hotair--2020-10-06--Red alert: Trump says he's giving up on stimulus negotiations with Pelosi as Dow tumbles

I ’ m being as sympathetic to him as I can be in trying to analyze this .
Certainly , in the abstract , it ’ s good that a Republican president is trying to put a brake on blockbuster spending .
Especially after an historic spending binge this summer that ’ s sent the national debt north of — deep breath — $ 27 trillion .
But substantively it ’ s catastrophic considering that the last jobs report was underwhelming and laid-off American workers are desperate for a financial lifeline between now and January .
And politically it ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ himself up to be blamed for the resulting economic misery four weeks out from a national election in which he and his party currently look to fare very , very badly .
The double-edged sword of being an incumbent is that you get credit for a booming economy even if you don ’ t really deserve it and you get blame for a crumbling economy even if you don ’ t really deserve it .
Which is why , even if you think this is just a negotiating tactic — got ta walk @ @ @ @ @ @ @ !
— it doesn ’ t add up .
Pelosi ’ s under no pressure .
She ’ s perfectly fine with Trump balking at a deal .
No doubt she believes , probably correctly , that this package is his last chance to rebound with voters before Election Day .
A generous deal replete with new stimulus checks might earn him enough goodwill that it puts him back into contention in swing states .
If he wants to decline that lifeline and run on his exciting new “ you shouldn ’ t @ @ @ @ @ @ @ me ” message , she ’ s willing to accommodate him .
So what exactly is his “ leverage ” here , particularly when he ’ s willing to broadcast the fact that he , not she , is the one who gave up on a deal for Americans ?
I don ’ t understand his post-election plan here .
The one all but certain outcome on November 3 is that the House will stay blue and Pelosi will still be in charge next year .
Why does he think the next round @ @ @ @ @ @ @ current round , especially if House Dems increase their majority ?
As others are noting in reacting to the news , what ’ s inexplicable about this is that Trump won the primaries four years ago partly because he wasn ’ t the sort of Republican who ’ d try to starve federal programs in the name of fiscal responsibility .
President Ted Cruz might slash your Medicare but President Donald Trump didn ’ t even pretend to care about shrinking government .
The fact that he ’ s trying to lowball Pelosi @ @ @ @ @ @ @ need of it 28 days from an election , in the middle of a pandemic , is an invasion-of-the-body-snatchers moment — as if Cruz and the Republican establishment had secretly replaced him with an impostor more conducive to Paul Ryan Republicanism .
“ I can not believe that he is letting the Kudlow/McConnell establishment that he dispatched in the primary talk him into this , ” tweeted an amazed Tim Miller .
“ A massive unforced error .
2016 Trump would ’ ve said make it 3 trillion and put my face on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that those 2016 instincts do still emerge occasionally .
The $ 200 gift cards for prescription drugs that the White House is looking to send to seniors is a naked attempt to bribe them with taxpayer money before Election Day .
The negotiations with Pelosi are an opportunity to increase that bribe by several orders of magnitude and expand it to a much larger segment of the electorate .
And yet , instead of grabbing Senate Republicans by the throat and telling them to get it done , he ’ s walking away @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the situation in a tweet last week .
The one guy in the administration who still seems to be on a populist track is the uber-rich Treasury Secretary , not the president who appointed him : “ So Trump resurrects ‘ Just the Flu ’ and kills an economic stimulus package on the very same day , ” tweeted Saagar Enjeti .
“ Literally goes all in on his two most unpopular positions with less than a month go to before the election.
” Exactly .
What ’ s the strategy here ?
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ dominance ” theme ?
He whipped COVID , then he put Pelosi in her place .
Trump 2020 : Who cares if you can ’ t make rent next month ?
I wonder , frankly , if there ’ s any real strategy at all .
The irresistible temptation to psychoanalyze Trump leaves us to wonder if maybe there ’ s a “ grudge match ” element to this for him .
He resents Pelosi for impeachment , he resents her for the many cutting remarks she ’ s made about him publicly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to come up to her number even though it ’ s the best option left on the political menu for him to improve his election chances .
“ Mindbogglingly insane , ” says conservative Henry Olsen of Trump ’ s decision to walk away .
Olsen isn ’ t a Never Trumper , he just recognizes that this is grossly damaging both to the public interest and to Trump ’ s political interest .
It makes no sense .
I ’ ll leave you with this :

I’m being as sympathetic to him as I can be in trying to analyze this. Certainly, in the abstract, it’s good that a Republican president is trying to put a brake on blockbuster spending. Especially after an historic spending binge this summer that’s sent the national debt north of — deep breath — $27 trillion.
But substantively it’s catastrophic considering that the last jobs report was underwhelming and laid-off American workers are desperate for a financial lifeline between now and January.
And politically it’s unfathomable that the president is setting himself up to be blamed for the resulting economic misery four weeks out from a national election in which he and his party currently look to fare very, very badly. The double-edged sword of being an incumbent is that you get credit for a booming economy even if you don’t really deserve it and you get blame for a crumbling economy even if you don’t really deserve it.
Which is why, even if you think this is just a negotiating tactic — gotta walk away from the table sometimes for leverage! — it doesn’t add up. Pelosi’s under no pressure. She’s perfectly fine with Trump balking at a deal. No doubt she believes, probably correctly, that this package is his last chance to rebound with voters before Election Day. A generous deal replete with new stimulus checks might earn him enough goodwill that it puts him back into contention in swing states. If he wants to decline that lifeline and run on his exciting new “you shouldn’t worry about the disease that might kill me” message, she’s willing to accommodate him.
So what exactly is his “leverage” here, particularly when he’s willing to broadcast the fact that he, not she, is the one who gave up on a deal for Americans?
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1313551795646541824
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1313551798142152704
I don’t understand his post-election plan here. The one all but certain outcome on November 3 is that the House will stay blue and Pelosi will still be in charge next year. Why does he think the next round of negotiations will be easier than the current round, especially if House Dems increase their majority?
The reaction was predictable:
BREAKING: Dow falls 400+ points to fresh session low after Trump terminates stimulus talks https://t.co/Y95ZRZKSLQ pic.twitter.com/MnNCA95R3T — CNBC Now (@CNBCnow) October 6, 2020
As others are noting in reacting to the news, what’s inexplicable about this is that Trump won the primaries four years ago partly because he wasn’t the sort of Republican who’d try to starve federal programs in the name of fiscal responsibility. President Ted Cruz might slash your Medicare but President Donald Trump didn’t even pretend to care about shrinking government. The fact that he’s trying to lowball Pelosi on financial aid to voters in dire need of it 28 days from an election, in the middle of a pandemic, is an invasion-of-the-body-snatchers moment — as if Cruz and the Republican establishment had secretly replaced him with an impostor more conducive to Paul Ryan Republicanism. “I cannot believe that he is letting the Kudlow/McConnell establishment that he dispatched in the primary talk him into this,” tweeted an amazed Tim Miller. “A massive unforced error. 2016 Trump would’ve said make it 3 trillion and put my face on the checks.”
The weird thing is that those 2016 instincts do still emerge occasionally. The $200 gift cards for prescription drugs that the White House is looking to send to seniors is a naked attempt to bribe them with taxpayer money before Election Day. The negotiations with Pelosi are an opportunity to increase that bribe by several orders of magnitude and expand it to a much larger segment of the electorate. And yet, instead of grabbing Senate Republicans by the throat and telling them to get it done, he’s walking away.
Ross Douthat captured the irony of the situation in a tweet last week. The one guy in the administration who still seems to be on a populist track is the uber-rich Treasury Secretary, not the president who appointed him:
The only administration figure who seems to understand what a populist president needs to do in a pandemic is this guy, and Trump is letting him get hamstrung by Congressional Rs who are planning Tea Party II for the Biden era: pic.twitter.com/XE4Pa1TOBG — Ross Douthat (@DouthatNYT) October 1, 2020
“So Trump resurrects ‘Just the Flu’ and kills an economic stimulus package on the very same day,” tweeted Saagar Enjeti. “Literally goes all in on his two most unpopular positions with less than a month go to before the election.” Exactly. What’s the strategy here? Is he going for some big-picture “dominance” theme? He whipped COVID, then he put Pelosi in her place. Trump 2020: Who cares if you can’t make rent next month?
🚨🚨🚨Key consequence of stimulus talks falling through: — Close to 30 million jobless ppl to permanently see an income cut of ~50% — 40% of restaurants face closure in ~6 months, per surveys — Tens of thousands of airline workers will be laid off — No stimulus checks 2.0 — Jeff Stein (@JStein_WaPo) October 6, 2020
I wonder, frankly, if there’s any real strategy at all. The irresistible temptation to psychoanalyze Trump leaves us to wonder if maybe there’s a “grudge match” element to this for him. He resents Pelosi for impeachment, he resents her for the many cutting remarks she’s made about him publicly, and so on principle he refuses to come up to her number even though it’s the best option left on the political menu for him to improve his election chances.
“Mindbogglingly insane,” says conservative Henry Olsen of Trump’s decision to walk away. Olsen isn’t a Never Trumper, he just recognizes that this is grossly damaging both to the public interest and to Trump’s political interest. It makes no sense.
I’ll leave you with this:


hotair--2020-10-06--Today's hot topics on #TEMS: Surprise-time starts, Biden's restart, Trump's med chart, <i>Restless H

Today's hot topics on #TEMS: Surprise-time starts, Biden's restart, Trump's med chart, <i>Restless Heart</i>, Saudis depart, and more!

Today on The Ed Morrissey Show ( 4 pm ET ) , we have another great lineup for the news of the day !
The show will be streamed on Hot Air ’ s Facebook page and embedded here and on the show page for those who are not on Facebook .
Join us as we welcome : • Andrew Malcolm joins us for Tuesdays with Andrew !
The Prince of Twitter and I will discuss all of the hot political stories of the day .
The period of October surprises has already begun — and already has gone off @ @ @ @ @ @ @ What surprises are left to be sprung ?
How will Trump ’ s COVID-19 diagnosis change the election cycle ?
And what can we expect from tomorrow night ’ s debate ?
• With a Supreme Court opening in the offing , most eyes are on Roe in the balance .
What about same-sex marriage ?
Kim Zember , author of Restless Heart : My Struggle with Life & Sexuality , joins us to discuss her struggles with same-sex attraction and Catholic faith .
How did that allow her to serve God by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ what lessons should we take in public policy as a result ?
• Have the Saudis had enough of the Palestinians ?
Jeff Dunetz joins us to discuss Prince Bandar ’ s blast at the PA , plus Joe Biden ’ s performance at last night ’ s NBC softball forum , and other Biden bon mots .
The Ed Morrissey Show and its dynamic chatroom can be seen on the permanent TEMS page .
Be sure to join us , and don ’ t forget to keep up with the debate on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ can Republicans and conservatives keep the momentum going ?
Find out in GOING RED , published in April from Crown Forum !

Today on The Ed Morrissey Show (4 pm ET), we have another great lineup for the news of the day! The show will be streamed on Hot Air’s Facebook page and embedded here and on the show page for those who are not on Facebook.
Join us as we welcome:
The Ed Morrissey Show and its dynamic chatroom can be seen on the permanent TEMS page. Be sure to join us, and don’t forget to keep up with the debate on my Facebook page, too!
How can Republicans and conservatives keep the momentum going? Find out in GOING RED, published in April from Crown Forum!


hotair--2020-10-06--Saudis to Palestinians: Stop being losers and cut a deal -- or else; <span class='red'>Update:</span

Saudis to Palestinians: Stop being losers and cut a deal -- or else; Update: "You have never heard a Saudi official discuss it"

In case anyone doubted which way the wind blows in the Middle East , the Saudi ruling class has erected a weathervane even the Palestinians can ’ t miss .
After Palestinian leadership blasted Arab nations for normalizing relations with Israel , a leading figure in the Riyadh regime blasted them right back in an interview with Saudi state television outlet al-Arabiya .
The Palestinian criticisms were “ reprehensible discourse , ” said Prince Bandar bin Sultan bin Abdulaziz , part of a 75-year-long track record of Palestinian “ failures ” : In an interview with Saudi-owned Al Arabiya television @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Palestinian authorities ’ criticism a “ transgression ” and “ reprehensible discourse.
” “ The Palestinian cause is a just cause but its advocates are failures , and the Israeli cause is unjust but its advocates have proven to be successful .
That sums up the events of the last 70 or 75 years , ” he said in the first of a three-part airing of the interview .
“ There is something that successive Palestinian leadership historically share in common : they always bet on the losing side , and that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ now , the Saudis have played their cards close to the vest .
The moves toward normalization from UAE and Bahrain wouldn ’ t have happened without Saudi support , or at least acquiescence , and everyone knows it .
The Saudis want to remain quiet about this new effort to engage Israel both for domestic reasons ( so as not to stoke a even-more-radical-Islamist backlash against the Wahhabi regime ) and to give Palestinians a last bit of leverage to cut a deal .
Unfortunately , the current Palestinian leadership responded by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and Turkey , which is what Bandar meant by the “ losing side.
” That ’ s not all he meant , though ; in the video below , Bandar slams Palestinians for partnering with Hitler and Saddam Hussein , whose missile attacks on Riyadh are clearly not forgotten , nor are the Palestinian celebrations of those attacks .
With that track record , the Palestinians should rethink their entire worldview and their approach , Bandar advised , adding , “ This low level of discourse is not what we expect from officials @ @ @ @ @ @ @ their cause.
” Translation : Grow up and smell the coffee , Palestinians .
That might also be a warning to Turkey as well .
Recep Tayyip Erdogan declared Jerusalem to be “ our city , ” a hint of Ottomanesque ambitions that certainly seems to have gotten the attention of Riyadh : “ In this city that we had to leave in tears during the First World War , it is still possible to come across traces of the Ottoman resistance .
So Jerusalem is our city , a city from us @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a major policy speech in Ankara .
“ Our first qibla [ direction of prayer in Islam ] al-Aqsa and the Dome of the Rock in Jerusalem are the symbolic mosques of our faith .
In addition , this city is home to the holy places of Christianity and Judaism.
” … “ Another crisis that our country and our nation carefully follow is the oppression of Israel against the Palestinians and the indifferent practices that disregard the privacy of Jerusalem , ” he said toward the end of his address .
“ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ordinary geopolitical problem for us .
First of all , the current physical appearance of the Old City , which is the heart of Jerusalem , was built by Suleiman the Magnificent , with its walls , bazaar , and many buildings .
Our ancestors showed their respect for centuries by keeping this city in high esteem.
” The Palestinian people have been living in Jerusalem “ for thousands of years , ” but they were occupied and had their rights violated , the Turkish leader went on .
Worth pointing out : @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as well , especially regarding the temple mount and other structures , which existed for millennia before the Ottomans showed up .
At any rate , Erdogan ’ s paean to Ottoman claims might have pushed the Saudis to start accelerating their timeline on normalization — and put more pressure on Mahmoud Abbas to start negotiating .
Nominally , the Saudis still back the Arab Peace Plan , which is much more favorable to the Palestinians than the Trump administration ’ s new peace plan .
In reality , the Saudis and other @ @ @ @ @ @ @ about the contours of a two-state plan .
They just want it resolved so that they can focus on the real threats to their power in Tehran , Damascus , and now Ankara .
If the Palestinians ever want to get their own state and end this conflict , they ’ d better settle for a universally recognized Israel being part of their long-term reality .
The sooner they figure that out , the better off they ’ ll be .
The clock is ticking , clearly .
Here ’ s the first @ @ @ @ @ @ @ which Bandar vents at length about the failures and bad choices by Palestinians .
This is not exactly subtle , as warning shots across bows go .
Update : I added the second part of the interview , as Bandar ’ s history discourse should not be missed .
In it , he describes how Yasser Arafat repeatedly betrayed the Saudis , as well as the Jordanians and Lebanese , and sabotaged peace again and again .
This is a remarkable narrative , especially from the Saudis .
“ You have never heard @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Bandar says .
The fact they ’ re discussing it now means they have clearly had it with the Palestinians , or at least their leadership .

In case anyone doubted which way the wind blows in the Middle East, the Saudi ruling class has erected a weathervane even the Palestinians can’t miss. After Palestinian leadership blasted Arab nations for normalizing relations with Israel, a leading figure in the Riyadh regime blasted them right back in an interview with Saudi state television outlet al-Arabiya. The Palestinian criticisms were “reprehensible discourse,” said Prince Bandar bin Sultan bin Abdulaziz, part of a 75-year-long track record of Palestinian “failures”:
In an interview with Saudi-owned Al Arabiya television aired on Monday, the prince labeled the Palestinian authorities’ criticism a “transgression” and “reprehensible discourse.” “The Palestinian cause is a just cause but its advocates are failures, and the Israeli cause is unjust but its advocates have proven to be successful. That sums up the events of the last 70 or 75 years,” he said in the first of a three-part airing of the interview. “There is something that successive Palestinian leadership historically share in common: they always bet on the losing side, and that comes at a price.”
Up to now, the Saudis have played their cards close to the vest. The moves toward normalization from UAE and Bahrain wouldn’t have happened without Saudi support, or at least acquiescence, and everyone knows it. The Saudis want to remain quiet about this new effort to engage Israel both for domestic reasons (so as not to stoke a even-more-radical-Islamist backlash against the Wahhabi regime) and to give Palestinians a last bit of leverage to cut a deal.
Unfortunately, the current Palestinian leadership responded by insults and appealing for succor from Iran and Turkey, which is what Bandar meant by the “losing side.” That’s not all he meant, though; in the video below, Bandar slams Palestinians for partnering with Hitler and Saddam Hussein, whose missile attacks on Riyadh are clearly not forgotten, nor are the Palestinian celebrations of those attacks. With that track record, the Palestinians should rethink their entire worldview and their approach, Bandar advised, adding, “This low level of discourse is not what we expect from officials who seek to gain global support for their cause.” Translation: Grow up and smell the coffee, Palestinians.
That might also be a warning to Turkey as well. Recep Tayyip Erdogan declared Jerusalem to be “our city,” a hint of Ottomanesque ambitions that certainly seems to have gotten the attention of Riyadh:
“In this city that we had to leave in tears during the First World War, it is still possible to come across traces of the Ottoman resistance. So Jerusalem is our city, a city from us,” he told Turkish lawmakers during a major policy speech in Ankara. “Our first qibla [direction of prayer in Islam] al-Aqsa and the Dome of the Rock in Jerusalem are the symbolic mosques of our faith. In addition, this city is home to the holy places of Christianity and Judaism.” … “Another crisis that our country and our nation carefully follow is the oppression of Israel against the Palestinians and the indifferent practices that disregard the privacy of Jerusalem,” he said toward the end of his address. “The issue of Jerusalem is not an ordinary geopolitical problem for us. First of all, the current physical appearance of the Old City, which is the heart of Jerusalem, was built by Suleiman the Magnificent, with its walls, bazaar, and many buildings. Our ancestors showed their respect for centuries by keeping this city in high esteem.” The Palestinian people have been living in Jerusalem “for thousands of years,” but they were occupied and had their rights violated, the Turkish leader went on.
Worth pointing out: That same argument makes the Turks occupiers as well, especially regarding the temple mount and other structures, which existed for millennia before the Ottomans showed up. At any rate, Erdogan’s paean to Ottoman claims might have pushed the Saudis to start accelerating their timeline on normalization — and put more pressure on Mahmoud Abbas to start negotiating.
Nominally, the Saudis still back the Arab Peace Plan, which is much more favorable to the Palestinians than the Trump administration’s new peace plan. In reality, the Saudis and other Arab nations couldn’t care less about the contours of a two-state plan. They just want it resolved so that they can focus on the real threats to their power in Tehran, Damascus, and now Ankara. If the Palestinians ever want to get their own state and end this conflict, they’d better settle for a universally recognized Israel being part of their long-term reality. The sooner they figure that out, the better off they’ll be. The clock is ticking, clearly.
Here’s the first part of the al-Arabiya interview, in which Bandar vents at length about the failures and bad choices by Palestinians. This is not exactly subtle, as warning shots across bows go.
Update:I added the second part of the interview, as Bandar’s history discourse should not be missed. In it, he describes how Yasser Arafat repeatedly betrayed the Saudis, as well as the Jordanians and Lebanese, and sabotaged peace again and again. This is a remarkable narrative, especially from the Saudis. “You have never heard a Saudi official discuss it,” Bandar says. The fact they’re discussing it now means they have clearly had it with the Palestinians, or at least their leadership.
Update: One more thought about this lengthy interview on Saudi state television — who’s the audience? It’s not the Israelis, and it’s not even really the Palestinians. The royal family is informing the Saudi populace about the long history of Palestinian deception and betrayals to prepare their subjects for something. Will the Saudis normalize relations with Israel in the next couple of weeks? If I were in Palestinian leadership, I’d be afraid … very afraid at what’s coming next.


hotair--2020-10-06--China has become very unpopular around the world thanks to the coronavirus

The Pew Research Center published the results of a survey of advanced countries which found views of China have become far less favorable thanks to the coronavirus pandemic .
In fact , for many of the countries surveyed including the Unites States , the unfavorable view of China is the highest ever recorded : Views of China have grown more negative in recent years across many advanced economies , and unfavorable opinion has soared over the past year , a new 14-country Pew Research Center survey shows .
Today , a majority in each of the surveyed countries has an @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Australia , the United Kingdom , Germany , the Netherlands , Sweden , the United States , South Korea , Spain and Canada , negative views have reached their highest points since the Center began polling on this topic more than a decade ago .
Negative views of China increased most in Australia , where 81 % now say see the country unfavorably , up 24 percentage points since last year .
In the UK , around three-quarters now see the country in a negative light – up 19 points .
And , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ China have increased nearly 20 percentage points since President Donald Trump took office , rising 13 points since just last year .
This chart really sums up the trend , though a couple of nations included in the most recent survey aren ’ t included : You may recall that after the initial outbreak in China there was a concerted effort by the Chinese to portray themselves as a hero in the fight against the coronavirus .
That apparently hasn ’ t worked at all , not even in nations like Italy where @ @ @ @ @ @ @ same respondents who had negative views of China also felt similarly of President Xi Jinping : Pew connects all of this negativity to the coronavirus which is obviously the main driver but I wonder to what degree China ’ s takeover of Hong Kong and additional information about its re-education camps in Xinjiang also play a role here .
There are lots of good reasons not to like China right now .
The bad news from a U.S. perspective is that while about 60 % of respondents to the poll felt China did @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the numbers were even worse for the United States , with 84 % saying the U.S. did a bad job .
And similarly , views of President Trump were even less favorable than views of President Xi in many countries .
In most of the countries surveyed both China and the U.S. had favorability below 50 % .
Still , the U.S. is still viewed more favorably than China in most places : Finally , it ’ s worth noting that the nations surveyed don ’ t necessarily view the U.S. more favorably @ @ @ @ @ @ @ economy .
In fact , Pew found that European nations said China ’ s economy was stronger than the U.S. economy : In every European country surveyed , a plurality or majority say China is the top economy in the world .
Only in South Korea , Japan and the U.S. itself do more people name the U.S. Across Europe , these ratings are largely unchanged since 2019 despite the major changes in the global economy brought on by the coronavirus pandemic .
Western Europeans have generally considered China ’ s economy to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , even while people in Central and Eastern Europe , Latin America , Africa and the Middle East – none of which were surveyed this year – have often named the U.S .
So Europeans generally view the U.S. slightly more favorably than China despite believing our Coronavirus response was worse and despite many of them believing China has the stronger economy .
But in some cases ( Germany , Belgium ) the difference is pretty slight .

The Pew Research Center published the results of a survey of advanced countries which found views of China have become far less favorable thanks to the coronavirus pandemic. In fact, for many of the countries surveyed including the Unites States, the unfavorable view of China is the highest ever recorded:
Views of China have grown more negative in recent years across many advanced economies, and unfavorable opinion has soared over the past year, a new 14-country Pew Research Center survey shows. Today, a majority in each of the surveyed countries has an unfavorable opinion of China. And in Australia, the United Kingdom, Germany, the Netherlands, Sweden, the United States, South Korea, Spain and Canada, negative views have reached their highest points since the Center began polling on this topic more than a decade ago. Negative views of China increased most in Australia, where 81% now say see the country unfavorably, up 24 percentage points since last year. In the UK, around three-quarters now see the country in a negative light – up 19 points. And, in the U.S., negative views of China have increased nearly 20 percentage points since President Donald Trump took office, rising 13 points since just last year.
This chart really sums up the trend, though a couple of nations included in the most recent survey aren’t included:
You may recall that after the initial outbreak in China there was a concerted effort by the Chinese to portray themselves as a hero in the fight against the coronavirus. That apparently hasn’t worked at all, not even in nations like Italy where China sent help and supplies.
The same respondents who had negative views of China also felt similarly of President Xi Jinping:
Across the 14 countries surveyed, a median of 78% say they have no confidence in Chinese President Xi to do the right thing when it comes to international affairs, with at least seven-in-ten in every country saying they lack confidence in Xi. Only a median of 19% express any trust.
Pew connects all of this negativity to the coronavirus which is obviously the main driver but I wonder to what degree China’s takeover of Hong Kong and additional information about its re-education camps in Xinjiang also play a role here. There are lots of good reasons not to like China right now.
The bad news from a U.S. perspective is that while about 60% of respondents to the poll felt China did a bad job handling the coronavirus, the numbers were even worse for the United States, with 84% saying the U.S. did a bad job. And similarly, views of President Trump were even less favorable than views of President Xi in many countries. In most of the countries surveyed both China and the U.S. had favorability below 50%. Still, the U.S. is still viewed more favorably than China in most places:
Finally, it’s worth noting that the nations surveyed don’t necessarily view the U.S. more favorably than China simply because of our strong economy. In fact, Pew found that European nations said China’s economy was stronger than the U.S. economy:
In every European country surveyed, a plurality or majority say China is the top economy in the world. Only in South Korea, Japan and the U.S. itself do more people name the U.S. Across Europe, these ratings are largely unchanged since 2019 despite the major changes in the global economy brought on by the coronavirus pandemic. Western Europeans have generally considered China’s economy to be the strongest worldwide in recent years, even while people in Central and Eastern Europe, Latin America, Africa and the Middle East – none of which were surveyed this year – have often named the U.S.
So Europeans generally view the U.S. slightly more favorably than China despite believing our Coronavirus response was worse and despite many of them believing China has the stronger economy. But in some cases (Germany, Belgium) the difference is pretty slight.


hotair--2020-10-06--Biden on abortion: If SCOTUS overturns <i>Roe</i>, I'll make it "the law of the land"

Originalism and judicial restraint for the win ?
That ’ s one takeaway from this answer about abortion and the Supreme Court from last night ’ s NBC News/MSNBC town hall with Joe Biden .
Biden liked this exchange so much that he ( or more likely his campaign ) clipped it out and amplified it by proclaiming , “ Roe v Wade must remain the law of the land ” : BROWN : Hello , Mr. Biden .
My youngest sister is in high school right now .
And I knew whenever I was graduating high school and entering @ @ @ @ @ @ @ degree and start a career before starting a family .
Having access to birth control and safe reproductive health care was imperative in making that true for me .
So considering the new Supreme Court nomination of Amy Coney Barrett , what are your particular plans to protect women ’ s reproductive rights in the U.S. ?
BIDEN : Number one , we don ’ t know exactly what she will do , although expectation is that she may very well move to overrule — overview — overrule Roe .
And — but @ @ @ @ @ @ @ response to that would be to pass legislation making Roe the law of the land .
That ’ s what I would do .
Revealing ?
Certainly , but also a better answer in some ways than what the rest of Joe Biden ’ s party has demanded over the past couple of weeks .
It might even appeal to those who honestly object to Roe v Wade more on institutional grounds rather than to abortion itself , at least primarily .
The institutional argument is that the Supreme Court overextended its authority @ @ @ @ @ @ @ judicial activism .
This issue should have been left to the legislative branches of the states , as people have argued for nearly fifty years after Roe .
The opposition to that point of view is that legislative action is not sufficient to protect women ’ s agency over their own bodies .
Now , however , Biden appears to suggest that legislation would be sufficient , although he ’ s proposing it at the federal level .
If Roe ( and Casey , which is now controlling on abortion issues ) get @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to legalize abortion in all fifty states ?
Arguably yes , by the same authority Congress claimed in passing ObamaCare .
However , it would require something far short of abortion on demand until the moment of birth , which has become the position of the Democratic Party , in order to pass Congress , especially the Senate .
Even without a filibuster , any legislation legalizing abortion over the objection of states would necessarily have to follow public opinion on restrictions — which would move the window back to Roe and first-trimester @ @ @ @ @ @ @ option would also be institutionally more credible than Roe , which would be to amend the Constitution to create an explicit right to abortion .
That would be even tougher , though , and the filibuster won ’ t matter — it would take two-thirds of both chambers to pass , and thirty-eight states would have to ratify it .
That would almost certainly require more stringent restrictions than even a regular bill in Congress would include to have any hope of passage and eventual ratification .
Oddly , Biden never mentions the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Bader Ginsburg passed away — court packing .
Lester Holt never asked about it , either .
However , this answer is not going to make Catholics any happier with Biden .
The existence of Roe has created a curious free zone for Catholic Democrats by largely removing abortion policy from elections .
That allows politicians like Biden to claim to personally oppose abortion so as to keep their Catholic identity while pledging not to interfere with Roe ( and Casey ) .
If Roe gets overturned , though , suddenly Biden ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ maintain legalized abortion — and that overt act will put him at odds with the Catholic Church and many Catholic voters .
And both sides have recognized the importance of winning Catholics in this election .
In that sense , this is a risky answer by Biden .
He might have been better off sticking with the court-packing strategy .

Originalism and judicial restraint for the win? That’s one takeaway from this answer about abortion and the Supreme Court from last night’s NBC News/MSNBC town hall with Joe Biden. Biden liked this exchange so much that he (or more likely his campaign) clipped it out and amplified it by proclaiming, “Roe v Wade must remain the law of the land”:
Roe v. Wade must remain the law of the land. pic.twitter.com/1Gq6Ncc2IK — Joe Biden (@JoeBiden) October 6, 2020
BROWN: Hello, Mr. Biden. My youngest sister is in high school right now. And I knew whenever I was graduating high school and entering college that I wanted to obtain my degree and start a career before starting a family. Having access to birth control and safe reproductive health care was imperative in making that true for me. So considering the new Supreme Court nomination of Amy Coney Barrett, what are your particular plans to protect women’s reproductive rights in the U.S.? BIDEN: Number one, we don’t know exactly what she will do, although expectation is that she may very well move to overrule — overview — overrule Roe. And — but the only thing, the only responsible response to that would be to pass legislation making Roe the law of the land. That’s what I would do.
Revealing? Certainly, but also a better answer in some ways than what the rest of Joe Biden’s party has demanded over the past couple of weeks. It might even appeal to those who honestly object to Roe v Wade more on institutional grounds rather than to abortion itself, at least primarily. The institutional argument is that the Supreme Court overextended its authority in Roe in an unconscionable fit of judicial activism. This issue should have been left to the legislative branches of the states, as people have argued for nearly fifty years after Roe. The opposition to that point of view is that legislative action is not sufficient to protect women’s agency over their own bodies.
Now, however, Biden appears to suggest that legislation would be sufficient, although he’s proposing it at the federal level. If Roe (and Casey, which is now controlling on abortion issues) get struck down, would Congress have jurisdiction to legalize abortion in all fifty states? Arguably yes, by the same authority Congress claimed in passing ObamaCare. However, it would require something far short of abortion on demand until the moment of birth, which has become the position of the Democratic Party, in order to pass Congress, especially the Senate. Even without a filibuster, any legislation legalizing abortion over the objection of states would necessarily have to follow public opinion on restrictions — which would move the window back to Roe and first-trimester limits in most cases.
The other option would also be institutionally more credible than Roe, which would be to amend the Constitution to create an explicit right to abortion. That would be even tougher, though, and the filibuster won’t matter — it would take two-thirds of both chambers to pass, and thirty-eight states would have to ratify it. That would almost certainly require more stringent restrictions than even a regular bill in Congress would include to have any hope of passage and eventual ratification.
Oddly, Biden never mentions the strategy his party has pushed since Ruth Bader Ginsburg passed away — court packing. Lester Holt never asked about it, either.
However, this answer is not going to make Catholics any happier with Biden. The existence of Roe has created a curious free zone for Catholic Democrats by largely removing abortion policy from elections. That allows politicians like Biden to claim to personally oppose abortion so as to keep their Catholic identity while pledging not to interfere with Roe (and Casey). If Roe gets overturned, though, suddenly Biden’s on the hook for acting to maintain legalized abortion — and that overt act will put him at odds with the Catholic Church and many Catholic voters. And both sides have recognized the importance of winning Catholics in this election.
In that sense, this is a risky answer by Biden. He might have been better off sticking with the court-packing strategy.


hotair--2020-10-06--Michelle Obama: You know, the protests have been mostly peaceful

This morning Michelle Obama released a 24-minute video titled “ Michelle Obama ’ s Closing Argument ” which argues that everyone should vote for Joe Biden for President .
The first section is a sustained argument that the coronavirus death toll is all Trump ’ s fault which , as usual , ignores that the worst outbreak in the U.S. happened in New York , a state with a Democratic Governor .
But I ’ m not going to go through her entire argument .
Instead I want to focus on a point she makes midway through about protests .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ to blame peaceful BLM protesters for violence as a way to distract from his own problems .
That ’ s a pretty well-worn talking point by now but Obama gives a bit of a twist , expressing some empathy for struggling white Americans .
“ You ’ ve worked hard all your life and for too long you ’ ve watched the rich get richer , ” she said .
She continued , “ You ’ ve lost your farms , your livelihood to corporate greed .
You ’ ve seen your beloved @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ve watched families destroyed by drug addiction and mental health challenges .
All of this long before this virus hit .
“ And it is frustrating to hear some folks say that you ’ ve been the beneficiary of privilege , that the color of your skin gives you a head start .
That is the reality for far too many hard-working , decent Americans.
” She ’ s pretty clearly talking about blue-collar white voters here .
And she ’ s also talking about the BLM message of white supremacy and white @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ t really seem to benefit a lot of them .
And that ’ s where she turns back to Trump .
“ Right now the president and his allies are trying to tap into that frustration and distract from his breathtaking failures by giving folks someone to blame other than them , ” Obama continued .
“ They ’ re stoking fears about black and brown Americans .
Lying about how minorities will destroy the suburbs .
Whipping up violence and intimidation .
And they ’ re pinning it all on what @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for racial solidarity .
“ It ’ s true .
Research backs it up .
Only a tiny fraction of demonstrations have had any violence at all .
So what the president is doing is once again , patently false .
It ’ s morally wrong and yes it is racist , but that doesn ’ t mean it won ’ t work.
” There are no footnotes in this statement obviously but it seems clear that Obama is referring to this survey of violence called the US Crisis Monitor .
Here ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the argument being made here is that on 7 % of protests have become violent and really that ’ s not so bad .
Except that this metric hides most of what is really going on .
If there are 100 protests and 7 of them turn violent , you could say the rate of violence is 7 % which is apparently what this research did .
But you could also look at those seven violent protests/riots and find that within those there were many individual acts of violence .
For instance , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a dozen or more individuals during a riot and that doesn ’ t count all the violent behavior ( throwing rocks , using lasers , vandalism , etc . )
for which no one is ever caught or punished .
When there is rioting and looting in a city like New York or Chicago , there are likely hundreds , possibly even thousands of individual criminal acts taking place but so long as it all takes place as part of one night ’ s “ protest ” the researchers would count that as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ words , the data Michelle Obama is relying on here is obscuring as much about the violence as it ’ s revealing .
Maybe only 7 percent of the protests became violent but that 7 percent represents thousands of violent and destructive acts doing billions of dollars of damage over a period of just a few months .
The other problem here is that Michelle Obama is completely ignoring the messaging that even many of the peaceful protesters have put forward .
There have been many protests in Portland and Seattle and Kenosha @ @ @ @ @ @ @ violent ( at least not every night ) , and yet the people there were chanting “ All cops are bastards ” or agitating for major cuts to the police budget , or simply hectoring police and calling them murderers .
Of course people are free to peacefully protest and say what they want , but I think Michelle Obama is glossing over the extremism of these protests and the degree to which most Americans , including most black Americans , probably think some of the solutions being offered are not helpful .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ and extremist even if they don ’ t become riots on a given night .
Bottom line , not all protests have been violent and not all of them have used extremist rhetoric but some of the protests have been extremely violent and many of the peaceful protests have been just plain extreme .
Arguing , as Obama is doing here , that white racial resentment is the only reason anyone could possibly object to all of this is absurd .
It ’ s possible to be entirely sympathetic to the idea that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ need for changes in policing and still think the BLM anti-police protests are a bandwagon of terrible ideas which would only make things worse for everyone .

This morning Michelle Obama released a 24-minute video titled “Michelle Obama’s Closing Argument” which argues that everyone should vote for Joe Biden for President. The first section is a sustained argument that the coronavirus death toll is all Trump’s fault which, as usual, ignores that the worst outbreak in the U.S. happened in New York, a state with a Democratic Governor. But I’m not going to go through her entire argument. Instead I want to focus on a point she makes midway through about protests.
Michelle Obama claims that Trump is trying to blame peaceful BLM protesters for violence as a way to distract from his own problems. That’s a pretty well-worn talking point by now but Obama gives a bit of a twist, expressing some empathy for struggling white Americans. “You’ve worked hard all your life and for too long you’ve watched the rich get richer,” she said. She continued, “You’ve lost your farms, your livelihood to corporate greed. You’ve seen your beloved towns shattered by joblessness. You’ve watched families destroyed by drug addiction and mental health challenges. All of this long before this virus hit.
“And it is frustrating to hear some folks say that you’ve been the beneficiary of privilege, that the color of your skin gives you a head start. That is the reality for far too many hard-working, decent Americans.”
She’s pretty clearly talking about blue-collar white voters here. And she’s also talking about the BLM message of white supremacy and white privilege that, she admits, doesn’t really seem to benefit a lot of them. And that’s where she turns back to Trump.
“Right now the president and his allies are trying to tap into that frustration and distract from his breathtaking failures by giving folks someone to blame other than them,” Obama continued. “They’re stoking fears about black and brown Americans. Lying about how minorities will destroy the suburbs. Whipping up violence and intimidation. And they’re pinning it all on what’s been an overwhelmingly peaceful movement for racial solidarity.
“It’s true. Research backs it up. Only a tiny fraction of demonstrations have had any violence at all. So what the president is doing is once again, patently false. It’s morally wrong and yes it is racist, but that doesn’t mean it won’t work.”
There are no footnotes in this statement obviously but it seems clear that Obama is referring to this survey of violence called the US Crisis Monitor. Here’s the gist of it:
The vast majority of demonstration events associated with the BLM movement are non-violent (see map below). In more than 93% of all demonstrations connected to the movement, demonstrators have not engaged in violence or destructive activity. Peaceful protests are reported in over 2,400 distinct locations around the country. Violent demonstrations, meanwhile, have been limited to fewer than 220 locations — under 10% of the areas that experienced peaceful protests. In many urban areas like Portland, Oregon, for example, which has seen sustained unrest since Floyd’s killing, violent demonstrations are largely confined to specific blocks, rather than dispersed throughout the city (CNN, 1 September 2020).
So the argument being made here is that on 7% of protests have become violent and really that’s not so bad. Except that this metric hides most of what is really going on. If there are 100 protests and 7 of them turn violent, you could say the rate of violence is 7% which is apparently what this research did. But you could also look at those seven violent protests/riots and find that within those there were many individual acts of violence. For instance, in some cases police wind up arresting a dozen or more individuals during a riot and that doesn’t count all the violent behavior (throwing rocks, using lasers, vandalism, etc.) for which no one is ever caught or punished.
When there is rioting and looting in a city like New York or Chicago, there are likely hundreds, possibly even thousands of individual criminal acts taking place but so long as it all takes place as part of one night’s “protest” the researchers would count that as just 1 bad night. In other words, the data Michelle Obama is relying on here is obscuring as much about the violence as it’s revealing. Maybe only 7 percent of the protests became violent but that 7 percent represents thousands of violent and destructive acts doing billions of dollars of damage over a period of just a few months.
The other problem here is that Michelle Obama is completely ignoring the messaging that even many of the peaceful protesters have put forward. There have been many protests in Portland and Seattle and Kenosha and elsewhere that didn’t become violent (at least not every night), and yet the people there were chanting “All cops are bastards” or agitating for major cuts to the police budget, or simply hectoring police and calling them murderers. Of course people are free to peacefully protest and say what they want, but I think Michelle Obama is glossing over the extremism of these protests and the degree to which most Americans, including most black Americans, probably think some of the solutions being offered are not helpful. Simply put, protests can be objectionable and extremist even if they don’t become riots on a given night.
Bottom line, not all protests have been violent and not all of them have used extremist rhetoric but some of the protests have been extremely violent and many of the peaceful protests have been just plain extreme. Arguing, as Obama is doing here, that white racial resentment is the only reason anyone could possibly object to all of this is absurd. It’s possible to be entirely sympathetic to the idea that the death of George Floyd shows the need for changes in policing and still think the BLM anti-police protests are a bandwagon of terrible ideas which would only make things worse for everyone.


hotair--2020-10-06--30K more California addresses hit by unemployment fraud attempts

A couple of weeks ago we learned that California was shutting down its unemployment claims system due to large numbers of “ irregularities ” in claims being submitted .
The layman ’ s translation of that explanation is that massive numbers of fraudulent claims were being filed , with many of them receiving at least some benefit checks before being discovered .
And by massive , I mean numbers in the tens if not hundreds of thousands .
That move was spurred by the investigative reporting of several local CBS News outlets , causing quite a bit of embarrassment for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Sacramento .
The team at CBS Los Angeles hasn ’ t dropped the ball on this story yet , though .
They ’ ve continued digging into the records and interviewing people whose homes have been used as targets for collecting illicit unemployment checks .
Not surprisingly , they ’ ve unearthed another 30,000 such cases of fraud .
On top of the raw numbers , they ’ ve also identified a widespread pattern that demonstrates how the fraudsters have been so successful .
More than 30,000 California addresses have been targets of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Employment Development Department data obtained by CBS… The EDD has acknowledged that perpetrators were using stolen identities to apply for benefits in victims ’ names , and CBS Los Angeles found that a number of claims were being filed using addresses of homes recently put on the market .
But , due to EDD ’ s efforts to eliminate potential fraud from the system , [ Mike ] Weaver said he and his wife had now had their legitimate unemployment claims suspended .
Both lost their jobs when the pandemic hit and made @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the financial hardship .
The fraudsters , many of them operating from other countries , particularly in Africa , have clearly been running a mass-production operation .
One address in Winnetka , California had 5,769 individual claims attached to it .
Another house in Valley Village registered more than 2,800 claims .
Two mansions worth tens of millions of dollars each had 479 and 322 claims respectively .
Here ’ s the common thread between these homes that were being inundated with bogus payments .
The majority of them had all been recently @ @ @ @ @ @ @ you think about it , that makes a lot of sense for a savvy grifter .
Homes that are put on the market are frequently vacant quite a bit of the time .
And seeing a stranger showing up and looking around a property with a For Sale sign out front is hardly unusual , so neighbors are probably less likely to immediately call the police .
The prospective “ buyer ” could simply look like they are checking out the front entry , make sure nobody is looking , and then surreptitiously @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s a pile of unemployment checks in there… bingo .
It ’ s payday .
The person quoted in the article excerpt above is named Mike Weaver .
He and his wife are the owners of one of the homes in Canyon Country where names associated with 114 different social security numbers were receiving benefits , each under a different name .
As a result , the Weavers had their legitimate unemployment claims canceled even though they had lost their jobs due to the pandemic .
And the reason their home was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
It was already impossible for them to make ends meet with California ’ s insane cost of living .
Now they are moving out of the state .
No matter how fast California manages to identify and cancel these fraudulent claims , almost all of them receive at least a couple of payments before the crime is detected .
And most of that taxpayer money is gone for good .
We saw the same thing in Washington State , where they ’ ve only managed to claw back roughly half of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ been paid out to fraudulent claims .
A similar situation was encountered in Chicago .
Most of the unemployment systems in the United States were unprepared to handle claims in the volumes we ’ ve seen during the pandemic .
The stress has exposed weaknesses in our automated claims processing systems that must be upgraded and secured because criminals are obviously well aware of them and are exploiting them at a frantic pace .

A couple of weeks ago we learned that California was shutting down its unemployment claims system due to large numbers of “irregularities” in claims being submitted. The layman’s translation of that explanation is that massive numbers of fraudulent claims were being filed, with many of them receiving at least some benefit checks before being discovered. And by massive, I mean numbers in the tens if not hundreds of thousands. That move was spurred by the investigative reporting of several local CBS News outlets, causing quite a bit of embarrassment for the state’s elected officials in Sacramento.
The team at CBS Los Angeles hasn’t dropped the ball on this story yet, though. They’ve continued digging into the records and interviewing people whose homes have been used as targets for collecting illicit unemployment checks. Not surprisingly, they’ve unearthed another 30,000 such cases of fraud. On top of the raw numbers, they’ve also identified a widespread pattern that demonstrates how the fraudsters have been so successful.
More than 30,000 California addresses have been targets of potential unemployment insurance fraud, according to Employment Development Department data obtained by CBS… The EDD has acknowledged that perpetrators were using stolen identities to apply for benefits in victims’ names, and CBS Los Angeles found that a number of claims were being filed using addresses of homes recently put on the market. But, due to EDD’s efforts to eliminate potential fraud from the system, [Mike] Weaver said he and his wife had now had their legitimate unemployment claims suspended. Both lost their jobs when the pandemic hit and made the decision to leave California due to the financial hardship.
The fraudsters, many of them operating from other countries, particularly in Africa, have clearly been running a mass-production operation. One address in Winnetka, California had 5,769 individual claims attached to it. Another house in Valley Village registered more than 2,800 claims. Two mansions worth tens of millions of dollars each had 479 and 322 claims respectively.
Here’s the common thread between these homes that were being inundated with bogus payments. The majority of them had all been recently put up for sale. And if you think about it, that makes a lot of sense for a savvy grifter. Homes that are put on the market are frequently vacant quite a bit of the time. And seeing a stranger showing up and looking around a property with a For Sale sign out front is hardly unusual, so neighbors are probably less likely to immediately call the police. The prospective “buyer” could simply look like they are checking out the front entry, make sure nobody is looking, and then surreptitiously go through the mailbox. If there’s a pile of unemployment checks in there… bingo. It’s payday.
The person quoted in the article excerpt above is named Mike Weaver. He and his wife are the owners of one of the homes in Canyon Country where names associated with 114 different social security numbers were receiving benefits, each under a different name. As a result, the Weavers had their legitimate unemployment claims canceled even though they had lost their jobs due to the pandemic. And the reason their home was on the market is no surprise either. It was already impossible for them to make ends meet with California’s insane cost of living. Now they are moving out of the state.
No matter how fast California manages to identify and cancel these fraudulent claims, almost all of them receive at least a couple of payments before the crime is detected. And most of that taxpayer money is gone for good. We saw the same thing in Washington State, where they’ve only managed to claw back roughly half of the estimated $600 million that’s been paid out to fraudulent claims. A similar situation was encountered in Chicago.
Most of the unemployment systems in the United States were unprepared to handle claims in the volumes we’ve seen during the pandemic. The stress has exposed weaknesses in our automated claims processing systems that must be upgraded and secured because criminals are obviously well aware of them and are exploiting them at a frantic pace.


hotair--2020-10-06--Biden laments: You know, I *used* to get the support of law enforcement ... until just recently

This answers a leftover question from last week ’ s debate .
At that time , Donald Trump challenged Joe Biden to list any law-enforcement groups that supported his presidential bid , a question which Biden dodged .
In last night ’ s NBC News/MSNBC town hall with Lester Holt , Biden conceded that law enforcement has not supported him , but tells a “ former Republican ” wife and mother of police officers that they should .
Why should they ?
The answer comes after the end of this clip , but it ’ s a doozy : MICHELLE @ @ @ @ @ @ @ evening , Mr. Vice President .
As a mother of a police officer , and the wife of a retired police officer , served 28 years , the term defunding the police is of concern and troubling .
I understand that police departments do need reform .
We need to serve and protect safely and properly .
With that being said , I would like to know what you and your administration ’ s policies in reforming the police , how those will come about , how — how they will be best @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the public citizens ’ safety as well .
BIDEN : I grew up in a neighborhood where the guys I grew up with in my working-class neighborhood either became cops , firefighters , or priests .
I wasn ’ t qualified to be any one of them .
I have had overwhelming support from police my whole career , up until this year , as your husband will tell you .
As her husband would also likely tell her , that was a much different Joe Biden than the one on display in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ played footsie with the “ defund the police ” crowd , even though Biden denies that now .
In fact , he ’ s still playing footsie with them , as the rest of this answer demonstrates .
Biden still wants police funding redirected to social workers and , um … psychologists and psychiatrists : That would likely amuse the woman ’ s husband .
Police officers would know that adding another civilian into a 911 response without any indication of their need increases their risk , as it adds another person they @ @ @ @ @ @ @ where counselors might be useful — and not all 911 calls fall into that category — police have to ensure the safety of everyone involved first , and adding more people to confrontations makes that more complicated .
This is also amusing , for other reasons : So what I ’ m going to do , I ’ m going to do what I have done in the past .
I ’ m going to bring all these interests together — peaceful protesters , police chiefs , police officers , police unions as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the White House , and sit down and decide what are the things that need to be done to improve and help police officers ?
… And so , we ’ ve got to make sure there ’ s more communication .
That ’ s what I ’ m going to do as president , bring together a national commission sitting in the White House with me — with me , and working this out .
Does Biden have an overwhelming impression from protests by Black Lives Matter and Antifa rallies ( and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ from law enforcement ?
They have made it clear that they don ’ t want to “ improve and help police officers , ” but to reduce their numbers or eliminate them altogether .
They aren ’ t painting “ ACAB ” ( All Cops are Bastards ) and demanding police abolition as a way to “ help police officers.
” On top of that , this is not a national problem , but rather a series of failures at the local level in major cities to deal with policing policy rationally and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ won ’ t have any impact on those failures , as the federal government has little to do with local law enforcement .
The Department of Justice can manipulate the courts to get consent decrees , but Seattle already operates under a consent decree , as do a number of other cities .
How has federal intervention worked out ?
KOAT in Albuquerque — one of the cities with a consent decree — discovered an ugly outcome in a report last year , well before this year ’ s spike in crime : @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 7 has found that nearly all of the cities that reached settlement agreements or consent decrees with the DOJ during the same time as Albuquerque have seen double-digit increases in violent crime – crimes like murders , rapes and robberies .
Cops are also leaving the departments .
“ No , I am not shocked , ” said Shaun Willoughby , president of the Albuquerque Police Officers ’ Association .
“ Wherever the DOJ goes , crime goes up.
” The analysis conducted by Target 7 looked at cities that reached consent decrees @ @ @ @ @ @ @ statistics to the FBI .
Target 7 compared each city ’ s violent crime rate two years before the city started its consent decree and two years after .
The analysis found that every city with a population higher than 50,000 people experienced a double-digit increase in violent crime .
Albuquerque had a 36 percent increase in that time .
Other cities included Seattle , 27 percent ; Los Angeles , 61 percent ; Cleveland , 13 percent ; Phoenix , 10 percent ; and 20 percent in New Orleans .
Is that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ America ?
If so , small wonder that law enforcement agencies are looking elsewhere in 2020 .

This answers a leftover question from last week’s debate. At that time, Donald Trump challenged Joe Biden to list any law-enforcement groups that supported his presidential bid, a question which Biden dodged. In last night’s NBC News/MSNBC town hall with Lester Holt, Biden conceded that law enforcement has not supported him, but tells a “former Republican” wife and mother of police officers that they should.
Why should they? The answer comes after the end of this clip, but it’s a doozy:
MICHELLE CRUZ MARRERO, FORMER REPUBLICAN: Good evening, Mr. Vice President. As a mother of a police officer, and the wife of a retired police officer, served 28 years, the term defunding the police is of concern and troubling. I understand that police departments do need reform. We need to serve and protect safely and properly. With that being said, I would like to know what you and your administration’s policies in reforming the police, how those will come about, how — how they will be best handled to ensure police officer safety and the public citizens’ safety as well. BIDEN: I grew up in a neighborhood where the guys I grew up with in my working-class neighborhood either became cops, firefighters, or priests. I wasn’t qualified to be any one of them. I have had overwhelming support from police my whole career, up until this year, as your husband will tell you.
As her husband would also likely tell her, that was a much different Joe Biden than the one on display in 2020. This version of Joe Biden played footsie with the “defund the police” crowd, even though Biden denies that now. In fact, he’s still playing footsie with them, as the rest of this answer demonstrates. Biden still wants police funding redirected to social workers and, um … psychologists and psychiatrists:
I’m the only one who’s talked about increasing police budgets. When your husband goes on a call that, in fact, is a 911 call, it’s better if he or she has with them a psychologist or a psychiatrist with him, someone who knows how to deal with someone who is not all there.
That would likely amuse the woman’s husband. Police officers would know that adding another civilian into a 911 response without any indication of their need increases their risk, as it adds another person they have to protect. Even in situations where counselors might be useful — and not all 911 calls fall into that category — police have to ensure the safety of everyone involved first, and adding more people to confrontations makes that more complicated.
This is also amusing, for other reasons:
So what I’m going to do, I’m going to do what I have done in the past. I’m going to bring all these interests together — peaceful protesters, police chiefs, police officers, police unions as well as the civil rights groups in the White House, and sit down and decide what are the things that need to be done to improve and help police officers? … And so, we’ve got to make sure there’s more communication. That’s what I’m going to do as president, bring together a national commission sitting in the White House with me — with me, and working this out.
Does Biden have an overwhelming impression from protests by Black Lives Matter and Antifa rallies (and worse) that they want more engagement from law enforcement? They have made it clear that they don’t want to “improve and help police officers,” but to reduce their numbers or eliminate them altogether. They aren’t painting “ACAB” (All Cops are Bastards) and demanding police abolition as a way to “help police officers.”
On top of that, this is not a national problem, but rather a series of failures at the local level in major cities to deal with policing policy rationally and accountably. A “national commission” won’t have any impact on those failures, as the federal government has little to do with local law enforcement. The Department of Justice can manipulate the courts to get consent decrees, but Seattle already operates under a consent decree, as do a number of other cities. How has federal intervention worked out? KOAT in Albuquerque — one of the cities with a consent decree — discovered an ugly outcome in a report last year, well before this year’s spike in crime:
More than four years later, Target 7 has found that nearly all of the cities that reached settlement agreements or consent decrees with the DOJ during the same time as Albuquerque have seen double-digit increases in violent crime – crimes like murders, rapes and robberies. Cops are also leaving the departments. “No, I am not shocked,” said Shaun Willoughby, president of the Albuquerque Police Officers’ Association. “Wherever the DOJ goes, crime goes up.” The analysis conducted by Target 7 looked at cities that reached consent decrees since 2010 and had reported their crime statistics to the FBI. Target 7 compared each city’s violent crime rate two years before the city started its consent decree and two years after. The analysis found that every city with a population higher than 50,000 people experienced a double-digit increase in violent crime. Albuquerque had a 36 percent increase in that time. Other cities included Seattle, 27 percent; Los Angeles, 61 percent; Cleveland, 13 percent; Phoenix, 10 percent; and 20 percent in New Orleans.
Is that what Biden is promising the rest of America? If so, small wonder that law enforcement agencies are looking elsewhere in 2020.


hotair--2020-10-06--Trump's closing argument: COVID's not that big of a deal

It ’ s a bold strategy , Cotton .
Let ’ s see if it pays off for him .
Common flu doesn ’ t kill more than 100,000 Americans a year even in an especially bad season and I ’ ve never heard of it hitting any demographic harder than COVID has .
But lay that aside .
What ’ s truly terrible about that tweet is that it sounds eerily similar to one of the more infamous ones he ’ s ever sent , almost seven months ago to the day .
This was at the very start @ @ @ @ @ @ @ d banned travel from Europe , when the daily death toll was in single digits : After 215,000 deaths and a severe case himself that required experimental therapies to treat , he ’ s back to square one .
He ’ s actually regressed from his experience with the disease .
Last night Tim Miller wrote that the 90 seconds Trump spent on the White House balcony , first removing his mask , then saluting while he gasped for breath , and then apparently entering the building *without his mask on* — presumably @ @ @ @ @ @ @ weirdest 90 seconds in the history of the presidency .
I ’ d argue that the clip below , which he shot in the moments afterward , is even weirder .
Any other politician would have seized on his infection as an opportunity to gain sympathy and signal that he feels the country ’ s pain in a uniquely physical , personal way .
Instead Trump ’ s strongman instincts have led him to position himself as someone who heroically and deliberately accepted the risk of infection in order to show leadership ( @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to it , but I had to do it ” ) instead of having half-assed his way into an outbreak at the White House through sheer negligence , if not recklessness .
“ Trump having embraced the covid-is-a-distraction perspective of the halfass floomers with new messianic zeal instead of his old , smug trolling is a new level of Hell from 2020 , ” wrote Peter Spiliakos .
Yesterday I said that the SUV ride around Walter Reed may have been the most damaging photo op of his presidency .
I think this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that preceded it may have topped it .
The coup de grace was the line “ Maybe I ’ m immune , I don ’ t know.
” If you ’ re sick enough to need oxygen , remdesivir , dexamethasone , and a Regeneron antibody cocktail that practically no one else has had access to , then guess what ?
You ’ re not immune .
But this is what we get from Trump surrounding himself with people like Scott Atlas who ’ ve been chattering at him that “ cross-immunity ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ susceptible to infection in the aggregate than anyone thinks .
Trump probably believed that , which may have fed his skepticism of masks and social distancing inside the White House .
And he may have believed it so much that he ’ s still entertaining the possibility that he ’ s immune just seconds after he was caught on camera gasping for breath .
I ’ d guess Philip Klein ’ s take on what went down last night is shared by , say , two-thirds of voters : It ’ s irresponsible @ @ @ @ @ @ @ — again , if he is truly over the hump — should guide the behavior and decision making of all Americans , none of whom have the resources that he does .
This is especially true for COVID-19 , which has produced an incredibly wide range of outcomes , even among those with similar demographic and health profiles .
Somebody else may get a much worse case than Trump simply because they were unlucky .
Trump ’ s triumphalism is unwarranted , and frankly , cruel to those who were less fortunate through @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has been trying to argue that he got COVID-19 because he did not think a leader should be cooped up in the White House , so he took on more personal risk .
But this is a completely selfish way of looking at it .
This isn ’ t just a matter of the risk that he personally took on , but the actions he took to needlessly endanger the lives of others — including attending a fundraiser when there was good reason to believe , at the minimum , that he had @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ t be afraid to get back to work , the president tells the viewer in the clip .
“ You ’ re going to beat it.
” But of course that ’ s not true for many , many people , especially ones his age .
And telling them that , as Klein notes , will lead vulnerable people to take risks that end up endangering them .
Even if Trump himself pulls through , which remains an open question , it could be that he ends up suffering from one of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ COVID survivors are coping with .
There ’ s an undertone to the White House messaging about his recovery over the past few days that Trump overcoming the illness was somehow a matter of “ strength ” or determination ( “ he ’ s a fighter !
” ) , but that ’ s destined to play as a terrible insult to people who ’ ve died .
They battled the virus too .
They fought to live .
Many of them were physically strong .
They lost .
Should they be blamed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have a fleet of doctors and experimental therapies to help get them through ?
One of the people apparently endangered by him is a military aide who works at the White House and has been in contact with him .
He ’ s the latest positive case from the White House .
A source who works there told Axios that staffers are afraid and angry : What ’ s notably crazy about this “ don ’ t sweat the disease that might yet kill me ” message is that it ’ s likely @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Trump ’ s been trying to make inroads with .
One is Latinos , who have suffered disproportionately as a population from COVID .
The other is seniors , who went big for Trump four years ago and have been drifting away from him this year .
He ’ s tried stunts to win them back ( e.g.
, his recent plan to send them $ 200 taxpayer-funded gift cards to pay for prescriptions ) but being cavalier about a virus that kills them at much higher rates than any other age group @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the home stretch of a campaign .
Two national polls this week have found Biden leading among the 65+ group by more than 20 points — and that probably doesn ’ t even include reaction to the president acting cavalier about the virus .
It ’ s mostly being driven by his boorish debate performance .
What will the split among seniors look like next week ?
The best thing he could do for himself now would be to lie low , heal , and try to make the debate on the 15th @ @ @ @ @ @ @ there and is sympathetic to voters ( it ’ s a townhall debate , remember ) , that could help him .
He vowed this morning that he ’ ll be there : The worst thing he could do for himself would be to double down on this “ COVID ’ s not so bad ” message in another high-profile way , especially as cases are rising again nationally and in swing states like Wisconsin .
But since he ’ s Trump , that ’ s probably what he ’ s going to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ even Republicans are down for an “ I beat it , so will you !
” pep talk .
A new poll finds that 66 percent of GOPers now say they always wear a mask when leaving home , up 20 points since July .
They ’ re more worried about the disease than they used to be , not less , especially with a second wave predicted for winter .
Now that they ’ ve seen their own president hospitalized for it , the takeaway for most won ’ t be , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that dangerous.
” It ’ ll be , “ If the president can ’ t avoid it , no one can.
” I ’ ll leave you with this piece from Matthew Walther , lamenting that Trump is ending his campaign by doubling down on COVID skepticism but resigning himself to the fact that it was probably inevitable .
“ It is not entirely clear to me that this is about winning anymore .
What we are seeing is Trump unbound , determined ‘ Neither to change , nor falter , nor repent @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , perhaps hopelessly , to make support for him some kind of life-affirming existential gesture .
”

It’s a bold strategy, Cotton. Let’s see if it pays off for him.
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1313449844413992961
Common flu doesn’t kill more than 100,000 Americans a year even in an especially bad season and I’ve never heard of it hitting any demographic harder than COVID has. But lay that aside. What’s truly terrible about that tweet is that it sounds eerily similar to one of the more infamous ones he’s ever sent, almost seven months ago to the day. This was at the very start of the pandemic, before he’d banned travel from Europe, when the daily death toll was in single digits:
https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/1237027356314869761?lang=en
After 215,000 deaths and a severe case himself that required experimental therapies to treat, he’s back to square one. He’s actually regressed from his experience with the disease.
Last night Tim Miller wrote that the 90 seconds Trump spent on the White House balcony, first removing his mask, then saluting while he gasped for breath, and then apparently entering the building *without his mask on* — presumably still contagious with COVID — was the weirdest 90 seconds in the history of the presidency. I’d argue that the clip below, which he shot in the moments afterward, is even weirder. Any other politician would have seized on his infection as an opportunity to gain sympathy and signal that he feels the country’s pain in a uniquely physical, personal way. Instead Trump’s strongman instincts have led him to position himself as someone who heroically and deliberately accepted the risk of infection in order to show leadership (“I knew there’s danger to it, but I had to do it”) instead of having half-assed his way into an outbreak at the White House through sheer negligence, if not recklessness. “Trump having embraced the covid-is-a-distraction perspective of the halfass floomers with new messianic zeal instead of his old, smug trolling is a new level of Hell from 2020,” wrote Peter Spiliakos.
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1313267615083761665
Yesterday I said that the SUV ride around Walter Reed may have been the most damaging photo op of his presidency. I think this clip and the spectacle on the balcony that preceded it may have topped it. The coup de grace was the line “Maybe I’m immune, I don’t know.” If you’re sick enough to need oxygen, remdesivir, dexamethasone, and a Regeneron antibody cocktail that practically no one else has had access to, then guess what? You’re not immune. But this is what we get from Trump surrounding himself with people like Scott Atlas who’ve been chattering at him that “cross-immunity” may mean that Americans are far less susceptible to infection in the aggregate than anyone thinks. Trump probably believed that, which may have fed his skepticism of masks and social distancing inside the White House. And he may have believed it so much that he’s still entertaining the possibility that he’s immune just seconds after he was caught on camera gasping for breath.
I’d guess Philip Klein’s take on what went down last night is shared by, say, two-thirds of voters:
It’s irresponsible for Trump to suggest that his experience — again, if he is truly over the hump — should guide the behavior and decision making of all Americans, none of whom have the resources that he does. This is especially true for COVID-19, which has produced an incredibly wide range of outcomes, even among those with similar demographic and health profiles. Somebody else may get a much worse case than Trump simply because they were unlucky. Trump’s triumphalism is unwarranted, and frankly, cruel to those who were less fortunate through no fault of their own. Trump has been trying to argue that he got COVID-19 because he did not think a leader should be cooped up in the White House, so he took on more personal risk. But this is a completely selfish way of looking at it. This isn’t just a matter of the risk that he personally took on, but the actions he took to needlessly endanger the lives of others — including attending a fundraiser when there was good reason to believe, at the minimum, that he had been exposed to the virus.
Don’t be afraid to get back to work, the president tells the viewer in the clip. “You’re going to beat it.” But of course that’s not true for many, many people, especially ones his age. And telling them that, as Klein notes, will lead vulnerable people to take risks that end up endangering them. Even if Trump himself pulls through, which remains an open question, it could be that he ends up suffering from one of the long-term complications that thousands of other COVID survivors are coping with. There’s an undertone to the White House messaging about his recovery over the past few days that Trump overcoming the illness was somehow a matter of “strength” or determination (“he’s a fighter!”), but that’s destined to play as a terrible insult to people who’ve died. They battled the virus too. They fought to live. Many of them were physically strong. They lost. Should they be blamed?
Especially when they didn’t have a fleet of doctors and experimental therapies to help get them through?
One of the people apparently endangered by him is a military aide who works at the White House and has been in contact with him. He’s the latest positive case from the White House. A source who works there told Axios that staffers are afraid and angry:
“It’s insane that he would return to the White House and jeopardize his staff’s health when we are still learning of new cases among senior staff. This place is a cesspool.” “He was so concerned with preventing embarrassing stories that he exposed thousands of his own staff and supporters to a deadly virus. He has kept us in the dark, and now our spouses and kids have to pay the price. It’s just selfish.”
What’s notably crazy about this “don’t sweat the disease that might yet kill me” message is that it’s likely to play badly with two groups that Trump’s been trying to make inroads with. One is Latinos, who have suffered disproportionately as a population from COVID. The other is seniors, who went big for Trump four years ago and have been drifting away from him this year. He’s tried stunts to win them back (e.g., his recent plan to send them $200 taxpayer-funded gift cards to pay for prescriptions) but being cavalier about a virus that kills them at much higher rates than any other age group seems like a singularly terrible move in the home stretch of a campaign. Two national polls this week have found Biden leading among the 65+ group by more than 20 points — and that probably doesn’t even include reaction to the president acting cavalier about the virus. It’s mostly being driven by his boorish debate performance.
What will the split among seniors look like next week?
The best thing he could do for himself now would be to lie low, heal, and try to make the debate on the 15th. If he looks and sounds good there and is sympathetic to voters (it’s a townhall debate, remember), that could help him. He vowed this morning that he’ll be there:
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1313489709847531520
The worst thing he could do for himself would be to double down on this “COVID’s not so bad” message in another high-profile way, especially as cases are rising again nationally and in swing states like Wisconsin. But since he’s Trump, that’s probably what he’s going to do:
Trump is considering a televised address to the nation after returning yesterday from a three-day stay in the hospital for coronavirus treatment, @SalehaMohsin reports. — Jennifer Jacobs (@JenniferJJacobs) October 6, 2020
I’m not sure even Republicans are down for an “I beat it, so will you!” pep talk. A new poll finds that 66 percent of GOPers now say they always wear a mask when leaving home, up 20 points since July. They’re more worried about the disease than they used to be, not less, especially with a second wave predicted for winter. Now that they’ve seen their own president hospitalized for it, the takeaway for most won’t be, “I guess it’s not that dangerous.” It’ll be, “If the president can’t avoid it, no one can.”
I’ll leave you with this piece from Matthew Walther, lamenting that Trump is ending his campaign by doubling down on COVID skepticism but resigning himself to the fact that it was probably inevitable. “It is not entirely clear to me that this is about winning anymore. What we are seeing is Trump unbound, determined ‘Neither to change, nor falter, nor repent,’ a politician who is trying, perhaps hopelessly, to make support for him some kind of life-affirming existential gesture.”


hotair--2020-10-06--Oops he did it again! Biden's mask slips, reveals his inner racist one more time

Now that we have Britney Spears ’ songs in our heads , let ’ s talk about the most recent racist remark uttered by Joe Biden that the media tried to ignore .
A 10-second video clip has re-surfaced from a September 15 roundtable with veterans in Tampa , Fla .
In the clip , Biden explains to the veterans that he has been able to quarantine so much because “ some black woman was able to stack the grocery shelf.
” While you are thinking to yourself , hey , what if President Trump said those same words during @ @ @ @ @ @ @ remember that Joe Biden is the Democrat nominee , therefore the one that almost all reporters will be voting for in November .
Not only does the press continue to only lob softball questions at him during the rare times he takes questions from them but when he does say something offensive or odd , no one asks for clarification .
That clip was originally shared on September 29 .
Now , thanks to Turning Point USA senior contributor Rob Smith , the video has resurfaced and gone viral .
We know that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the video clip would have gone viral immediately and Trump would be asked to explain it over and over again .
But , this is Joe Biden so all that was heard at the time was the chirping of crickets .
Rob Smith is a black conservative and it looks like his Twitter account was suspended after this video went viral .
I ’ d like to be shocked by this development but this is normal for our woke , Biden voter overlords at Twitter headquarters .
Biden was trying to make a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ home for such a long period of time , quarantined during the coronavirus pandemic .
He is certainly of the age group that is asked to stay home if possible , and he has some past health issues to take into consideration , too .
But , instead of saying that he is staying home as much as possible and taking advantage of virtual campaigning , he went the long way around it .
He was trying to say that it is his white privilege , or something , that allows him to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ while essential workers show up and do their jobs despite the health risks .
He singled out black women and Hispanic workers , of course , because Democrats are all about identity politics and racial victimization .
It ’ s quite a ramble from Sleepy Joe .
“ And they say , ‘ Well , why in the hell would you say that Biden ?
You just talked about all these difficulties.
’ Well , I ’ ll tell you why .
Because the American public , the blinders have been taken off @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
“ They ’ ve all of a sudden seen a hell of a lot clearer .
They ’ re saying , ‘ Jeeze , the reason I was able to stay sequestered in my home is because some Black woman was able to stack the grocery shelf .
Or a young Hispanic is out there , these dreamers are out there , 60,000 of them acting as first responders and nurses and docs.
’ Or all of a sudden people are realizing , ‘ My Lord , these people have done so @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , across the board , have done so much for me .
We can do this .
We can get things done.
’ And I think they ’ re ready.
” What Biden does is assume that grocery store workers stocking the shelves are black women which is an odd assumption .
In my own experience and anecdotal observation , I would say that the majority of stockers I see during a normal daytime trip to the grocery store are young males .
They are white as well as minority workers .
And @ @ @ @ @ @ @ DREAMers are working as first responders is probably a stretch , especially given that he also lumps in doctors and nurses in the number .
He is just trying to check off the boxes and not leave anyone out of his explanation .
He makes it sound like white people are not showing up for work .
My favorite reply came from Dave Rubin .
And Bethany Mandel points out that Joe Biden assumes lower-income workers are used as human shields for more affluent consumers .
Joe Biden has a history of racist @ @ @ @ @ @ @ he is speaking off the cuff .
With this in mind , you can understand why he is so tethered to his teleprompter .
During his 2020 presidential campaign in May , he told a radio show host that if he doesn ’ t vote for Biden , he “ ain ’ t black.
” In August he dissed the African American community for its lack of diversity in thought – “ unlike the African American community , with notable exceptions , the Latino community is an incredibly diverse community with incredibly different @ @ @ @ @ @ @ remember that Biden accused President Trump of being the first racist to be elected president .
The fact is that Trump has a pretty good record as far as the black community goes – record-high employment and entrepreneurial opportunities for black Americans , record homeownership , criminal justice reform , permanently fully funding HBCUs instead of annual funding renewals , and the fact that in his life as a private businessman he was often given awards by black leaders for his work in their communities .
Joe Biden , by contrast , has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ them his friends .
In his presidential campaign in 2008 , he said of Barack Obama , “ You got the first mainstream African American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy .
I mean , that ’ s a storybook , man.
” Biden didn ’ t even realize that Obama was not the first African American to run for president .
In 2014 , as vice-president , he lobbed an anti-semitic slur during remarks at the 40th anniversary of the Legal Services Corporation .
“ That people @ @ @ @ @ @ @ what was happening to them at home in terms of foreclosures , in terms of bad loans that were being … I mean these Shylocks who took advantage of , um , these women and men while overseas.
” And , in August 2019 , Biden during a speech to the Asian & Latino Coalition in Iowa , he implied that all poor kids are minorities .
These are just a few examples of Joe ’ s racism surfacing during his on the record remarks .
He ’ ll be given a pass @ @ @ @ @ @ @ always receives .
The man has been in politics for almost 50 years and his speech still dwells in the past .
When his mask drops , the real Joe Biden is revealed .
Believe him when he tells us who he is .

Now that we have Britney Spears’ songs in our heads, let’s talk about the most recent racist remark uttered by Joe Biden that the media tried to ignore. A 10-second video clip has re-surfaced from a September 15 roundtable with veterans in Tampa, Fla. In the clip, Biden explains to the veterans that he has been able to quarantine so much because “some black woman was able to stack the grocery shelf.”
While you are thinking to yourself, hey, what if President Trump said those same words during a roundtable discussion, let’s remember that Joe Biden is the Democrat nominee, therefore the one that almost all reporters will be voting for in November. Not only does the press continue to only lob softball questions at him during the rare times he takes questions from them but when he does say something offensive or odd, no one asks for clarification.
"The reason I was able to stay sequestered in my home was because some black woman was able to stack the grocery shelves." pic.twitter.com/iwXU3km8Oc — DaybreakInsider (@DaybreakInsider) October 6, 2020
That clip was originally shared on September 29. Now, thanks to Turning Point USA senior contributor Rob Smith, the video has resurfaced and gone viral. We know that if Trump made such a remark, the video clip would have gone viral immediately and Trump would be asked to explain it over and over again. But, this is Joe Biden so all that was heard at the time was the chirping of crickets. Rob Smith is a black conservative and it looks like his Twitter account was suspended after this video went viral. I’d like to be shocked by this development but this is normal for our woke, Biden voter overlords at Twitter headquarters.
Biden was trying to make a point about his ability to remain at home for such a long period of time, quarantined during the coronavirus pandemic. He is certainly of the age group that is asked to stay home if possible, and he has some past health issues to take into consideration, too. But, instead of saying that he is staying home as much as possible and taking advantage of virtual campaigning, he went the long way around it. He was trying to say that it is his white privilege, or something, that allows him to stay protected from the coronavirus at home while essential workers show up and do their jobs despite the health risks. He singled out black women and Hispanic workers, of course, because Democrats are all about identity politics and racial victimization. It’s quite a ramble from Sleepy Joe.
“And they say, ‘Well, why in the hell would you say that Biden? You just talked about all these difficulties.’ Well, I’ll tell you why. Because the American public, the blinders have been taken off,” Biden told the roundtable attendees. “They’ve all of a sudden seen a hell of a lot clearer. They’re saying, ‘Jeeze, the reason I was able to stay sequestered in my home is because some Black woman was able to stack the grocery shelf. Or a young Hispanic is out there, these dreamers are out there, 60,000 of them acting as first responders and nurses and docs.’ Or all of a sudden people are realizing, ‘My Lord, these people have done so much. Not just Black, White, across the board, have done so much for me. We can do this. We can get things done.’ And I think they’re ready.”
What Biden does is assume that grocery store workers stocking the shelves are black women which is an odd assumption. In my own experience and anecdotal observation, I would say that the majority of stockers I see during a normal daytime trip to the grocery store are young males. They are white as well as minority workers. And, for Biden to assume that 60,000 DREAMers are working as first responders is probably a stretch, especially given that he also lumps in doctors and nurses in the number. He is just trying to check off the boxes and not leave anyone out of his explanation. He makes it sound like white people are not showing up for work.
My favorite reply came from Dave Rubin.
You ain’t black if you ain’t stocking a grocery shelf for Joe Biden. https://t.co/IyIwm9TmbC — Dave Rubin (@RubinReport) October 5, 2020
And Bethany Mandel points out that Joe Biden assumes lower-income workers are used as human shields for more affluent consumers.
This should spark a lot of conversation about the morality of the lockdowns and how we’ve made lower-income Americans into human shields. https://t.co/Bcs6ISfJKe — Bethany S. Mandel (@bethanyshondark) October 5, 2020
Joe Biden has a history of racist comments. They usually come out when he is speaking off the cuff. With this in mind, you can understand why he is so tethered to his teleprompter. During his 2020 presidential campaign in May, he told a radio show host that if he doesn’t vote for Biden, he “ain’t black.” In August he dissed the African American community for its lack of diversity in thought – “unlike the African American community, with notable exceptions, the Latino community is an incredibly diverse community with incredibly different attitudes about different things.”
You may remember that Biden accused President Trump of being the first racist to be elected president. The fact is that Trump has a pretty good record as far as the black community goes – record-high employment and entrepreneurial opportunities for black Americans, record homeownership, criminal justice reform, permanently fully funding HBCUs instead of annual funding renewals, and the fact that in his life as a private businessman he was often given awards by black leaders for his work in their communities. Joe Biden, by contrast, has a history of complimenting segregationists and calling them his friends.
In his presidential campaign in 2008, he said of Barack Obama, “You got the first mainstream African American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy. I mean, that’s a storybook, man.” Biden didn’t even realize that Obama was not the first African American to run for president.
In 2014, as vice-president, he lobbed an anti-semitic slur during remarks at the 40th anniversary of the Legal Services Corporation. “That people would come to him and talk about what was happening to them at home in terms of foreclosures, in terms of bad loans that were being … I mean these Shylocks who took advantage of, um, these women and men while overseas.”
And, in August 2019, Biden during a speech to the Asian & Latino Coalition in Iowa, he implied that all poor kids are minorities. These are just a few examples of Joe’s racism surfacing during his on the record remarks. He’ll be given a pass from those on the left as he always receives. The man has been in politics for almost 50 years and his speech still dwells in the past. When his mask drops, the real Joe Biden is revealed. Believe him when he tells us who he is.