hotair--2020-09-14--Joe Biden would really like you to forget that he opposed Trump's China travel ban

Last Thursday ( September 10th ) , when Joe Biden ’ s National Press Secretary , TJ Ducko , sat down on Fox News for an interview with Bret Baier , it didn ’ t go well .
As Allahpundit wrote that same day , Ducklo came off as a stuttering , angry boxer who was continually caught on the ropes .
But there was one part of that interview that ’ s drawing renewed attention as Biden ’ s campaign attempts to ramp up their attacks on President Trump ’ s handling of the novel coronavirus pandemic .
Bair @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to Trump ’ s decision to impose a travel ban on China to hinder the spread of the virus .
The prompted Ducklo to go into full denial mode , claiming that his boss ’ s support of ( or at least failure to oppose ) the travel ban had been “ fact-checked to death.
” But it turns out that whoever was doing the fact-checking for them was asleep at the switch .
( Free Beacon ) Joe Biden ’ s national press secretary claimed Thursday that the former vice president was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s decision to restrict travel from China , but all of Biden ’ s public comments , including from the day the decision was announced , indicate otherwise .
“ Joe Biden has been clear that he was not against that travel ban at the time , ” TJ Ducklo told Fox News anchor Bret Baier .
Ducklo ’ s claim contrasts with Biden ’ s previous statements on the travel restrictions , including some made on the very day the policy was announced .
Less than an hour after Health and Human @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a public health emergency and announced the China travel ban , Biden took the stage at a campaign event in Iowa and went after Trump ’ s “ hysterical xenophobia.
” Here ’ s the brief video clip of the exchange .
Ducklo is once again on the ropes and becoming increasingly flustered .
We ’ ve grown used to seeing both Joe Biden and Kamala Harris flip-flopping from the positions they took during the primary on a regular basis , but this one is just a flat-out lie .
As the Free @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a matter of moments after Trump announced the ban when Joe Biden , in the middle of a campaign event in Iowa , seized the microphone and lit into the President .
“ This is no time for Donald Trump ’ s record of hysteria xenophobia , hysterical xenophobia , and fear-mongering to lead the way instead of science , ” Biden said .
Do you suppose there ’ s a way to interpret “ Trump ’ s…hysterical xenophobia and fear-mongering ” as being supportive of the order ?
But that wasn ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , lest his media defenders choose to make this another case where he simply “ misspoke ” about his own policy and then walked it back .
Later that same day he took to Twitter to launch another attack on the travel ban .
Trump ’ s travel ban is “ a direct betrayal of America ’ s most fundamental freedom… And now he ’ s adding more countries to his list of who ’ s not welcome in America.
” You tell me .
Does that sound like it translates to anything @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to help prevent the spread of the plague ?
Not hardly .
Well into March , after the severity of this disaster was becoming obvious , Biden was still bashing travel bans in general as a way to fight the spread of the pandemic .
But now that we ’ re into September , his National Press Secretary is going out and rewriting history , claiming that Biden “ has been clear that he wasn ’ t against that travel ban at the time.
” This isn ’ t some random Biden surrogate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fumbling the ball .
This is his Press Secretary .
If Ducklo doesn ’ t know Biden ’ s mind and his history ( well… at least his history ) , then what is he doing holding this job ?
If this was a fumble , it was a bad one .
But far more likely is that Biden ’ s team is simply lying ( again ) and trying to rewrite the history of his poor judgment as the early stages of the pandemic played out .

Last Thursday (September 10th), when Joe Biden’s National Press Secretary, TJ Ducko, sat down on Fox News for an interview with Bret Baier, it didn’t go well. As Allahpundit wrote that same day, Ducklo came off as a stuttering, angry boxer who was continually caught on the ropes. But there was one part of that interview that’s drawing renewed attention as Biden’s campaign attempts to ramp up their attacks on President Trump’s handling of the novel coronavirus pandemic. Bair brought up Biden’s original opposition to Trump’s decision to impose a travel ban on China to hinder the spread of the virus. The prompted Ducklo to go into full denial mode, claiming that his boss’s support of (or at least failure to oppose) the travel ban had been “fact-checked to death.” But it turns out that whoever was doing the fact-checking for them was asleep at the switch. (Free Beacon)
Joe Biden’s national press secretary claimed Thursday that the former vice president was in favor of President Donald Trump’s decision to restrict travel from China, but all of Biden’s public comments, including from the day the decision was announced, indicate otherwise. “Joe Biden has been clear that he was not against that travel ban at the time,” TJ Ducklo told Fox News anchor Bret Baier. Ducklo’s claim contrasts with Biden’s previous statements on the travel restrictions, including some made on the very day the policy was announced. Less than an hour after Health and Human Services secretary Alex Azar declared the coronavirus a public health emergency and announced the China travel ban, Biden took the stage at a campaign event in Iowa and went after Trump’s “hysterical xenophobia.”
Here’s the brief video clip of the exchange. Ducklo is once again on the ropes and becoming increasingly flustered.
https://youtu.be/_G6kdaRwFDE
We’ve grown used to seeing both Joe Biden and Kamala Harris flip-flopping from the positions they took during the primary on a regular basis, but this one is just a flat-out lie. As the Free Beacon points out, it was only a matter of moments after Trump announced the ban when Joe Biden, in the middle of a campaign event in Iowa, seized the microphone and lit into the President. “This is no time for Donald Trump’s record of hysteria xenophobia, hysterical xenophobia, and fear-mongering to lead the way instead of science,” Biden said.
Do you suppose there’s a way to interpret “Trump’s…hysterical xenophobia and fear-mongering” as being supportive of the order? But that wasn’t the only time Biden said this, lest his media defenders choose to make this another case where he simply “misspoke” about his own policy and then walked it back. Later that same day he took to Twitter to launch another attack on the travel ban.
Donald Trump's Muslim ban is a direct betrayal of America’s most fundamental freedom: religious freedom. And now he's adding more countries to his list of who's not welcome in America. It's not who we are — and we'll prove that when we beat Trump this November and end the ban. pic.twitter.com/qdlU5P7MZQ — Joe Biden (@JoeBiden) January 31, 2020
Trump’s travel ban is “a direct betrayal of America’s most fundamental freedom… And now he’s adding more countries to his list of who’s not welcome in America.” You tell me. Does that sound like it translates to anything about the ban being a sound policy to help prevent the spread of the plague? Not hardly.
Well into March, after the severity of this disaster was becoming obvious, Biden was still bashing travel bans in general as a way to fight the spread of the pandemic.
A wall will not stop the coronavirus. Banning all travel from Europe — or any other part of the world — will not stop it. This disease could impact every nation and any person on the planet — and we need a plan to combat it. — Joe Biden (@JoeBiden) March 13, 2020
But now that we’re into September, his National Press Secretary is going out and rewriting history, claiming that Biden “has been clear that he wasn’t against that travel ban at the time.”
This isn’t some random Biden surrogate getting caught with a gotcha question and fumbling the ball. This is his Press Secretary. If Ducklo doesn’t know Biden’s mind and his history (well… at least his history), then what is he doing holding this job? If this was a fumble, it was a bad one. But far more likely is that Biden’s team is simply lying (again) and trying to rewrite the history of his poor judgment as the early stages of the pandemic played out.


hotair--2020-09-14--Biden: Elect Trump and watch the suburbs burn ... and flood ... and get blown away

Finally , both presidential candidates agree on one thing : after the election , the suburbs are gon na burn , baby .
If we elect Joe Biden , Donald Trump claims , they ’ ll burn as Black Lives Matter forces police into further retreat .
If we re-elect Trump , Biden warns , then the climate will burn the suburbs .
Frankly , I ’ d take my chances with climate change over BLM and the Democrats pandering to them .
But wait , Biden says , there ’ s more !
Suburbanites won ’ t just get @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the wind , and who knows what else ( via Twitchy ) : At one point , Biden calls Trump a “ climate arsonist ” over the wildfires on the West Coast .
That ’ s a clever turn of phrase , but the existence of actual arsonists in connection to some of these fires makes it a bit difficult to sustain .
Furthermore , Biden and Barack Obama had eight years to solve this problem , while Trump only had three to exacerbate it .
What precisely did Trump do differently than @ @ @ @ @ @ @ actual carbon-emission reduction that would sustain a charge of “ climate arsonist ” ?
Actually , the Trump years have been mostly below the carbon-emissions output of the Obama-Biden years , according to a study released in January of this year : Greenhouse gas emissions in the United States dropped last year after a sharp increase in 2018 , new data released Tuesday show .
The drop resumed a long-term downward trend driven chiefly by a shift away from coal power generation .
The story of the emissions decline has largely been one @ @ @ @ @ @ @ utilities close coal plants in favor of cheaper natural gas and renewable energy .
But this shift to lower-carbon energy has been restricted to the electricity sector , and the nation ’ s emissions cuts are still not on track to meet the targets it agreed to under the Paris climate accord .
… Overall , U.S. greenhouse gas emissions fell about 2 percent in 2019 , according to preliminary estimates by Rhodium Group , an economic analysis firm .
The previous year , strong economic growth and other factors had pushed emissions @ @ @ @ @ @ @ rise in 2018 , but not as high as they did in 2014 in the Obama-Biden term .
The 2012-14 and 2018 bumps correlate to an expansion of economic activity — the kind of growth that adds jobs .
All three years of Trump ’ s term shows a smaller carbon-emissions total than all but three years of Obama ’ s term , and perhaps only two years .
Trump ’ s 2018 peak is still well below two peaks in the Obama era , 2009 and 2014 .
Furthermore , given the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the economy and energy use , we can expect 2020 to be one of the lowest on record for US carbon emissions .
So how could Trump ’ s position on climate change have anything to do with the wildfires on the West Coast , other than in Biden ’ s imagination — or perhaps more accurately , Biden ’ s demagoguery ?
Like I said at the top , this suburbanite will take his chances with Trump rather than on the tender mercies of the BLM and Antifa mobs .
You know @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .

Finally, both presidential candidates agree on one thing: after the election, the suburbs are gonna burn, baby. If we elect Joe Biden, Donald Trump claims, they’ll burn as Black Lives Matter forces police into further retreat. If we re-elect Trump, Biden warns, then the climate will burn the suburbs.
Frankly, I’d take my chances with climate change over BLM and the Democrats pandering to them. But wait, Biden says, there’s more! Suburbanites won’t just get the fire, but the floods and the wind, and who knows what else (via Twitchy):
.@JoeBiden: If Trump wins again, "how many suburbs will be burned in wildfires? How many suburban neighborhoods will have been flooded out? How many suburbs will have been blown away in superstorms?” pic.twitter.com/bWYZpI9iiz — Tom Elliott (@tomselliott) September 14, 2020
At one point, Biden calls Trump a “climate arsonist” over the wildfires on the West Coast. That’s a clever turn of phrase, but the existence of actual arsonists in connection to some of these fires makes it a bit difficult to sustain. Furthermore, Biden and Barack Obama had eight years to solve this problem, while Trump only had three to exacerbate it. What precisely did Trump do differently than the Obama administration on climate change and actual carbon-emission reduction that would sustain a charge of “climate arsonist”?
Actually, the Trump years have been mostly below the carbon-emissions output of the Obama-Biden years, according to a study released in January of this year:
Greenhouse gas emissions in the United States dropped last year after a sharp increase in 2018, new data released Tuesday show. The drop resumed a long-term downward trend driven chiefly by a shift away from coal power generation. The story of the emissions decline has largely been one of market forces—rather than policies—that have made utilities close coal plants in favor of cheaper natural gas and renewable energy. But this shift to lower-carbon energy has been restricted to the electricity sector, and the nation’s emissions cuts are still not on track to meet the targets it agreed to under the Paris climate accord. … Overall, U.S. greenhouse gas emissions fell about 2 percent in 2019, according to preliminary estimates by Rhodium Group, an economic analysis firm. The previous year, strong economic growth and other factors had pushed emissions up roughly 3 percent.
Emissions did rise in 2018, but not as high as they did in 2014 in the Obama-Biden term. The 2012-14 and 2018 bumps correlate to an expansion of economic activity — the kind of growth that adds jobs. All three years of Trump’s term shows a smaller carbon-emissions total than all but three years of Obama’s term, and perhaps only two years. Trump’s 2018 peak is still well below two peaks in the Obama era, 2009 and 2014.
Furthermore, given the immense impact of the shutdown on both the economy and energy use, we can expect 2020 to be one of the lowest on record for US carbon emissions. So how could Trump’s position on climate change have anything to do with the wildfires on the West Coast, other than in Biden’s imagination — or perhaps more accurately, Biden’s demagoguery?
Like I said at the top, this suburbanite will take his chances with Trump rather than on the tender mercies of the BLM and Antifa mobs. You know, the ones who actually commit arson.


hotair--2020-09-14--Atlantic: If Trump wins, Democrats will respond with 'mass unrest'

Yesterday the Atlantic published a piece by Shadi Hamid which makes the argument that if Trump wins the 2020 election , Democrats are not going to handle it well .
The basis of his argument is pretty simple .
Democrats didn ’ t handled the 2016 loss very well : Liberals had enough trouble accepting the results of the 2016 election .
In some sense , they never really came to terms with it .
The past four years have witnessed the continuous urge to explain away the inexplicable , to find solace in the fact that the voters betrayed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ their fellow Americans side with a racist and a fabulist , someone so callous and seemingly without empathy ?
It was easier to think that those Americans had been lackeys , manipulated and deceived , or that they simply hadn ’ t understood what was best for them .
Moreover , the Russians had interfered , and tipped the balance in an extremely close election through propaganda , fake news , and collusion with the Trump campaign .
Perhaps , as former Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid suggested , the Russians had even @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the moment the results were in Democrats started chanting “ Not my president !
” in the streets .
Paul Krugman called the result “ illegitimate ” in the NY Times .
The Women ’ s March became the largest national protest in recent history .
As recently as last year , Hillary Clinton said the election had been “ stolen ” from her .
So it really is a given that Democrats didn ’ t handle the 2016 loss well .
But Hamid argues that if Biden were to lose this year @ @ @ @ @ @ @ get what he ’ s saying but to be fair , Democrats fully expected to win in 2016 as well .
Hillary was similarly up in the polls and the best case for a Trump win at the time was that he had something like a 15 % chance .
But I guess it would be worse in the sense that all of the anger they ’ ve built toward Trump over the past four years would appear not to matter .
Hamid says the results of that could be violence in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ dissonance—the gap between what is and what should be—can fuel revolutionary sentiment , and not just in a fluffy , radical-chic kind of way .
In such situations , acting outside the political process , including through nonpeaceful means , becomes more attractive , not necessarily out of hope but out of despair .
This distance between what a society should be and the tragedy of what it actually becomes is less of a problem in democracies , because democracies are supposed to be responsive to voters ’ demands and grievances .
But @ @ @ @ @ @ @ gap will grow larger under a Trump presidency than a Biden one , and this has implications for mass unrest and political violence across American cities .
Last time Democrats lost they started The Resistance which resulted in a wave of death threats against GOP office holders in 2017 .
If they lose again , it will be worse .
More on the left will embrace antifa tactics , i.e .
beat up those who disagree , burn down anything that stands in the way .
Needless to say , some on the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ : But he defended his work in a way that ’ s hard to argue with : I think he ’ s right to expect the worst from the left if Trump wins but that doesn ’ t mean that , even if his prediction comes true , it will be seen by people as what it is , i.e .
a continuation of bad behavior that started after the 2016 election .
If Trump wins , we ’ ll have wall-to-wall media coverage of what went wrong ( starting with the presumption @ @ @ @ @ @ @ more pressure to change the electoral college .
No one at CNN or MSNBC is going to admit the left is behaving badly and failing to accept the results .
How do I know ?
Because no one really made this point in 2017 ( except people on the right ) .
More recently , the media has spent the entire summer trying to downplay far left riots as not significant or not worthy of national coverage .
If Trump wins , Brian Stelter and people like him will redouble their efforts to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ actual violence , just as they ’ re doing now .
This is the difference that having a left-wing media makes .
The right is denounced in advance on the expectation that they won ’ t behave themselves .
The left isn ’ t even denounced in real time as they do the very thing the right is criticized for maybe thinking about doing .
With that kind of advantage , the left is rarely held accountable for their behavior .

Yesterday the Atlantic published a piece by Shadi Hamid which makes the argument that if Trump wins the 2020 election, Democrats are not going to handle it well. The basis of his argument is pretty simple. Democrats didn’t handled the 2016 loss very well:
Liberals had enough trouble accepting the results of the 2016 election. In some sense, they never really came to terms with it. The past four years have witnessed the continuous urge to explain away the inexplicable, to find solace in the fact that the voters betrayed them. How could so many of their fellow Americans side with a racist and a fabulist, someone so callous and seemingly without empathy? It was easier to think that those Americans had been lackeys, manipulated and deceived, or that they simply hadn’t understood what was best for them. Moreover, the Russians had interfered, and tipped the balance in an extremely close election through propaganda, fake news, and collusion with the Trump campaign. Perhaps, as former Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid suggested, the Russians had even tampered with the vote itself.
From the moment the results were in Democrats started chanting “Not my president!” in the streets. Paul Krugman called the result “illegitimate” in the NY Times. The Women’s March became the largest national protest in recent history. As recently as last year, Hillary Clinton said the election had been “stolen” from her. So it really is a given that Democrats didn’t handle the 2016 loss well. But Hamid argues that if Biden were to lose this year things would be even worse:
In presidential elections, once is a fluke; twice is a pattern. I struggle to imagine how, beyond utter shock, millions of Democrats will process a Trump victory. A loss for Biden, after having been the clear favorite all summer, would provoke mass disillusion with electoral politics as a means of change—at a time when disillusion is already dangerously high. If Democrats can’t beat a candidate as unpopular as Trump during a devastating pandemic and a massive economic contraction, then are they even capable of winning presidential elections anymore?
I get what he’s saying but to be fair, Democrats fully expected to win in 2016 as well. Hillary was similarly up in the polls and the best case for a Trump win at the time was that he had something like a 15% chance. But I guess it would be worse in the sense that all of the anger they’ve built toward Trump over the past four years would appear not to matter. Hamid says the results of that could be violence in the streets:
A certain kind of cognitive dissonance—the gap between what is and what should be—can fuel revolutionary sentiment, and not just in a fluffy, radical-chic kind of way. In such situations, acting outside the political process, including through nonpeaceful means, becomes more attractive, not necessarily out of hope but out of despair. This distance between what a society should be and the tragedy of what it actually becomes is less of a problem in democracies, because democracies are supposed to be responsive to voters’ demands and grievances. But they aren’t always. The gap will grow larger under a Trump presidency than a Biden one, and this has implications for mass unrest and political violence across American cities.
Last time Democrats lost they started The Resistance which resulted in a wave of death threats against GOP office holders in 2017. If they lose again, it will be worse. More on the left will embrace antifa tactics, i.e. beat up those who disagree, burn down anything that stands in the way.
Needless to say, some on the left didn’t appreciate the article:
Not just tripe, but dangerous tripe. This is a very dangerous article and Goldberg is criminally irresponsible for publishing it. — Lisa Goldman (@lisang) September 13, 2020
But he defended his work in a way that’s hard to argue with:
Whatever else you think about the argument, it's a fairly mild claim to say liberals had trouble accepting the results of the 2016 election. The evidence, on display the past four years, is overwhelminghttps://t.co/wbpBYfuTLT — Shadi Hamid (@shadihamid) September 13, 2020
I think he’s right to expect the worst from the left if Trump wins but that doesn’t mean that, even if his prediction comes true, it will be seen by people as what it is, i.e. a continuation of bad behavior that started after the 2016 election. If Trump wins, we’ll have wall-to-wall media coverage of what went wrong (starting with the presumption that his win is wrong) and more pressure to change the electoral college. No one at CNN or MSNBC is going to admit the left is behaving badly and failing to accept the results.
How do I know? Because no one really made this point in 2017 (except people on the right). More recently, the media has spent the entire summer trying to downplay far left riots as not significant or not worthy of national coverage. If Trump wins, Brian Stelter and people like him will redouble their efforts to downplay any threats of violence or even actual violence, just as they’re doing now.
This is the difference that having a left-wing media makes. The right is denounced in advance on the expectation that they won’t behave themselves. The left isn’t even denounced in real time as they do the very thing the right is criticized for maybe thinking about doing. With that kind of advantage, the left is rarely held accountable for their behavior.


hotair--2020-09-14--Fact checking versus "fact checking" in the Trump era

As we get closer and closer to the election , one thing you can count on is that there will be a ton of fact-checking going on , even if Biden refuses to do any debates .
But one thing to keep an eye on is the level and severity of the fact-checking in question and how it ’ s applied to the two candidates .
One good example came to us this weekend from the Associated Press .
I thought we might have a bit of fun today and do a simple compare and contrast exercise to see how @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the “ fair and balanced ” standard that everyone is supposed to apply .
This particular piece comes to us from AP reporters Hope Yen and Calvin Woodward .
Let ’ s just start with the title , shall we ?
“ AP FACT CHECK : Trump ’ s torrent of falsehoods , Biden missteps ” Ahem .
Trump is tagged as invoking a dramatic “ torrent of falsehoods.
” Not just a few lies , mind you .
It ’ s a “ torrent.
” And what about Joe Biden ?
Oh @ @ @ @ @ @ @ few “ missteps.
” Nothing intentional , to be sure .
Just a few simple mistakes any of us could make .
Okay , so let ’ s look at a few droplets from the aforementioned “ torrent.
” They first peg Trump for “ lying ” about COVID-19 because he said , “ we are rounding the corner.
” The AP quotes one source in response , Dr. Fauci , because he told MSNBC that he “ disagreed.
” But his concerns were based on wishing that the baseline numbers were even @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , the CDC said this last week .
The numbers continue to decline , as much as most cable news networks hate to admit it .
Sound like they ’ re going in the right direction to me .
Let ’ s look at another one .
TRUMP : “ Remember , Miami Cubans gave me the highly honored Bay of Pigs Award for all I have done for our great Cuban Population !
” — tweet Sunday .
THE FACTS : No such award exists .
Trump got an endorsement in 2016 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , the first ever from the group of Florida-based veterans who fought in the United States ’ failed attempt to overthrow the Cuban government in the 1961 invasion .
But no award comes with it .
So in a moment of excitement , Trump described the announced support of the Bay of Pigs Veterans Association as an “ award ” rather than an “ endorsement.
” ( The first time they ’ ve ever given an endorsement , by the way . )
Oh , dear !
What a huge “ lie ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Next , they call out Trump for lying when he said during one rally that “ We ’ re developing a vaccine in record time .
It will be ready before the end of the year and maybe much sooner than that.
” The AP responds by saying “ He ’ s almost certainly raising unrealistic hopes.
” Seriously ?
His hopes may turn out to be unrealistic and we may not have a vaccine by then , but he ’ s making a prediction .
The prediction has not yet been @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ t know that until the end of the year .
How do you fact check a prediction ?
?
?
They then go on to ding Trump for saying that Biden wants to ban fracking , copying the rest of the liberal media by saying that Biden “ misstated his position.
” Well , he “ misstated ” it pretty often and only flip-flopped when called out on it .
This one is beyond tiresome at this point .
But what did the Associated Press find to fact check Biden about ?
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ his son Beau had been feted in Kosovo for his accomplishments , saying , “ They erected a monument to him thanking him for his service , I think the only American that they did that for.
” Out of all of that , the thing the AP found to correct was that Beau does indeed have a monument in his honor in Kosovo ( and a road named after him , which they throw in even though Joe never mentioned it ) but he ’ s not the only American to be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Bill Clinton and Bob Dole in Kosovo as well .
For Pete ’ s sake .
Read through the rest of it yourself if you can stomach it .
I ’ m not saying that Donald Trump doesn ’ t tell the occasional whopper or bend the truth to promote his accomplishments .
He clearly does .
But this “ fact check ” is composed almost entirely of a series of swings and misses against the President and softball critiques of Biden over minor points .
And both Biden and Harris have been @ @ @ @ @ @ @ month .
But I suppose we wouldn ’ t want to bring that up , would we ?

As we get closer and closer to the election, one thing you can count on is that there will be a ton of fact-checking going on, even if Biden refuses to do any debates. But one thing to keep an eye on is the level and severity of the fact-checking in question and how it’s applied to the two candidates. One good example came to us this weekend from the Associated Press. I thought we might have a bit of fun today and do a simple compare and contrast exercise to see how their coverage stacks up in terms of the “fair and balanced” standard that everyone is supposed to apply.
This particular piece comes to us from AP reporters Hope Yen and Calvin Woodward. Let’s just start with the title, shall we? “AP FACT CHECK: Trump’s torrent of falsehoods, Biden missteps”
Ahem. Trump is tagged as invoking a dramatic “torrent of falsehoods.” Not just a few lies, mind you. It’s a “torrent.” And what about Joe Biden? Oh, he’s just made a few “missteps.” Nothing intentional, to be sure. Just a few simple mistakes any of us could make.
Okay, so let’s look at a few droplets from the aforementioned “torrent.” They first peg Trump for “lying” about COVID-19 because he said, “we are rounding the corner.” The AP quotes one source in response, Dr. Fauci, because he told MSNBC that he “disagreed.” But his concerns were based on wishing that the baseline numbers were even lower going into the fall. Meanwhile, the CDC said this last week.
After declining since mid-July, the percentage of laboratory specimens testing positive for SARS-CoV-2 nationally increased slightly during week 35 but then decreased during week 36. Indicators that track influenza-like illness (ILI) and COVID-19-like illness (CLI) continued to decrease or remain stable (change of ≤0.1%) nationally and in all 10 regions; however, due to COVID-19 activity, one region reported levels of ILI above the region-specific baseline. Weekly hospitalization rates and mortality attributed to COVID-19 declined during week 36. Mortality attributed to COVID-19 remains above the epidemic threshold.
The numbers continue to decline, as much as most cable news networks hate to admit it. Sound like they’re going in the right direction to me. Let’s look at another one.
TRUMP: “Remember, Miami Cubans gave me the highly honored Bay of Pigs Award for all I have done for our great Cuban Population!” — tweet Sunday. THE FACTS: No such award exists. Trump got an endorsement in 2016 from the Bay of Pigs Veterans Association, the first ever from the group of Florida-based veterans who fought in the United States’ failed attempt to overthrow the Cuban government in the 1961 invasion. But no award comes with it.
So in a moment of excitement, Trump described the announced support of the Bay of Pigs Veterans Association as an “award” rather than an “endorsement.” (The first time they’ve ever given an endorsement, by the way.) Oh, dear! What a huge “lie” to tell! Give me a break.
Next, they call out Trump for lying when he said during one rally that “We’re developing a vaccine in record time. It will be ready before the end of the year and maybe much sooner than that.”
The AP responds by saying “He’s almost certainly raising unrealistic hopes.” Seriously? His hopes may turn out to be unrealistic and we may not have a vaccine by then, but he’s making a prediction. The prediction has not yet been proven wrong or correct and we won’t know that until the end of the year. How do you fact check a prediction???
They then go on to ding Trump for saying that Biden wants to ban fracking, copying the rest of the liberal media by saying that Biden “misstated his position.” Well, he “misstated” it pretty often and only flip-flopped when called out on it. This one is beyond tiresome at this point.
But what did the Associated Press find to fact check Biden about? They called him out for saying that his son Beau had been feted in Kosovo for his accomplishments, saying, “They erected a monument to him thanking him for his service, I think the only American that they did that for.”
Out of all of that, the thing the AP found to correct was that Beau does indeed have a monument in his honor in Kosovo (and a road named after him, which they throw in even though Joe never mentioned it) but he’s not the only American to be so honored. There are statues of Bill Clinton and Bob Dole in Kosovo as well.
For Pete’s sake. Read through the rest of it yourself if you can stomach it. I’m not saying that Donald Trump doesn’t tell the occasional whopper or bend the truth to promote his accomplishments. He clearly does. But this “fact check” is composed almost entirely of a series of swings and misses against the President and softball critiques of Biden over minor points. And both Biden and Harris have been out there flip-flopping up a storm this month. But I suppose we wouldn’t want to bring that up, would we?


hotair--2020-09-14--Markey: It's time to disarm police -- even of non-lethal means

Uhhhhh … second look at Joe Kennedy ?
Forget defunding or abolishing the police , Sen. Ed Markey ( D-MA ) declared this morning .
Let ’ s just disarm them and let nature take its course .
Not only does Markey want police disarmed from “ weapons of war , ” he also wants them stripped of non-lethal force as well ( via Twitchy ) : There might be “ brute force ” on the streets in Portland , but it ’ s not coming from the police .
For almost four months , rioters have taken control of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ public buildings , and assaulting law enforcement with commercial-grade fireworks and powerful lasers intended to blind them .
The wildfires in Oregon have pushed those riots off the front pages in the state ’ s media , but the wildfires may be yet another front in the rioting : A man is facing charges after Portland police say he used a Molotov cocktail to ignite a brush fire along Interstate 205 near East Burnside Street Sunday .
Officers responded to a reported brush fire in the 9600 block of East Burnside Street shortly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , they found a section of grass along the I-205 freeway was burning .
About an hour later , a witness contacted officers and pointed out the suspect accused of starting the fire ; he was in a nearby tent .
The suspect , 45-year-old Domingo Lopez , Jr. , admitted he lit the fire using a plastic bottle with a wick and police arrested him .
Police came in handy in this instance , no ?
When it comes to brute force , though , Markey has made his choice of team @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with Bernie Sanders to strip law enforcement at all levels of the use of non-lethal options when it comes to crowd control : Senators Edward J. Markey ( D-Mass . )
and Bernie Sanders ( I-Vt. ) today announced legislation to ban the use of tear gas and rubber bullets by law enforcement .
The No Tear Gas or Projectiles Act would prohibit federal , state , and local law enforcement officers ’ use of tear gas and rubber bullets by banning federal officers ’ use of riot control agents and kinetic impact @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of federal funding to state and local entities that do not ban riot control agents and kinetic impact projectiles .
The legislation also creates a civil penalty for law enforcement officers who violate the prohibition , as well as establishes a private right of action for their victims .
The Chemical Weapons Convention bans the use of riot control agents – including tear gas – in warfare , but U.S. law enforcement can still use them against civilians .
“ Our streets are not meant to be battlefields , and law enforcement shouldn @ @ @ @ @ @ @ against protestors and other Americans , ” said Senator Markey .
“ Law enforcement ’ s use of tear gas also compounds the effects of structural racism , because we know communities of color are already suffering disproportionately during this global respiratory pandemic .
It ’ s time we stop using these potentially lethal weapons against our own people .
I thank Senator Sanders for his partnership on this legislation and urge our colleagues to join us in protecting the health and rights of the American people.
” The “ private right of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the police officers , their departments , and their cities if those options get used .
That would put police even more on the defensive , as well as eliminate practically all methods for re-establishing order when demonstrations turn illegal and/or violent .
Other than tasers or handguns ( maybe ! )
, local police and sheriff ’ s deputies would have nothing other than bullhorns and a lot of bluffing to put an end to rioting .
Riots , by the way , damage the health and rights of the American people @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s CHAZ , or the Minneapolis riots , as well as the spike in crime that has followed in major American cities .
Markey ’ s picking a very good moment to make this pitch , although some of his fellow Democrats might disagree .
They ’ re choosing the rioters just before Americans choose their next set of elected representatives .
Forbes ’ Seth Cohen warns Black Lives Matter organizers today that rioting in Lancaster over a completely justified shooting might cost Joe Biden Pennsylvania and the election : In other @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of Ricardo Munoz is not , on the surface , the same as the deaths of George Floyd , Daniel Purdue , and others .
Yet the violent protests in reaction to the incident are the same as they have been in other cities like Minneapolis , Rochester and elsewhere .
And that ’ s a problem for both the Biden campaign , and the broader Black Lives Matter movement leaders who have defended anti-police protests as legitimate expressions of anger at unjust police actions .
The obvious fact is , not every @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and reacting to each one with similar violent protests is not only wrong , but it is shortsighted .
Conflating incidents like the one that just occurred in Lancaster with ones where there is much greater evidence of police misconduct dilutes both the power and the purpose of rightful outrage against unjustified police actions .
Riots like those that occurred overnight in Lancaster also play into the hands of those who are claiming that the anti-police protestors don ’ t discern between the conduct of police who are doing their job , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a racially-motivated manner .
That ’ s because they don ’ t distinguish between the two .
They don ’ t even bother to wait for the opportunity to discern the difference .
Democrats like Markey and Sanders are so busy climbing aboard that bandwagon that they don ’ t bother to do so either , instead proclaiming “ systemic racism ” and demanding that police stand down in the face of public unrest .
Cohen warns that a reckoning will come soon : Let ’ s hope it does .
Markey and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and voters can now conclude that only one party is actually interested in enforcing the law and keeping the peace .
The more this continues , the more that will be the question that decides the election .

Uhhhhh … second look at Joe Kennedy? Forget defunding or abolishing the police, Sen. Ed Markey (D-MA) declared this morning. Let’s just disarm them and let nature take its course.
Not only does Markey want police disarmed from “weapons of war,” he also wants them stripped of non-lethal force as well (via Twitchy):
Portland police routinely attack peaceful protestors with brute force. We must disarm these officers, and every other police department in America, of weapons of war, and enact a nationwide ban on tear gas, rubber and plastic bullets, and bean bag rounds. https://t.co/PDZcjhmSLB — Ed Markey (@SenMarkey) September 14, 2020
There might be “brute force” on the streets in Portland, but it’s not coming from the police. For almost four months, rioters have taken control of the streets, lobbing Molotov cocktails at public buildings, and assaulting law enforcement with commercial-grade fireworks and powerful lasers intended to blind them. The wildfires in Oregon have pushed those riots off the front pages in the state’s media, but the wildfires may be yet another front in the rioting:
A man is facing charges after Portland police say he used a Molotov cocktail to ignite a brush fire along Interstate 205 near East Burnside Street Sunday. Officers responded to a reported brush fire in the 9600 block of East Burnside Street shortly after 4:30 p.m. In the area, they found a section of grass along the I-205 freeway was burning. Firefighters extinguished the flames. About an hour later, a witness contacted officers and pointed out the suspect accused of starting the fire; he was in a nearby tent. The suspect, 45-year-old Domingo Lopez, Jr., admitted he lit the fire using a plastic bottle with a wick and police arrested him.
Police came in handy in this instance, no? When it comes to brute force, though, Markey has made his choice of team pretty clear. Markey has teamed up with Bernie Sanders to strip law enforcement at all levels of the use of non-lethal options when it comes to crowd control:
Senators Edward J. Markey (D-Mass.) and Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) today announced legislation to ban the use of tear gas and rubber bullets by law enforcement. The No Tear Gas or Projectiles Act would prohibit federal, state, and local law enforcement officers’ use of tear gas and rubber bullets by banning federal officers’ use of riot control agents and kinetic impact projectiles, and by restricting the allocation of federal funding to state and local entities that do not ban riot control agents and kinetic impact projectiles. The legislation also creates a civil penalty for law enforcement officers who violate the prohibition, as well as establishes a private right of action for their victims. The Chemical Weapons Convention bans the use of riot control agents – including tear gas – in warfare, but U.S. law enforcement can still use them against civilians. “Our streets are not meant to be battlefields, and law enforcement shouldn’t be using weapons of war against protestors and other Americans,” said Senator Markey. “Law enforcement’s use of tear gas also compounds the effects of structural racism, because we know communities of color are already suffering disproportionately during this global respiratory pandemic. It’s time we stop using these potentially lethal weapons against our own people. I thank Senator Sanders for his partnership on this legislation and urge our colleagues to join us in protecting the health and rights of the American people.”
The “private right of action” clause would allow lawsuits against the police officers, their departments, and their cities if those options get used. That would put police even more on the defensive, as well as eliminate practically all methods for re-establishing order when demonstrations turn illegal and/or violent. Other than tasers or handguns (maybe!), local police and sheriff’s deputies would have nothing other than bullhorns and a lot of bluffing to put an end to rioting.
Riots, by the way, damage the health and rights of the American people. Just ask those who endured Seattle’s CHAZ, or the Minneapolis riots, as well as the spike in crime that has followed in major American cities.
Markey’s picking a very good moment to make this pitch, although some of his fellow Democrats might disagree. They’re choosing the rioters just before Americans choose their next set of elected representatives. Forbes’ Seth Cohen warns Black Lives Matter organizers today that rioting in Lancaster over a completely justified shooting might cost Joe Biden Pennsylvania and the election:
In other words, the circumstances of the death of Ricardo Munoz is not, on the surface, the same as the deaths of George Floyd, Daniel Purdue, and others. Yet the violent protests in reaction to the incident are the same as they have been in other cities like Minneapolis, Rochester and elsewhere. And that’s a problem for both the Biden campaign, and the broader Black Lives Matter movement leaders who have defended anti-police protests as legitimate expressions of anger at unjust police actions. The obvious fact is, not every police-officer initiated shooting is the same, and reacting to each one with similar violent protests is not only wrong, but it is shortsighted. Conflating incidents like the one that just occurred in Lancaster with ones where there is much greater evidence of police misconduct dilutes both the power and the purpose of rightful outrage against unjustified police actions. Riots like those that occurred overnight in Lancaster also play into the hands of those who are claiming that the anti-police protestors don’t discern between the conduct of police who are doing their job, and those who are acting improperly or in a racially-motivated manner.
That’s because they don’t distinguish between the two. They don’t even bother to wait for the opportunity to discern the difference. Democrats like Markey and Sanders are so busy climbing aboard that bandwagon that they don’t bother to do so either, instead proclaiming “systemic racism” and demanding that police stand down in the face of public unrest.
Cohen warns that a reckoning will come soon:
All eyes will be focused on how Biden addresses the incident, and how he explains to the American people where the line between proper protests and the need for law and order should be drawn. As the campaign hits its stretch run, Biden must address this issue, and the protests in Lancaster, like his election depends on it…. Because it likely does.
Let’s hope it does. Markey and Sanders have thrown in with the rioters, and voters can now conclude that only one party is actually interested in enforcing the law and keeping the peace. The more this continues, the more that will be the question that decides the election.


hotair--2020-09-14--How was it in Trump's interest to hold an indoor rally last night?

Normally I ’ d ask “ Why would the president put people at risk and set a bad example by holding an indoor rally last night ?
” but that ’ d be a silly question .
He ’ s a civic disaster and a deeply selfish human being .
If it ’ s in his interest to do something , he ’ s going to do it regardless of what it means for anyone else .
So let ’ s approach it from that angle .
How was it in his interest to hold a rally indoors ?
How @ @ @ @ @ @ @ days out from an election , to generate headlines like this ?
Americans are keenly aware of the risk from indoor gatherings .
More than two-thirds believe they ’ re not safe in a movie theater right now .
“ Tenet , ” one of the most hotly anticipated films of the year , has reportedly made a measly $ 16 million over its first two weekends of release .
Last week the CDC released a study that found people who ’ ve tested positive for COVID were twice as likely to have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ weeks than people who haven ’ t .
Herman Cain famously contracted COVID after attending Trump ’ s last indoor rally , in Tulsa in June , and later passed away .
There ’ s no proof that he got infected at the rally itself , but he might have , and his tragic death is mentioned in many of the reports today about the Nevada rally last night .
To repeat the question : Against that backdrop , how is it in Trump ’ s electoral interest to broadcast to Americans that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ seriously than most of them are ?
Especially following a media uproar over what he said to Bob Woodward in March about deliberately “ downplaying ” the threat from the virus .
That ’ s plausible .
It ’ s extremely Trumpy to believe you can talk the public into believing that things are getting back to normal as the death toll nudges past 200,000 , Americans are mass-boycotting things like movie theaters , and doctors like Fauci are warning of a brutal winter to come .
To have even an outside chance @ @ @ @ @ @ @ one would think the president would need a reservoir of credibility on handling COVID that he just doesn ’ t have .
An ABC poll out yesterday finds that just 31 percent of adults trust his rhetoric about the virus , and 51 percent of his own base — whites without a college degree — are skeptical of what he ’ s said about it .
There would at least be some mitigation of the bad optics if the campaign had insisted on all attendees wearing masks .
But according to the AP @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in view of the camera , standing behind Trump ’ s podium .
“ Relatively few in the crowd wore masks otherwise , ” the agency reported .
Some attendees told the Times that the virus was a hoax , with one wearing a t-shirt that read “ Social-ism distancing ” and another carrying a sign that read “ Media is the virus.
” The Times has another theory for why the rally was held indoors , one provided by the campaign itself .
They were forced to do it because Nevada ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on letting them hold one outdoors : Is Gov .
Steve Sisolak attempting to effectively block Trump from holding rallies in his state on social-distancing grounds ?
He was all over the president on Twitter after last night ’ s event : Trump would be justified in complaining if one of his outdoor rallies wasn ’ t met with the same warm reception by local government as a BLM mass protest , but that doesn ’ t excuse the decision to hold an indoor rally — at a site , no less , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ *more restrictive* than Sisolak ’ s rules .
( Xtreme Manufacturing , where the rally was held , limits gatherings to 10 people . )
I also don ’ t understand how Sisolak could have effectively “ blocked ” Trump and his fans from holding an outdoor rally .
Obviously they couldn ’ t block them from holding the rally indoors even though that violated state rules as well .
Surely there ’ s some pro-Trump Nevadan somewhere with a few acres to spare who would have been willing to let the president @ @ @ @ @ @ @ property for an evening .
Sheldon Adelson doesn ’ t own any empty parcels anywhere in or around Las Vegas ?
Also , if the problem here is Sisolak , what ’ s Mike Pence doing holding an indoor event today in Wisconsin ?
Exit question : How does this help Trump with 50 days to go ?
Which undecided voter out there who ’ s worried about getting infected is sifting through the coverage of the Nevada rally today , thinking , “ I love having a president who breaks the rules @ @ @ @ @ @ @ follow to keep people safe ” ?

Normally I’d ask “Why would the president put people at risk and set a bad example by holding an indoor rally last night?” but that’d be a silly question. He’s a civic disaster and a deeply selfish human being. If it’s in his interest to do something, he’s going to do it regardless of what it means for anyone else.
So let’s approach it from that angle. How was it in his interest to hold a rally indoors?
How is it in his interest, 50 days out from an election, to generate headlines like this?
Americans are keenly aware of the risk from indoor gatherings. More than two-thirds believe they’re not safe in a movie theater right now. “Tenet,” one of the most hotly anticipated films of the year, has reportedly made a measly $16 million over its first two weekends of release. Last week the CDC released a study that found people who’ve tested positive for COVID were twice as likely to have dined at restaurants over the previous two weeks than people who haven’t.
Herman Cain famously contracted COVID after attending Trump’s last indoor rally, in Tulsa in June, and later passed away. There’s no proof that he got infected at the rally itself, but he might have, and his tragic death is mentioned in many of the reports today about the Nevada rally last night.
To repeat the question: Against that backdrop, how is it in Trump’s electoral interest to broadcast to Americans that he’s taking the virus less seriously than most of them are? Especially following a media uproar over what he said to Bob Woodward in March about deliberately “downplaying” the threat from the virus.
The AP suggests a possibility:
[T]he president’s campaign believes it needs to change the subject and project the sense, despite evidence otherwise, that the pandemic was winding down and that a vaccine was on the horizon. Part of the plan: create images of normalcy, like the packed White House lawn for Trump’s convention speech, though it was unclear if viewers were reassured or frightened.
That’s plausible. It’s extremely Trumpy to believe you can talk the public into believing that things are getting back to normal as the death toll nudges past 200,000, Americans are mass-boycotting things like movie theaters, and doctors like Fauci are warning of a brutal winter to come. To have even an outside chance of succeeding at that, though, one would think the president would need a reservoir of credibility on handling COVID that he just doesn’t have. An ABC poll out yesterday finds that just 31 percent of adults trust his rhetoric about the virus, and 51 percent of his own base — whites without a college degree — are skeptical of what he’s said about it.
There would at least be some mitigation of the bad optics if the campaign had insisted on all attendees wearing masks. But according to the AP, masks were mandatory only for those in view of the camera, standing behind Trump’s podium. “Relatively few in the crowd wore masks otherwise,” the agency reported. Some attendees told the Times that the virus was a hoax, with one wearing a t-shirt that read “Social-ism distancing” and another carrying a sign that read “Media is the virus.”
The Times has another theory for why the rally was held indoors, one provided by the campaign itself. They were forced to do it because Nevada’s Democratic governor wouldn’t yield on letting them hold one outdoors:
The campaign’s decision to hold Sunday’s rally indoors came after two outdoor rallies in the state were scuttled, one because the Reno-Tahoe Airport Authority informed the tenants who lease the hangar there that the event was in violation of the state directive limiting gatherings to under 50 people. The campaign then vetted five different outdoor venues, all of which were blocked by the governor, according to an administration official familiar with the planning. It settled on the indoor manufacturing plant as a last resort, adding extra ventilation and keeping doors open.
Is Gov. Steve Sisolak attempting to effectively block Trump from holding rallies in his state on social-distancing grounds? He was all over the president on Twitter after last night’s event:
Despite reports from his own White House, despite local officials in Southern & Northern Nevada reiterating to the venues the existing restrictions in State emergency directives, tonight, the President is knowingly packing thousands into an indoor venue to hold a political rally. — Governor Sisolak (@GovSisolak) September 14, 2020
Early on in this crisis, when it came time to exhibit real leadership and make difficult decisions to protect the American people, he failed to develop a unified national response strategy. — Governor Sisolak (@GovSisolak) September 14, 2020
Instead, he came into our State and blatantly disregarded the emergency directives and tough choices made to fight this pandemic and begin reopening our economy by hosting an indoor gathering that’s categorized as “high risk” according to his own CDC. — Governor Sisolak (@GovSisolak) September 14, 2020
This is an insult to every Nevadan who has followed the directives, made sacrifices, and put their neighbors before themselves. It’s also a direct threat to all of the recent progress we’ve made, and could potentially set us back. — Governor Sisolak (@GovSisolak) September 14, 2020
Trump would be justified in complaining if one of his outdoor rallies wasn’t met with the same warm reception by local government as a BLM mass protest, but that doesn’t excuse the decision to hold an indoor rally — at a site, no less, whose own rules about social distancing are *more restrictive* than Sisolak’s rules. (Xtreme Manufacturing, where the rally was held, limits gatherings to 10 people.) I also don’t understand how Sisolak could have effectively “blocked” Trump and his fans from holding an outdoor rally. Obviously they couldn’t block them from holding the rally indoors even though that violated state rules as well. Surely there’s some pro-Trump Nevadan somewhere with a few acres to spare who would have been willing to let the president and a few thousand fans use his property for an evening. Sheldon Adelson doesn’t own any empty parcels anywhere in or around Las Vegas?
Also, if the problem here is Sisolak, what’s Mike Pence doing holding an indoor event today in Wisconsin?
VP also doing an indoor campaign rally today in Janesville WI. Tells supporters "the road to victory runs right through Wisconsin." Less than six-feet social distancing between supporters, but not elbow-to-elbow as at Trump rally last night. pic.twitter.com/ILUIi3PLvC — Mark Knoller (@markknoller) September 14, 2020
Exit question: How does this help Trump with 50 days to go? Which undecided voter out there who’s worried about getting infected is sifting through the coverage of the Nevada rally today, thinking, “I love having a president who breaks the rules the rest of us are trying to follow to keep people safe”?


hotair--2020-09-14--President Trump says he's up for a four hour debate moderated by Joe Rogan

Yesterday MMA fighter Tim Kennedy put out this suggestion on Twitter , tagging Joe Rogan , Joe Biden and President Trump .
As you can see , this got quite a lot of attention : A couple hours later he added this second tweet : Earlier today that suggestion got a big thumbs up from the president : During the discussion with Kennedy , Joe Rogan suggested that Biden wasn ’ t going to go forward with the already planned official debates .
“ I don ’ t think he can .
I don ’ t think he can stand @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” Rogan said .
He went on to predict that if the debate happens , Trump would “ destroy him.
” Rogan then offered to bet Kennedy $ 100 that the debate wouldn ’ t happen .
A few minutes later Kennedy suggested the idea of a debate hosted by Rogan .
Rogan agreed saying , “ If they wanted to do that , they both wanted to come here in Austin and sit down and have a debate I would 100 % do it .
I would 100 % do it .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ find out but I don ’ t think that Biden can handle…people get mad at me for saying this—I think there ’ s something wrong.
” Rogan went on to say that he was a Bernie Sanders supporter , so it wasn ’ t his goal to support Trump .
He just genuinely believes Biden has a problem .
He went on to play a clip of Biden himself talking about his two brain surgeries and how even the surgeons said his chances of surviving weren ’ t good .
I ’ d @ @ @ @ @ @ @ course it won ’ t .
Biden ’ s people are playing defense and trying to limit the candidate ’ s exposure to damage .
Plus , the fact that Rogan has expressed his concern about Biden ’ s mental condition makes it easy for them to rule this out .
They won ’ t take the risk .
But it will be interesting to see what the Biden camp says about this today .
Here ’ s the clip of Rogan talking to Kennedy .
This is queued up to the discussion @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is a bonus clip of Rogan talking about Biden from earlier this month : Update : Eric Weinstein says Rogan would eat his own words if Biden showed up and put in a solid performance .
Maybe so but there ’ s no way the Biden team will take that risk while he ’ s leading in the polls .

Yesterday MMA fighter Tim Kennedy put out this suggestion on Twitter, tagging Joe Rogan, Joe Biden and President Trump. As you can see, this got quite a lot of attention:
On my podcast with @joerogan he offered to moderate a debate between @JoeBiden and @realDonaldTrump It would be four hours with no live audience. Just the two candidates, cameras, and their vision of how to move this country forward. Who wants this? #debates #Election2020 — Tim Kennedy (@TimKennedyMMA) September 13, 2020
A couple hours later he added this second tweet:
A long form debate with a neutral moderator.
No fake audience reactions.
No biased questions.
Neutral camera positions.
No sound bite length responses.
Just their respective policies explained to us.
Please @realDonaldTrump and @JoeBiden make it happen. #debate #joerogandebate — Tim Kennedy (@TimKennedyMMA) September 14, 2020
Earlier today that suggestion got a big thumbs up from the president:
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1305487258036781056
During the discussion with Kennedy, Joe Rogan suggested that Biden wasn’t going to go forward with the already planned official debates. “I don’t think he can. I don’t think he can stand there for that long and last,” Rogan said. He went on to predict that if the debate happens, Trump would “destroy him.” Rogan then offered to bet Kennedy $100 that the debate wouldn’t happen.
A few minutes later Kennedy suggested the idea of a debate hosted by Rogan. Rogan agreed saying, “If they wanted to do that, they both wanted to come here in Austin and sit down and have a debate I would 100% do it. I would 100% do it. It would be the best way to find out but I don’t think that Biden can handle…people get mad at me for saying this—I think there’s something wrong.”
Rogan went on to say that he was a Bernie Sanders supporter, so it wasn’t his goal to support Trump. He just genuinely believes Biden has a problem. He went on to play a clip of Biden himself talking about his two brain surgeries and how even the surgeons said his chances of surviving weren’t good.
I’d love to see this happen but of course it won’t. Biden’s people are playing defense and trying to limit the candidate’s exposure to damage. Plus, the fact that Rogan has expressed his concern about Biden’s mental condition makes it easy for them to rule this out. They won’t take the risk. But it will be interesting to see what the Biden camp says about this today.
Here’s the clip of Rogan talking to Kennedy. This is cued up to the discussion about holding a debate. Below that is a bonus clip of Rogan talking about Biden from earlier this month:
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1303429887592669184
Update: Eric Weinstein says Rogan would eat his own words if Biden showed up and put in a solid performance. Maybe so but there’s no way the Biden team will take that risk while he’s leading in the polls.


hotair--2020-09-14--Lynwood city manager: Ambush on deputies simply "chickens come home to roost"

Stay classy , Lynwood .
The city manager of this Los Angeles suburb decided to use his Instagram account to weigh in on the ambush shooting of two deputies … and to more or less endorse it .
Jose Ometeotl used a Malcolm X meme to argue that the Los Angeles Sheriff ’ s Department and its deputies basically had it coming to them , calling the shooting “ chickens come home to roost ” ( via Jeff Dunetz ) : Ometeotl ’ s Instagram page has been moved to private , but Melugin shared a screenshot of the post @ @ @ @ @ @ @ X .
A Change.org petition was started demanding Ometeotl ’ s resignation .
… “ The shooting of anyone is a wholly unacceptable occurrence in society .
I do not condone the type of violence seen in the shooting of the deputies yesterday in Compton .
I will say that communities like Compton have been plagued by deputy gangs that inflict fear and violence in the community .
These deputies murdered , framed and stole from the community just because they could .
Good deputies never turned on bad deputies for fear of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ bad deputies kept their jobs and continued on their criminal career .
The fact that someone randomly opened fire on deputies is to be expected in the society we live in today .
The political climate and leadership of Sheriff Villanueva has only sowed the seeds of anger and frustration in the community .
I pray for the deputies and their families while still demanding justice for Andres Guardado , Breona Taylor , Tamir Rice , Ahmaud Arbery… ” “ Deputy gangs ” ?
Heavy notes that Ometeotl seems to be referencing a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ago about a complaint from a deputy in the Compton station .
The deputy alleged that LASD deputies had formed cliques or “ gangs ” within the department , and that they operate as authorities within authorities , so to speak : It was one of the first instances of retaliation that continued for months , exacted by the Executioners , a band of deputies with matching tattoos that wields vast power at the Compton station , he alleged in a claim filed against Los Angeles County .
The claim says the group @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Nazi imagery and an AK-47 — celebrates deputy shootings and the induction of new members with “ inking parties.
” In recent years , the claim says , its members were involved in setting illegal arrest quotas and threatening work slowdowns — which involve ignoring or responding slowly to calls — when they did not get preferred assignments .
The allegations have revived long-standing concerns that inked deputy groups — with monikers such as the Spartans , Regulators , Grim Reapers and Banditos — operate out of several Sheriff ’ s Department stations @ @ @ @ @ @ @ see as criminal gangs within law enforcement .
The existence of such fraternities has sparked multiple internal investigations and recently a federal probe by the FBI , but the groups have remained entrenched , with many civil liberties advocates accusing the Sheriff ’ s Department of turning a blind eye .
“ We have a gang here that has grown to the point where it dominates every aspect of life at the Compton station , ” said Alan Romero , an attorney representing Gonzalez in the claim , which is a precursor to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ scheduling , the distribution of informant tips , and assignments to deputies in the station with preference shown to members of the gang as well as prospects.
” Sheriff Alex Villanueva denies that gangs run the Compton station , but ordered an investigation .
The FBI is also conducting a probe to see whether this allegation is true and resulting in civil-rights violations , which would trigger action by the Department of Justice — especially these days .
Worth noting , too : The commander of the LASD Compton station is Captain La @ @ @ @ @ @ @ None of this has been substantiated yet , however , and it has nothing to do with the ambush shooting that took place .
The deputies got shot while sitting in their car , not out on patrol or committing some kind of civil-rights violations .
With this statement , Ometeotl is tacitly encouraging open-season assaults on law enforcement and justifying them as “ chickens come home to roost.
” The city council tried doing a little damage control late yesterday : The City of Lynwood , which is just outside Compton , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in response to Ometeotl ’ s post , that offered prayers to the deputies and their families .
“ There have been comments made today ( Sunday ) by our City Manager on his personal social media that are his personal opinions and don ’ t reflect the position of the Lynwood City Council , ” the statement read .
There ’ s one sure way to deal with that , then .
The city council hired Ometeotl as city manager ; they can fire him as well , as city managers are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s public statements about law enforcement contradict the council ’ s view , then that kind of basic disconnect on the primary role of government — protecting its citizens — requires a change of personnel .
If Ometeotl keeps his job , then it ’ s pretty apparent that his statement does reflect the city council ’ s true attitude , or at least doesn ’ t contradict it enough for them to do anything more than pay lip service to law enforcement .
I wonder if Ometeotl will appreciate that chicken @ @ @ @ @ @ @ council doesn ’ t fire Ometeotl , the LASD could decide to terminate its services to Lynwood , which it provides under contract .
Lynwood is an incorporated city , which means that the county sheriff only operates in that jurisdiction by mutual agreement .
If Lynwood wants to call open season on LASD deputies , the LASD can pull out and leave Lynwood to stand up its own police force .
That might be an instructive moment in 2020 .

Stay classy, Lynwood. The city manager of this Los Angeles suburb decided to use his Instagram account to weigh in on the ambush shooting of two deputies … and to more or less endorse it. Jose Ometeotl used a Malcolm X meme to argue that the Los Angeles Sheriff’s Department and its deputies basically had it coming to them, calling the shooting “chickens come home to roost” (via Jeff Dunetz):
Here is the full post from before he made his account private. @FOXLA pic.twitter.com/ETAmv3ekcg — Bill Melugin (@BillFOXLA) September 13, 2020
Ometeotl’s Instagram page has been moved to private, but Melugin shared a screenshot of the post, which was a graphic of Malcolm X. A Change.org petition was started demanding Ometeotl’s resignation. … Ometeotl wrote with the graphic: “The shooting of anyone is a wholly unacceptable occurrence in society. I do not condone the type of violence seen in the shooting of the deputies yesterday in Compton. I will say that communities like Compton have been plagued by deputy gangs that inflict fear and violence in the community. These deputies murdered, framed and stole from the community just because they could. Good deputies never turned on bad deputies for fear of retaliation and when caught most of these bad deputies kept their jobs and continued on their criminal career. The fact that someone randomly opened fire on deputies is to be expected in the society we live in today. The political climate and leadership of Sheriff Villanueva has only sowed the seeds of anger and frustration in the community. I pray for the deputies and their families while still demanding justice for Andres Guardado, Breona Taylor, Tamir Rice, Ahmaud Arbery…”
“Deputy gangs”? Heavy notes that Ometeotl seems to be referencing a Los Angeles Times report from two months ago about a complaint from a deputy in the Compton station. The deputy alleged that LASD deputies had formed cliques or “gangs” within the department, and that they operate as authorities within authorities, so to speak:
It was one of the first instances of retaliation that continued for months, exacted by the Executioners, a band of deputies with matching tattoos that wields vast power at the Compton station, he alleged in a claim filed against Los Angeles County. The claim says the group — sporting tattoos of a skull with Nazi imagery and an AK-47 — celebrates deputy shootings and the induction of new members with “inking parties.” In recent years, the claim says, its members were involved in setting illegal arrest quotas and threatening work slowdowns — which involve ignoring or responding slowly to calls — when they did not get preferred assignments. The allegations have revived long-standing concerns that inked deputy groups — with monikers such as the Spartans, Regulators, Grim Reapers and Banditos — operate out of several Sheriff’s Department stations and represent what many in the community see as criminal gangs within law enforcement. The existence of such fraternities has sparked multiple internal investigations and recently a federal probe by the FBI, but the groups have remained entrenched, with many civil liberties advocates accusing the Sheriff’s Department of turning a blind eye. “We have a gang here that has grown to the point where it dominates every aspect of life at the Compton station,” said Alan Romero, an attorney representing Gonzalez in the claim, which is a precursor to a lawsuit. “It essentially controls scheduling, the distribution of informant tips, and assignments to deputies in the station with preference shown to members of the gang as well as prospects.”
Sheriff Alex Villanueva denies that gangs run the Compton station, but ordered an investigation. The FBI is also conducting a probe to see whether this allegation is true and resulting in civil-rights violations, which would trigger action by the Department of Justice — especially these days. Worth noting, too: The commander of the LASD Compton station is Captain La Tonya Clark, an African-American woman.
None of this has been substantiated yet, however, and it has nothing to do with the ambush shooting that took place. The deputies got shot while sitting in their car, not out on patrol or committing some kind of civil-rights violations. With this statement, Ometeotl is tacitly encouraging open-season assaults on law enforcement and justifying them as “chickens come home to roost.”
The city council tried doing a little damage control late yesterday:
The City of Lynwood, which is just outside Compton, issued a statement that appeared to be in response to Ometeotl’s post, that offered prayers to the deputies and their families. “There have been comments made today (Sunday) by our City Manager on his personal social media that are his personal opinions and don’t reflect the position of the Lynwood City Council,” the statement read.
There’s one sure way to deal with that, then. The city council hired Ometeotl as city manager; they can fire him as well, as city managers are appointed rather than elected. If Ometeotl’s public statements about law enforcement contradict the council’s view, then that kind of basic disconnect on the primary role of government — protecting its citizens — requires a change of personnel. If Ometeotl keeps his job, then it’s pretty apparent that his statement does reflect the city council’s true attitude, or at least doesn’t contradict it enough for them to do anything more than pay lip service to law enforcement. I wonder if Ometeotl will appreciate that chicken coming home to roost.
If the council doesn’t fire Ometeotl, the LASD could decide to terminate its services to Lynwood, which it provides under contract. Lynwood is an incorporated city, which means that the county sheriff only operates in that jurisdiction by mutual agreement. If Lynwood wants to call open season on LASD deputies, the LASD can pull out and leave Lynwood to stand up its own police force. That might be an instructive moment in 2020.


hotair--2020-09-14--Trump campaign canceling ad buys in swing states

I ’ m going to double down here on what I said last week .
Ads just aren ’ t that important for an incumbent president , less so an incumbent who ’ s as omnipresent in media as Trump is , less so an incumbent about whom public opinion is strongly held and incredibly polarized .
There aren ’ t many people out there whose feelings about him are still so fluid at this late date that a series of 30-second ads is going to matter .
The campaign is better off spending their money on organizational efforts .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ and how things are shaping up in Florida , that small group of voters who are still making up their minds is a potentially decisive prize .
Anything you can throw at them to influence them is worth throwing at them .
How did a campaign that ’ s raised a billion dollars land in a position where they ’ re having to do triage on ad spending in battlegrounds — in September ?
Team Trump took in $ 210 million in August alone .
Where did that money go such that they @ @ @ @ @ @ @ weeks left until the big vote ?
The one that really grabbed me is Nevada .
You can understand Trump and Bill Stepien taking a calculated gamble that Iowa and Ohio , both solidly red in 2016 , will stay red this year despite Biden ’ s best efforts .
But Nevada is a rare blue state in which Trump is competitive .
The NYT poll that came out a few days ago had Biden leading there by just four points .
Latinos make up a sizable part of the electorate in NV @ @ @ @ @ @ @ weak cohort for Biden this year .
It was smart of Trump to hold a rally there last night , to signal that he intends to compete for Nevada ’ s votes , but his advertising strategy cuts against that .
Where ’ s all the money going ?
Republicans want to know .
Between Aug. 10 and Sept. 7 , Biden spent $ 97.7 million on broadcast and cable ads , while Trump spent $ 21.6 million , according to ad-tracking firm Advertising Analytics .
In some crucial battleground states Biden outspent @ @ @ @ @ @ @ $ 9.2 million to Trump ’ s $ 1.5 million ; in Florida , Biden spent $ 23.2 million to Trump ’ s $ 6.4 million ; in Arizona , Biden spent $ 10 million compared to $ 1.4 million by Trump , and in North Carolina , Biden spent $ 11.5 million to Trump ’ s $ 3.7 million… “ They are in a cash crunch .
It ’ s obvious by looking at these numbers , ” said Republican strategist Bryan Lanza , deputy communications director for Trump ’ s 2016 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , you adapt to the environment .
They can ’ t cut from payroll , they can ’ t cut from operating so they ’ ve got to cut from TV .
That ’ s not killer , but it ’ s a problem .
You always want to have a strategic advantage when you ’ re competing against anybody and when you lose it , that ’ s a problem.
” According to Bloomberg , as of yesterday the campaign hadn ’ t run any ads since Labor Day in Arizona , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Pennsylvania .
They moved money instead to Florida , North Carolina , and Georgia , three red states .
Biden ’ s mega-blockbuster August fundraising haul — $ 365 million — means Trump has to play defense .
Read this WaPo piece and you ’ ll find that there are caveats to the ad deficit .
A source notes that Team Trump has an enormous field operation and an aggressive ground game involving traditional door-knocking , something the Biden camp has eschewed .
That ’ s a rational use of money given that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ about playing to his base instead of reaching out to swing voters .
It ’ s unlikely that he ’ s going to win back wary suburbanites now ; the path to victory is to find people in groups that are already well-disposed to him and to turn them out en masse .
In keeping with that , the campaign has spent big on data .
They ’ re also outpacing Biden in digital advertising , although WaPo notes that that ’ s often more geared to finding small-dollar donors than turning out @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a bit more than pro-Biden ones over the past month .
Despite all the caveats , though , top Republicans are reportedly worried about the ad imbalance — including Trump himself : Republican officials have been inundated with calls from worried activists and donors who complain about constant Biden ads in their local media markets , with very few paid Trump responses , according to people familiar with the conversations .
Some Republicans close to Trump have been baffled at the decision to sharply curb advertising and have told the president he should @ @ @ @ @ @ @ National Committee Chair Ronna McDaniel , who recently told the president she was concerned his ads were not on television in states such as Michigan and Florida where Biden was blanketing the airwaves , according to people familiar with the conversation .
The president shared the concern , according to the officials , who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss internal deliberations… Republicans working on Senate and House races , however , have been alarmed , as they have seen Democrats take over the airwaves in parts of the country where @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to carry them to victory .
We ’ re not talking about a minor gap here .
Biden ’ s campaign spent *five times* as much on ads as Trump did between August 10 and September 7 .
The sense you get from these stories is that Stepien inherited a bloated organization created by Brad Parscale that was too heavily weighted towards field operations and maybe not all that careful about how its money was being spent .
Quote : “ [ O ] ther Trump campaign officials said Stepien has been forced @ @ @ @ @ @ @ left behind by Parscale .
They said Stepien did not know where all the money was going , and they had to spend weeks putting together a formalized budget.
” The campaign also spent a surprisingly large amount of money advertising on Fox News over the summer , more than it spent on local advertising in Michigan , Minnesota , and Wisconsin combined .
That ’ s not completely irrational — one consultant noted that independents watch Fox , and Fox ads might be more likely to result in new donations — but @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a piece with Team Trump constantly pandering to voters whose support is already assured .
The money spent on Fox would be useful in Nevada right now .
All of this is essential background in understanding the dilemma posed by Mike Bloomberg ’ s promise to spend $ 100 million in Florida to help Biden .
Ideally for him and Sleepy Joe , that spending will help deliver the state to Democrats ; if it does , Trump is finished .
But even if it doesn ’ t , that kind of pressure @ @ @ @ @ @ @ force Trump and Stepien to give up on Nevada , Arizona , and so forth in the name of defending Florida .
The Bloomberg offensive isn ’ t about winning Florida so much as it is shrinking Trump ’ s national map .
I wonder how far away we are from the first reports of POTUS giving up on some states entirely .
His team has been bearish on Michigan for months now .
If the cash crunch intensifies , the various factors conspiring to make Biden the favorite there this year may @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Michigan and refocus on holding Florida and Pennsylvania instead .

I’m going to double down here on what I said last week. Ads just aren’t that important for an incumbent president, less so an incumbent who’s as omnipresent in media as Trump is, less so an incumbent about whom public opinion is strongly held and incredibly polarized. There aren’t many people out there whose feelings about him are still so fluid at this late date that a series of 30-second ads is going to matter. The campaign is better off spending their money on organizational efforts.
But.
Considering how close the 2016 election was and how things are shaping up in Florida, that small group of voters who are still making up their minds is a potentially decisive prize. Anything you can throw at them to influence them is worth throwing at them. How did a campaign that’s raised a billion dollars land in a position where they’re having to do triage on ad spending in battlegrounds — in September? Team Trump took in $210 million in August alone. Where did that money go such that they’re already spending strategically with seven weeks left until the big vote?
NEW: The Trump campaign is canceling TV ad schedules that been booked for this week (9/15-9/21) in multiple states including IA, OH and NV — Medium Buying (@MediumBuying) September 14, 2020
The one that really grabbed me is Nevada. You can understand Trump and Bill Stepien taking a calculated gamble that Iowa and Ohio, both solidly red in 2016, will stay red this year despite Biden’s best efforts. But Nevada is a rare blue state in which Trump is competitive. The NYT poll that came out a few days ago had Biden leading there by just four points. Latinos make up a sizable part of the electorate in NV and they’ve been a surprisingly weak cohort for Biden this year. It was smart of Trump to hold a rally there last night, to signal that he intends to compete for Nevada’s votes, but his advertising strategy cuts against that.
Where’s all the money going? Republicans want to know.
Between Aug. 10 and Sept. 7, Biden spent $97.7 million on broadcast and cable ads, while Trump spent $21.6 million, according to ad-tracking firm Advertising Analytics. In some crucial battleground states Biden outspent Trump. In Wisconsin, Biden spent $9.2 million to Trump’s $1.5 million; in Florida, Biden spent $23.2 million to Trump’s $6.4 million; in Arizona, Biden spent $10 million compared to $1.4 million by Trump, and in North Carolina, Biden spent $11.5 million to Trump’s $3.7 million… “They are in a cash crunch. It’s obvious by looking at these numbers,” said Republican strategist Bryan Lanza, deputy communications director for Trump’s 2016 campaign. “As with any campaign, you adapt to the environment. They can’t cut from payroll, they can’t cut from operating so they’ve got to cut from TV. That’s not killer, but it’s a problem. You always want to have a strategic advantage when you’re competing against anybody and when you lose it, that’s a problem.”
According to Bloomberg, as of yesterday the campaign hadn’t run any ads since Labor Day in Arizona, Iowa, Nevada, New Hampshire and Pennsylvania. They moved money instead to Florida, North Carolina, and Georgia, three red states. Biden’s mega-blockbuster August fundraising haul — $365 million — means Trump has to play defense.
Read this WaPo piece and you’ll find that there are caveats to the ad deficit. A source notes that Team Trump has an enormous field operation and an aggressive ground game involving traditional door-knocking, something the Biden camp has eschewed. That’s a rational use of money given that Trump’s strategy has always been about playing to his base instead of reaching out to swing voters. It’s unlikely that he’s going to win back wary suburbanites now; the path to victory is to find people in groups that are already well-disposed to him and to turn them out en masse. In keeping with that, the campaign has spent big on data. They’re also outpacing Biden in digital advertising, although WaPo notes that that’s often more geared to finding small-dollar donors than turning out voters. And pro-Trump Super PACs spent a bit more than pro-Biden ones over the past month.
Despite all the caveats, though, top Republicans are reportedly worried about the ad imbalance — including Trump himself:
Republican officials have been inundated with calls from worried activists and donors who complain about constant Biden ads in their local media markets, with very few paid Trump responses, according to people familiar with the conversations. Some Republicans close to Trump have been baffled at the decision to sharply curb advertising and have told the president he should change course… Among those worried is Republican National Committee Chair Ronna McDaniel, who recently told the president she was concerned his ads were not on television in states such as Michigan and Florida where Biden was blanketing the airwaves, according to people familiar with the conversation. The president shared the concern, according to the officials, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss internal deliberations… Republicans working on Senate and House races, however, have been alarmed, as they have seen Democrats take over the airwaves in parts of the country where lower-ranking candidates are depending on the president to carry them to victory.
We’re not talking about a minor gap here. Biden’s campaign spent *five times* as much on ads as Trump did between August 10 and September 7.
The sense you get from these stories is that Stepien inherited a bloated organization created by Brad Parscale that was too heavily weighted towards field operations and maybe not all that careful about how its money was being spent. Quote: “[O]ther Trump campaign officials said Stepien has been forced to clean up a disorganized accounting plan left behind by Parscale. They said Stepien did not know where all the money was going, and they had to spend weeks putting together a formalized budget.” The campaign also spent a surprisingly large amount of money advertising on Fox News over the summer, more than it spent on local advertising in Michigan, Minnesota, and Wisconsin combined. That’s not completely irrational — one consultant noted that independents watch Fox, and Fox ads might be more likely to result in new donations — but, again, it’s of a piece with Team Trump constantly pandering to voters whose support is already assured. The money spent on Fox would be useful in Nevada right now.
All of this is essential background in understanding the dilemma posed by Mike Bloomberg’s promise to spend $100 million in Florida to help Biden. Ideally for him and Sleepy Joe, that spending will help deliver the state to Democrats; if it does, Trump is finished. But even if it doesn’t, that kind of pressure in the most important swing state may force Trump and Stepien to give up on Nevada, Arizona, and so forth in the name of defending Florida. The Bloomberg offensive isn’t about winning Florida so much as it is shrinking Trump’s national map.
I wonder how far away we are from the first reports of POTUS giving up on some states entirely. His team has been bearish on Michigan for months now. If the cash crunch intensifies, the various factors conspiring to make Biden the favorite there this year may lead Trump to stop competing aggressively in Michigan and refocus on holding Florida and Pennsylvania instead.