Back

Three months later: they made the right decisions. Since then, Kamala did well.

What they need to figure out in the last 30 days is that people talk about them and not about Trump. This is his last resort. To just flood the zone with radioactive shit so people mention him, however badly.

Kamala was gaining points when she dominated the narrative. People need to talk about her (positively), not Trump (negatively).

The effect of Trump being mentioned daily is that people (or should I say: men) that hardly follow the news think:

"He is mentioned a lot so he is important. He's powerful. I go for the important guy, the winner. Also: less taxes."

The more negative he goes the more he drags her down because people assume that there is always some form of balance between two choices.

If she manages to capture the narrative as in the first few days and after the debate Trump will drown in his shit.

To both Republican talking points there are solid objective answers. Western countries need immigration (age pyramid and who wants the immigrants necessary low paid jobs) and inflation (regulate price gouging).

But the old fascist receipe ("Problem? Violence!") is simpler and triggers instincts. Instincts tend to win over logic and reason. That violence never solved anything and only makes things worse... is common knowledge, easily forgotten, it only gets remembered when it's too late.

So fingers crossed for tonight's debate. May the force of Rhetoric be with you, Tim Walz.

I expected Walz to be prepared to face a cold-blooded liar. It was obvious from previous interviews Vance could talk his way out of the most damning situations by lying in the most shameless way. Each time he was confronted about his remarks comparing Trump to Hitler, he found an oily way to wriggle free and go on an attack.

Walz held his ground, he came across as credible, human. Is showing good will the best way to deal with a cold blooded liar?

I think the most natural reaction to a liar is to turn away and reject the dialogue. But Walz had to show that he is willing to reach across the isle. Just as with the fracking and the gun ownership he communicated "I am eligible if you're Republican." Vance tried to reframe "Yeah, maybe Walz seems okay but he works for evil stupid lazy Kamala." Everything was Kamala's fault and every problem from School violence to inflation to house prices could be solved by kicking immigrants out.

Walz came across as nice, good guy but a bit naive. Vance was outright Machiavellian, eloquent but ruthless, completely dishonest and calculative.

You could still tell when he was lying by contrast. When it came to the only topic where Trump could score somewhat ("bringing manufacturing back to the US") you could feel that Vance was less calculative, showed less controlled tension because he knew a that for once he had a real talking point (the only one) where he didn't need to lie.

The first presidential debate I saw was in 1980. I've been following US politics ever since. All I remember since then was how "cool" Reagan sounded. They only showed highlights of the debate, and you have to imagine how they fade in the original voice, and about five seconds later, the German dubbing. I remember the two faces on blue grey backgrounds on TV of my half American friend Robert, whose father was a big Reagan supporter.

Because I perceived that my friend's father was a smart guy, as a 9 year old I thought that Reagan must have been the right person to win the presidency in 1980. Until the Olympics the image of Reagan continuously shifted. I remember starting to have stronger doubts when after the LA Olympics he made this stupid "we begin bombing in five minutes" off the record joke https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/We_begin_bombing_in_five_minutes

From 1984 on Reagan slipped bit by bit into dementia which was observed in Europe and downplayed in the States. I specifically remember when Reagan spoke publicly, recounting what seemed to be a vivid memory of a World War II event. In fact, he was describing a scene from a film rather than an actual event. He mentioned a heroic pilot’s story, which many believed he had confused with real history, but it was actually from a film called A Wing and a Prayer.

A lot of of déja-vus. From "are you better off now than four years ago" (Reagan's killer line in 1980) unsuccessfully recycled by Trump, to "Make America great again" (also Reagan) to age and dementia being an issue, and the Olympic Games taking place in LA (again in 2028). But what we've seen this year from Trump and Vance is unlike anything I've witnessed since 1980. It's completely off the rails and I can't imagine that any Americans in their right mind would vote for these crazy clowns.

This is completely off the charts insane.

Aide: "There will be violence if we keep doing this."
Trump Campaign Operative: "Make them riot. Do it."

@reichenstein if you read it, the “Make them riot. Do it." quote isn't actually Trump. It's still damning, but that part was his campaign employee I think.

@poswald You're right. It says P5 is a "Trump Campaign Operative". I corrected it. Thank you.