criticizing Trump shortly after the riot at the Capitol on January 6, 2021, not when she started guest-hosting “The View” in October 2021 or when she was named a permanent co-host in August 2022.
Abraham Lincoln’s sons: Trump told a story about how President Abraham Lincoln was a “very depressed” person in part because he lost his son “whose name was Tad.” Trump repeated later in the story that Lincoln lost his son “Tad.” In fact, Tad Lincoln outlived Abraham Lincoln by six years; the son Abraham Lincoln lost in 1862 was Willie. (This appeared to be an inadvertent mistake by Trump, but his claim was still inaccurate, and Trump has repeatedly bashed Biden over such mix-ups.)
Bad Bunny shows support for Harris after comedian makes offensive comment about Puerto Rico at Trump rally
Priscilla Alvarez, CNN – October 27, 2024
Puerto Rican singer Bad Bunny attends the Academy Awards in Los Angeles on March 10, 2024.
Yahoo is using AI to generate takeaways from this article. This means the info may not always match what’s in the article. Reporting mistakes helps us improve the experience.Generate Key Takeaways
Puerto Rican superstar Bad Bunny signaled support for Vice President Kamala Harris on Sunday, sharing a clip on social media of the vice president’s plans for the island moments after a speaker made an offensive joke at Donald Trump’s New York rally, sparking outrage.
The move comes as both the Harris and Trump campaigns have been vying for the Puerto Rican vote, especially in battleground Pennsylvania, where about 500,000 Puerto Ricans live. Benito Antonio Martínez Ocasio, known as Bad Bunny, shared the campaign clip to his more than 45 million followers on Instagram.
“I will never forget what Donald Trump did and what he did not do when Puerto Rico needed a caring and a competent leader,” Harris says in the video, which Bad Bunny reshared multiple times with a focus on Trump. “He abandoned the island, tried to block aid after back-to-back devastating hurricanes and offered nothing more than paper towels and insults.”
Thousands of people in Puerto Rico died as a result of Hurricane Maria in 2017 — shortly after Hurricane Irma caused mass power outages throughout the island. While surveying damage in Puerto Rica after Hurricane Maria, then-President Trump drew backlash after tossing supplies, including paper towels, to residents of the island.
Bad Bunny’s post Sunday was the first indication of support from the artist as the Harris campaign tries to shore up celebrity endorsements. And it came as outrage built over remarks made by Tony Hinchcliffe, a comedian and podcast host, assailing Puerto Rico at Trump’s rally in Madison Square Garden.
“There’s a lot going on, like, I don’t know if you know this but there’s literally a floating island of garbage in the middle of the ocean right now. Yeah. I think it’s called Puerto Rico,” he said. Puerto Rico is a US territory.
Harris campaign officials had been in conversation with Bad Bunny’s team, according to a source familiar, hoping to have him lend his support to the vice president’s plan for Puerto Rico.
“This has been a thoughtful and deliberate approach focused on the issues,” the source said.
A representative for Bad Bunny told CNN that his repost of Harris’ video on Instagram was “not an endorsement,” but that he is “supporting” Harris. “Benito’s political focus has always been on Puerto Rico,” his representative told CNN. His representative did not indicate whether a formal endorsement would be coming from the musician ahead of the election.
An endorsement from Bad Bunny has been at the top of the Harris campaign’s wish list of celebrity endorsements for months, according to a source familiar with the campaign’s Hollywood outreach. The campaign understands the large reach Bad Bunny has within the Latino community and believes his support could help sway young male Latino voters – a demographic that has gravitated toward Trump.
The campaign also celebrated Bad Bunny, along with Jennifer Lopez and Ricky Martin, sharing the vice president’s message on social media.
“Despacito” singer Luis Fonsi also joined the chorus of Puerto Rican stars sharing their support for Harris, posting a video clip of Hinchcliffe’s joke at the Trump rally with the caption, “Are you serious?” to his 16 million Instagram followers.
“It’s ok to have different views, and I respect those who think different than me…but going down this racist path ain’t it,” Fonsi posted on his Instagram story, along with emojis that signaled he is voting for Harris.
Earlier Sunday, Harris visited Freddy & Tony’s Restaurant, a Puerto Rican restaurant in north Philadelphia, where she spoke to Puerto Rico’s challenges and discussed her policies focused on the island.
“I’m going to create an opportunity economy task force for Puerto Rico,” she said, adding that she wants to focus on two things: building economic opportunity for the island and improving the electrical grid.
This story has been updated with additional information.
CNN’s Elizabeth Wagmeister and Max Rego contributed to this report.
