How Kamala Harris and the Democrats Should Talk About Inflation
PLUS: Some extra thoughts on Trump's "pet-eating immigrants" nonsense PLUS a WNBA playoffs preview
More than a week has passed since the presidential debate, and it appears Kamala Harris has gotten a small bump in the polls out of it. It’s obviously too soon to tell if this bump is permanent, although “they’re eating the dogs,” along with the Trump-Vance campaign’s insistence that this point has merit, may have helped remind voters what they don’t like about Trump.
I have more to say about the political significance of Trump’s vile pet-eating immigrant line, which I’ll get into after this essay. For now, I want to focus on Harris, who, despite handling the give-and-take of that debate exceptionally well, still has room for improvement. While nearly everyone agrees Harris won the debate, her shakiest moment came when most viewers were probably paying the most attention: Right at the beginning, in response to the debate’s first question. If you need a refresher, here’s the transcript:
DEBATE MODERATOR DAVID MUIR: So let’s get started. I want to begin tonight with the issue voters repeatedly say is their number one issue, and that is the economy and the cost of living in this country. Vice President Harris, you and President [Biden] were elected four years ago and your opponent on the stage here tonight often asks his supporters, are you better off than you were four years ago? When it comes to the economy, do you believe Americans are better off than they were four years ago?
VICE PRESIDENT KAMALA HARRIS: So, I was raised as a middle-class kid. And I am actually the only person on this stage who has a plan that is about lifting up the middle class and working people of America. I believe in the ambition, the aspirations, the dreams of the American people. And that is why I imagine and have actually a plan to build what I call an opportunity economy. Because here’s the thing. We know that we have a shortage of homes and housing, and the cost of housing is too expensive for far too many people. We know that young families need support to raise their children. And I intend on extending a tax cut for those families of $6,000, which is the largest child tax credit that we have given in a long time. So that those young families can afford to buy a crib, buy a car seat, buy clothes for their children. My passion, one of them, is small businesses. I was actually -- my mother raised my sister and me but there was a woman who helped raise us. We call her our second mother. She was a small business owner. I love our small businesses. My plan is to give a $50,000 tax deduction to start-up small businesses, knowing they are part of the backbone of America’s economy. My opponent, on the other hand, his plan is to do what he has done before, which is to provide a tax cut for billionaires and big corporations, which will result in $5 trillion to America’s deficit. My opponent has a plan that I call the Trump sales tax, which would be a 20% tax on everyday goods that you rely on to get through the month. Economists have said that Trump’s sales tax would actually result for middle-class families in about $4,000 more a year because of his policies and his ideas about what should be the backs of middle-class people paying for tax cuts for billionaires.
The quality of Muir’s prompt aside (he could have asked Harris to address the cost of living directly rather than bury it behind the generic “are you better off now” frame) the question is clearly an invitation for Harris to address the Biden administration’s economic record, particularly as it pertains to inflation. Viewers expected the Vice President to respond along those lines. Harris, however, dodged that subject by instead mentioning her middle-class upbringing, outlining her economic agenda, and attacking Trump’s proposals. It made strategic sense for Harris to do this, as Americans are not pleased with Biden’s handling of the economy. Harris didn’t want to try to put lipstick on that pig or even associate herself with an issue she’d only end up playing defense on. She instead did what politicians are coached to do in a debate: Change the topic if you don’t like the topic of a question. In that sense, her team may consider her answer, if not a win, then at least a draw.
The problem is that polls show inflation and the cost of living are voters’ most important issues in this election. When a debate moderator introduces inflation as a topic and asks a candidate, “Do you believe Americans are better off than they were four years ago?” and that candidate immediately responds, “So, I was raised as a middle-class kid,” voters can sense that candidate is evading the question. They either think what she thinks about the subject is politically problematic for her or that she doesn’t have a good answer to begin with.
Additionally, from a political pundit’s point of view, Harris’ answer is political malpractice. Harris knew the moderators would ask her a question about inflation. She needed a strong response, which that answer definitely was not.
More than anything else, cost of living is the issue keeping Harris from putting some distance between herself and Trump in this race. It’s not just a matter of bringing home wayward Democrats and undecided voters. With Trump in meltdown mode, Harris can position herself as a more acceptable option to soft Trump supporters if she can convince voters that she would be a good steward of the economy. With voter opinion hardening in the race, Harris needs to find a way to address inflation, and fast.
To win voters over on inflation, there are two arguments Harris can’t make, or at least one argument she can’t make in isolation and another she can’t make, period. The no-go argument is that presidents have little control over economic outcomes and can do little to address economic problems. A lot of political scientists will say there’s actually a lot of truth to that statement. Economic growth is often predicated on factors beyond the government’s control, such as technological advancements and developments in foreign markets. Our most recent bout of inflation was mostly a direct result of such an event: The pandemic, which threw supply and demand out of whack around the world. Vladimir Putin’s invasion of Ukraine, which drove up global energy prices, also didn’t help.
Presidents and policymakers can of course influence economic outcomes and respond to economic crises. Their ability to course correct whole economies, however, is limited. That’s why I tend to hold neither Joe Biden nor Donald Trump accountable for the economic tumult resulting from the pandemic. While some point to Biden’s stimulus package as a culprit, it’s pretty clear inflation, which affected economies around the world, was a fallout effect of the pandemic caused by pent-up demand accompanied by gummed-up supply. The stimulus, which kept many families and businesses afloat during the pandemic and was supported by a majority of the American public, played a small role in rising prices but also likely contributed to the relatively quick recovery. It’s also important to remember that presidents have few levers to pull when it comes to taming inflation, which is primarily the responsibility of the Federal Reserve.
None of this is to say presidents can’t influence the economy. Their policies on taxation, government spending, labor, regulation, trade, and research help shape the broad contours of the economy, but it often takes years for the effects of their policies to fully reveal themselves. For that reason, beyond decisions that have an immediate effect on the economy, it makes more sense to judge politicians on their economic ideologies than on either their brief stewardship of the economy or by metrics (i.e., gas prices, the unemployment rate, inflation, etc.,) that are often affected by forces beyond their control.
The reality, however, is that even if the president is limited in their ability to improve economic conditions, the American people expect them to fix economic problems. Studies have shown time and time again that, outside moments of national crisis, voters primarily judge presidents on their economic records. Harris can’t tell the American people that she (or, more accurately, President Biden) couldn’t do much about inflation, even if that’s mostly true. Voters expect more from their president.
Secondly, Harris can’t steer the conversation to more positive aspects of the economy, like the unemployment rate or GDP growth, or at least can’t make that argument in isolation. Not only are voters focused on inflation, but the effects of inflation sting, since most prices go up without eventually coming back down to where they were before. (Americans long for deflation, but that would probably send the economy into a recessionary spiral that would almost certainly eat away at people’s wages.) Consumers only tend to get over inflation long after it’s passed when they’ve become accustomed to higher (and at that point, more normal) prices. Until then, though, there’s no shifting the conversation.
So how can Harris handle that conversation? Or let’s say you’re having a conversation with a persuadable voter and the topic of inflation comes up: What can you say? Here’s how I would respond, in five steps:
Empathize with their complaint: To paraphrase Bill Clinton, feel their pain. Acknowledge two things. First, that’s it’s been a rough 4-5 years for everyone and that the pandemic really upended the economy. This signals to voters that Harris isn’t ducking an uncomfortable issue. (It also connects inflation to the pandemic, which most people understand was an event beyond anyone’s control, and places the origin of the problem prior to the start of the Biden administration.) Second, admit that inflation hit people hard in the pocketbook. Harris should say this so that voters know she is aware of and understands their problems at a personal level. For some Americans, inflation really squeezed their budgets and made it difficult for them to afford groceries, gas, rent, and other necessities. For others, inflation meant having to spend more than they were used to spending on everything from soda pop to vacations and may have led them to cut back on expenses to save money. Voters need to know Harris understands their struggles and irritation with inflation.
Explain what the Biden administration has done to address inflation: This is the hardest part not only because presidents are limited in their ability to fight inflation but because most undecided voters will feel Biden’s response to inflation was inadequate. Harris can’t argue presidents lack the tools needed to combat inflation, but she can assure voters the Biden administration was attuned to their concerns by providing them with a list of things Biden did to counteract inflation. These acts include:
Untangling supply chains to make sure goods could make it to market.
Releasing oil from the nation’s strategic oil reserve to keep gasoline prices from exploding.
Supporting unions to make sure wages kept up with rising prices.
Signing the Inflation Reduction Act (which is admittedly a misnamed piece of legislation) and the CHIPS Act, which laid the groundwork for future economic growth and energy development here in the United States.
Combatting price gouging and monopolistic business practices.
Harris should conclude by noting that inflation fell from 8-9% to below 3% a year after the passage of the Inflation Reduction Act. (She could even add retailers like Walmart and Target are lowering prices to win back customers.) It may feel disingenuous to argue that Biden is responsible for lowering inflation when we know his powers to do so were limited, but if the American public is going to hold him responsible for high inflation, he ought to be able to claim credit for getting it under control. The key, however, is to make sure voters know the Biden administration heard their concerns and took steps to lower inflation.
Pivot to the economy’s strengths and the need to keep that momentum going: After touting progress in the battle against inflation (which is now under 3%) Harris can then shift to highlighting the strength of the economy as a whole: A low unemployment rate, solid monthly job growth, rising wages, strong GDP growth, a record-breaking stock market, etc. Tell voters the economy is heading in the right direction and that they should send her to the White House to keep the economy on track.
Emphasize that a Trump presidency would disrupt economic growth: Begin by pointing out that Trump’s major policies—astronomically high tariffs, trade wars, tax cuts targeted at the wealthy, curtailing energy production, and drastically reducing immigration—would reignite inflation. Then add that Trump himself is an easily distracted chaos agent who spends more time rage tweeting and putting out fires he creates than he does tending to the nation’s economy. We need a president who works for the American people rather than himself.
Conclude by outlining the Harris economic agenda, and frame it around cost of living: If Trump is constantly thinking about himself, Harris needs to show the American people they are her number one priority. Lead by addressing the cost of housing and the need to make it easier to build new houses and apartments to fix the housing shortage. Harris has a plan to build 3 million new homes and rental units, cut red tape to build those homes faster, and provide first-time homebuyers with assistance on their down payments. Harris has also made more affordable child care a legislative priority so working-class families have more disposable income. Additionally, she wants to build on efforts to lower the cost of energy by supporting new clean energy initiatives as well as lowering the cost of prescription drugs. By doing this, Harris can shift the focus of the debate from the past four years to the next four years.
No matter what Harris says, there will be some voters who will always insist Biden didn’t do enough on inflation. Many will be upset that prices haven’t returned to pre-pandemic levels and will hold Biden and Harris accountable for permanent higher prices even as wages continue to rise. Harris risks losing these voters simply by talking about inflation. Yet her silence on the issue speaks volumes as well. Voters often interpret a candidate’s refusal to discuss an issue as a sign that whatever they would say about the issue wouldn’t go over well with the electorate. It’s time for Harris to address the cost of living head-on and frame the issue for voters on her terms.
EXTRA: A Couple Thoughts on the Political Significance of Trump’s “Pet-Eating Immigrants” Nonsense
I won’t take the time here to update you on what’s happened this past week concerning the turmoil that has engulfed Springfield, Ohio, following Trump’s baseless claim that immigrants there are eating people’s pets. You can read about all that below in Signals and Noise. I just want to take a moment to share a couple thoughts on the political significance of this episode, which I don’t think should be written off as just another weird, isolated debate moment.
First, while much of the commentary this week has been on Trump and JD Vance’s refusal to not only back away from their baseless claims about the immigrant community in Springfield but to double-down on them, what that commentary overlooks is how their nonsensical claims advance their broader political project. What Trump and Vance have said is both absurd and demonstrably refutable. By repeating those claims, Trump and Vance are conditioning their supporters to stand by the absurd and demonstrably refutable so that the might of mass delusion can make right.
So when Trump said, “They’re eating the dogs,” what he’s actually saying is, “They’re rigging the election.” And when Vance said, “If I have to create stories so that the American media actually pays attention to the suffering of the American people, then that’s what I’m going to do,” he’s actually telling Trump’s millions of supporters that if they accept false claims about a rigged election as true, they can compel the American political system to respond to them as if they are true.
This episode is about far more than the town of Springfield, Ohio, or immigration policy; it is about Trump’s determination to turn falsehoods into political reality, which is how he intends to seize power in the event he loses the election. To do that, he needs to indicate to his supporters that they will need to believe the unbelievable. In that sense, Trump and Vance have turned this episode into a practice session for the MAGAverse.
Second, Republican Ohio Governor Mike DeWine, a native of Springfield, has made some thought-provoking comments about Springfield’s immigrant community. He said this on ABC News:
I think it’s unfortunate that this came up. Let me tell you what we do know, though. What we know is that the Haitians who are in Springfield are legal. They came to Springfield to work. Ohio is on the move, and Springfield has really made a great resurgence with a lot of companies coming in. These Haitians came in to work for these companies.
He also wrote this in an op-ed for the New York Times:
As a supporter of former President Donald Trump and Senator JD Vance, I am saddened by how they and others continue to repeat claims that lack evidence and disparage the legal migrants living in Springfield. This rhetoric hurts the city and its people, and it hurts those who have spent their lives there….
The Springfield I know is not the one you hear about in social media rumors. It is a city made up of good, decent, welcoming people. They are hard workers — both those who were born in this country and those who settled here because, back in their birthplace, Haiti, innocent people can be killed just for cheering on the wrong team in a soccer match.
Only about a two-hour flight from U.S. shores, Haiti is one of the poorest, most dangerous places on earth. The government is in shambles, with machete-wielding, machine-gun-toting gang members taking over 80 percent of the capital, Port-au-Prince….
We know that the Haitian people want the same things we all want — a good job, the chance to get a quality education and the ability to raise a family in a safe and secure environment. Haitian migrants have gone to Springfield because of the jobs and chance for a better life there.
On Monday, I met with Springfield manufacturing business owners who employ Haitians. As one of them told me, his business would not have been able to stay open after the pandemic but for the Haitians who filled the jobs.
In politics, we often only think about issues in theoretical terms. Lately, especially with Trump, Americans have started thinking about issues in fantastical terms. Many have come to think about immigration this way: Open borders; an influx of crime, disease, and poverty; cultural degradation; all the harm immigrants inflict on established and content American communities; and how immigrants steal the wealth and political power of native-born Americans.
But when you actually take a look at the reality of the issue, the story changes, as DeWine demonstrates. It turns out the Haitians in Springfield are hard workers, a value they share with other Americans. They’ve helped revitalize what was once a community in decline. They are in the United States legally. They left their homes for a reason any of us can understand: To escape violence that left them and their families unsafe. They have bought into the American Dream.
They are not the monsters Trump and Vance make them out to be. As DeWine describes them, they are practically model citizens.
It’s not only a shame they are being used as political props. It’s a shame more Americans can’t put themselves in the shoes of immigrants and imagine why they decided to come to the United States. It’s a shame more Americans can’t approach the issue of immigration not from a theoretical or fantastical lens but from a human perspective.
We waste so much energy in this country demonizing immigrants and fretting about the problems they create here. Imagine how much more productive we could all be if we were to extend them a hand and worked to integrate them into our communities.
Signals and Noise
The Aborted Assassination Attempt on Trump
By Peter Baker of the New York Times: “Trump, Outrage and the Modern Era of Political Violence”: (“At the heart of today’s eruption of political violence is Mr. Trump, a figure who seems to inspire people to make threats or take actions both for him and against him. He has long favored the language of violence in his political discourse, encouraging supporters to beat up hecklers, threatening to shoot looters and undocumented migrants, mocking a near-fatal attack on the husband of the Democratic House speaker and suggesting that a general he deemed disloyal be executed. While Mr. Trump insists his fiery speech to supporters on Jan. 6, 2021, was not responsible for the subsequent ransacking of the Capitol, he resisted pleas from advisers and his own daughter that day to do more to stop the assault. He even suggested that the mob might be right to want to hang his vice president and has since embraced the attackers as patriots whom he may pardon if elected again. Mr. Trump does not pause to reflect on the impact of his own words. Just last week, his false pet-eating accusations against Haitian migrants during his debate with Ms. Harris were quickly followed by bomb threats that turned life upside-down in Springfield, Ohio, and he did nothing to discourage them.”)
Following the foiled attempt on Trump’s life last weekend, conservatives began blaming Democrats for inciting the attempt by using overheated rhetoric to attack the ex-president. But as Jonathan Chait points out for New York magazine, “Donald Trump Is a Threat to Democracy, and Saying So Is Not Incitement”. (“Donald Trump is a threat to democracy. That was true before an assassination attempt was foiled at his golf course Sunday, and it remains true after. Political violence in general, and assassinating presidential candidates specifically, also poses risks to democracy.”)
Elon Musk posted then deleted a message on Twitter/X wondering why people weren’t trying to assassinate Joe Biden and Kamala Harris.
Adam Wren and Kierra Frazier of Politico report that many attendees at Trump’s rally in Flint, Michigan, reported seeing the “hand of God” intervening to save Trump’s life.
The Whole “Immigrants Eating Pets in Springfield” Nonsense
By Adam Wren of Politico: “‘Springfield, Ohio, is Caught in a Political Vortex, and It is a Bit Out of Control’”. Springfield’s mayor has declared a state of emergency to deal with ongoing public safety concerns. Walmart stores and grocery stores have been evacuated due to bomb threats, a local college has gone to remote learning, and the Haitian community is living in fear.
Trump claimed to know nothing about the bomb threats Springfield is dealing with and claimed to only know that the town was overrun by illegal immigrants.
“I think it’s unfortunate that this came up. Let me tell you what we do know, though. What we know is that the Haitians who are in Springfield are legal. They came to Springfield to work. Ohio is on the move, and Springfield has really made a great resurgence with a lot of companies coming in. These Haitians came in to work for these companies. What the companies tell us is that they are very good workers. They’re very happy to have them there, and frankly, that’s helped the economy. Now, are there problems connected? Well, sure. When you go from a population of 58,000 and add 15,000 people onto that, you’re going to have some challenges and some problems. And we’re addressing those.”—Republican Ohio Governor Mike DeWine, on ABC. He also called claims that immigrants in Springfield were eating pets “garbage”.
By David A. Graham of The Atlantic: “Trump and Vance Are Harming the People They Claim to Care About” (“Springfield poses a real challenge for Trump’s political project. The former president says he will kick immigrants out of the country and revitalize manufacturing. But towns like Springfield show that immigration and revitalized manufacturing often travel hand in hand. Trump has no answer for that. His mass deportation would return Springfield to where it was a decade ago—shrinking in size, with median incomes dropping and future prospects bleak. Lacking a better idea, he turns to bogus stories about people eating pets.”) (Related: Bloomberg reports the US will see a shortage of 6 million workers in a decade’s time.)
By Adam Serwer of The Atlantic: “The Real Reason Trump and Vance Are Spreading Lies About Haitians” (“Trump’s and Vance’s statements reveal a belief that it would be better to leave dying towns in the Midwest to wither away than revive them and have to share that prosperity with people who are Black, and they seem to be betting that enough American voters in enough swing states agree that it would be better to be broke than integrated. In exchange for these fearful votes, a second Trump administration would proceed to shower tax cuts on the wealthy, raise them on everyone else, slash regulations on big business, and further undermine unions, while towns like Springfield would be left to tumble further into decline.”)
Jonathan V. Last of The Bulwark wonders if the pet-eating immigrant story is actually good for Trump, as it allows him to take back the spotlight.
Hannah Knowles and Sarah Ellison of the Washington Post look at how Trump and other Republicans have come to embrace the spread of conspiracy theories.
By Daniel Drezner: “Donald Trump and JD Vance Are Attempting Domestic Terrorism by Proxy”
Trump is reportedly planning a trip to Springfield. At a New York rally, he joked he may not be seen again after the visit.
“I’m still gonna call them an illegal alien.”—Vance, when questioned about how the Trump administration would deport Haitian immigrants who are in the country legally.
A Scripps News/Ipsos poll found 54% of Americans support the mass deportation of undocumented immigrants.
“Kristi Noem, who shot her dog, is stumping for Trump in Pennsylvania after he claimed that immigrants are eating pets.”—Headline in the Philadelphia Inquirer
Robert Kennedy, Jr., who endorsed Trump last month, said he is under investigation for cutting off the head of a whale carcass.
The 2024 Election: Policy
On Meet the Press, J.D. Vance tried to clarify Don Trump’s “concepts of a plan” comment about health care from the debate and basically wound up saying Trump prefers a pre-Obamacare system.
Trump said he wants to bring the state and local tax (SALT) deduction back, which puts the Republicans in Congress who used Trump’s tax cut bill to get rid of it in a bind. Joseph Zeballos-Roig and Burgess Everett of Semafor write about how all of Trump’s tax cut promises will make it harder for Republicans to extend his 2017 tax cuts for individuals.
By Ivana Saric of Axios: “Trump’s Vow to Lower Grocery Costs Will Backfire, Economists Warn”. MORE: By By Scott Lincicome and Sophia Bagley of The Atlantic: “Trump’s Deranged Plan to Lower Food Prices by Raising Them”
The 2024 Election: The Campaign Trail
Aaron Sanderford of the Nebraska Enquirer reports Nebraska’s legislature is facing pressure from Republicans to change the way it awards electoral votes before the election. Nebraska currently awards the winners of each of the state’s congressional districts one of the state’s five electoral votes. It is highly likely the Omaha-centered district will be won by Harris. Republicans want to move to a winner-take-all system, which would certainly result in Trump winning all five of Nebraska’s electoral votes. This could prove decisive if Harris won Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania but lost Nevada, Arizona, Georgia, and North Carolina, as the Omaha district’s one congressional vote would deliver her the winning vote.
Democrats in Maine, a Democratic-leaning state that also awards some of its electoral votes by district, have stated they plan on shifting to winner-take-all if Nebraska does so, but there’s a catch: Laws in Maine only take effect ninety days after they are passed unless two-thirds of the legislature overrides the waiting period. Democrats do not have supermajorities in the state legislature.
Alex Seitz-Wald of NBC News takes note of Don Trump’s tendency to predict the world will come crashing down if his opponents win. For example, during his only debate with Joe Biden in 2020, Trump said “If [Biden’s] elected, the stock market will crash. If he gets in, you will have a depression the likes of which you’ve never seen.” The stock market is currently at a record high. He has made similar predictions this election cycle about Kamala Harris. Other predictions from 2020 that did not come true:
“[I]f Joe Biden ever became President, our Country would COLLAPSE!”
At a Michigan rally: “If I don’t win, you will have no auto industry within two to three years.”
“If the left gains power, they will demolish the suburbs, confiscate your guns and appoint justices who will wipe away your Second Amendment and other constitutional freedoms.”
“If you vote for Biden, it means no kids in school, no graduations, no weddings, no Thanksgiving, no Christmas and no Fourth of July together.”
“If Joe Biden got in, religion will be gone, OK?”
“If I don’t win the election, China will own the United States. You’re going to have to learn to speak Chinese.”
“If I lose to him, I don’t know what I’m going to do. I will never speak to you again.”
Trump told the right-wing Israeli-American Council that Israel must defeat Kamala Harris. (“You have to defeat Kamala Harris. More than any other people on Earth, Israel, I believe, has to defeat her. You know that? And I’ve never said this before. And I’m thinking…more than any people on Earth, Israel has to defeat her. I really believe that. It’s a disaster for Israel, and you know why.”) He also told the group that a majority of Jews favor Harris because “the Democrat[s] hold a curse on you” and that “the Jewish people would have a lot to do with [him losing the election].”
“But I do have to say so I give these long sometimes very complex sentences and paragraphs but they all come together.”—Don Trump at a rally in Michigan. And that’s only part of a ramble that included references to Hannibal Lecter, catapults on aircraft carriers, and “this long complex area for instance that I talked about a lot of different territory.”
That same rally also saw Trump respond to a question about inflation by going on an eight minute ramble that finally ended with a remark about how Elon Musk would get the stranded astronauts home from the space station.
During an appearance on FOX News’ Gutfeld!, Trump expressed surprise that “a woman” is “somehow doing better” than Joe Biden in the race against him.
Not sure why he thinks this helps:
At a New York rally, Trump stated there is a 75% chance that a child who travels alone on New York’s subway will never be seen from again.
“And they didn’t correct her once. And they corrected me, everything I said, practically. I think nine times or 11 times. And the audience was absolutely– they went crazy.”—Trump talking about the debate during an appearance on FOX News’ Gutfeld!. No audience was present for the debate. Is Donald Trump…Norma Desmond?
The Teamsters declined to endorse a presidential candidate. A poll of Teamster union members showed a majority favored Trump for president. Meanwhile, Lauren Kaori Gurley of the Washington Post reports local Teamster unions in swing states are rushing to endorse Harris.
“If somebody breaks into my house, they're getting shot.”—Kamala Harris during an interview with Oprah Winfrey, affirming that she is a gun owner.
Kamala Harris accepted an October 23 debate on CNN, but Trump declined, claiming the debate was “too late.”
Maya Marchel Hoff of USA Today reports voter registration, particularly among young voters, is spiking.
Democracy Watch
Erin Mansfield of USA Today reports 46% of Republicans and 27% of Democrats will not accept the outcome of the presidential election if their side loses, with 14% of Republicans saying they would “take action to overturn” the results.
By Ari Berman of Mother Jones: “How Republicans Could Block a Democratic Victory in Georgia”
Justin Glawe of the The Guardian obtained emails from Georgia election officials revealing their plans to call into doubt the outcome of the 2024 election even before votes are cast and respond by using rules and procedures favored by the election denial movement.
The Georgia State Election Board voted to approve rules that would change the way elections in Georgia are conducted, including provisions that would require hand-counting all ballots and granting additional access to partisan poll watchers. The moves are intended to introduce additional chaos to the election process. The Georgia attorney general’s office has taken the rare step of asserting the Board’s actions likely exceed their authority.
Politico reports House Democrats are worried about how the electoral votes will be counted in the House come January 6, 2025, particularly if Republicans retain control of the House. Of concern: If Mike Johnson is re-elected Speaker and delays the count; if Republicans pick a Speaker willing to throw the process into chaos; if Republicans can even get their act together to elect a Speaker if they win the majority; if Johnson rewrites the rules governing the process; if the new Electoral Count Act is challenged as constitutional by members of the House; and if there are enough Republicans (20 in the Senate, 87 in the House) willing to object to certification.
A Republican election official in Maricopa County, Arizona, isasking a judge to declare 100,000 people in the Phoenix area ineligible to votesince they have never affirmed they are citizens. Most of these individuals are longtime voters, with records showing most are Republican. Residents could address this issue by providing proof of citizenship.An Arizona judge ruled this weekend those voters will be able to participate in the election.Despite saying he won’t, Trump is now free to sell his shares in Trump Media, which are valued at $1.7 billion. Over the past year, Trump has lost over $4 billion on paper as investors inflated the value of the meme stock. Shares in the unprofitable company are currently selling for around $13-14. Notice how easily it would be for investors to personally enrich Trump by driving up the value of his stock before he sells it; they would take a loss, but they would buy a lot of influence with a potential future president, who could also use that money to fund his campaign. None of this is regulated by campaign finance laws.
Liz Cheney speculated that if Trump loses the election, a new political party may be needed to replace the Republican Party. Said Cheney, “Whether it’s organizing a new party — look, it’s hard for me to see how the Republican Party, given what it has done, can make the argument convincingly or credibly that people ought to vote for Republican candidates until it really recognizes what it’s done.”
This Week in “WTF is Wrong with J.D. Vance?”
Vance re-posted a message on social media claiming immigrants in Dayton, Ohio, were grilling cats. Officials in Dayton disputed the claims.
“If I have to create stories so that the American media actually pays attention to the suffering of the American people, then that’s what I’m going to do.”—Vance, on CNN, reasserting and standing by the false claim that immigrants in Springfield, Ohio, are eating people’s pets. If I have to create stories so that the American media actually pays attention to how awful J.D. Vance is, then that’s what I’m going to do:
Democratic Pennsylvania Governor followed Vance on CNN and called the VP nominee’s comments “bonkers.”
Vance told CBS News he would continue to amplify baseless claims about immigrants eating pets despite the spate of bomb threats Springfield is dealing with following of such rumors because he does “not believe in a heckler’s veto in this country.”
At a rally in Eau Claire, Wisconsin, Vance said he is not responsible for fact checking claims made by constituents before acting on the assumption those claims are true, arguing that is the media’s job. That’s dumb, because a.) That makes him the puppet of every crazed constituent in Ohio, and b.) The media did fact check his claims about Springfield and reported them as false, yet Vance has not changed his behavior. For more on Vance’s remarks, which make little sense when reviewed in their totality, see this article in The Guardian and this article in The New Republic.
For example: The Wall Street Journal investigated a report it received from Vance of a stolen pet in Springfield from August in which the pet owner blamed her Haitian neighbors. When reporters arrived, the woman (who was wearing a MAGA hat) reported her missing cat had returned a few days later and that she had apologized to her neighbors.
“I think that I’ve learned my lesson on speaking for the president before he and I have actually talked about an issue.”—Vance, on Meet the Press, dodging a question about whether Trump would veto a national abortion ban. Vance had claimed in August he would, but Trump said in the debate his VP pick wasn’t speaking for him when Vance said that. Vance added on Meet the Press, “[Trump] wants abortion policy to be made by the states, because he thinks, look, Alabama is going to make a different decision from California, and that’s OK. We’re a big country. We can disagree.” So he’s in favor of choice on abortion?
This Week in “WTF is Wrong with Sarah Huckabee Sanders?”
During a speech at a Trump campaign rally, Republican Arkansas Governor Sarah Huckabee Sanders channeled her inner J.D. Vance and claimed Kamala Harris wouldn’t be a good leader because she lacks the thing that would keep her “humble”: Children. Sanders supports Trump, quite possibly the least humble man to ever run for president (“People want to believe that something is the biggest and the greatest and the most spectacular. I call it truthful hyperbole. It’s an innocent form of exaggeration, and a very effective form of promotion”—The Art of the Deal) and the father of five children.
This Week in “WTF is Wrong with Mark Robinson?”
Andrew Kaczynski and Em Steck of CNN released a bombshell report about Republican North Carolina lieutenant governor and gubernatorial candidate Mark Robinson, who made dozens of disturbing comments in online porn forums a decade ago. Robinson has positioned himself as a culturally conservative Republican. In addition to a number of sexually explicit comments (most of which CNN did not publish due to their graphic nature) Robinson
Called himself a “black NAZI”. (NOTE: This is the third consecutive week in which a prominent Republican has been connected to Nazism or white supremacy.)
Stated “I’d take Hitler over any of the sh*t that’s in Washington right now!” during the Obama administration.
Stated “Slavery is not bad. Some people need to be slaves. I wish they would bring it (slavery) back. I would certainly buy a few.”
Expressed interest in joining the Ku Klux Klan.
Referred to Martin Luther King, Jr. as “Martin Lucifer Koon.”
Robinson denied making the comments, but CNN’s reporting is airtight. Trump, who had earlier endorsed Robinson despite Robinson’s history of ugly rhetoric (including stating this year that “some people need killing”) has called Robinson “Martin Luther King on steroids” and said to him, “I think you’re better than Martin Luther King. I think you are Martin Luther King times two.” Trump has also hosted Robinson at Mar-a-Lago, where Trump said of him, “I think someday — hopefully I’m going to be around to see — someday we’re going to see that man at the highest position. I got to know him so well and fairly quickly...I hope you can back him and write checks for him.”
Had Robinson dropped out of the race by the end of Thursday, North Carolina Republicans could have designated someone else to receive the votes cast in his name. Robinson instead stayed in the race, preventing Republicans from fielding an alternative candidate. MORE: By Aaron Blake of the Washington Post: “Mark Robinson is a Trump Problem of Trump’s Own Making” (“It’s not just his endorsements of several flawed statewide candidates who went on to badly underperform and lose key races; it’s also the ethos he’s created in the party. He’s placed a premium on owning the libs and devotion to Trump, and he’s devalued political bona fides. He has effectively encouraged his party to overlook a Trump-loyal candidate’s very obvious baggage, by dismissing it as lies from the liberal media or even viewing it as an asset.”)
By Jonathan V. Last of The Bulwark: “Mark Robinson Proves—Again—That the Republican Party is a Failed State”
Congress
House Republicans are again rebelling against their own Speaker’s plan to pass a government funding bill. If such a bill isn’t passed by October 1, the government will shut down. Trump is urging members to vote against the bill unless legislation requiring proof of citizenship to register to vote is included, but even after it was inserted into the bill, House rebels still voted it down.
For the second time this year, a bipartisan group of House members used a discharge petition to bypass Speaker Mike Johnson and move a piece of legislation directly to the floor. The uncontroversial bill forces a vote on expanding Social Security benefits. The move is a sign either of Johnson’s weakness or ineptitude (or both perhaps) as Speaker.
During a congressional hearing on hate crimes against Jewish and Arab Americans, Louisiana Republican Senator John Kennedy asked Maya Berry, the executive director of the Arab American Institute, if she supported Hamas and Hezbollah. Despite saying she did not (“Hamas is a foreign terrorist organization that I do not support, but you asking the executive director of the Arab American Institute that question very much puts the focus on the issue of hate in our country”) Kennedy continued to demand that she renounce the groups before concluding by telling her she should “hide [her] head in a bag.”
During a floor speech, Republican Rep. Virginia Foxx of North Carolina objected to Democratic Rep. Sean Casten’s assertion that “certain white folks of low character might find the realization of Martin Luther King’s dream [nightmarish]” but then withdrew the objection when Casten assured her he was not directing the comments toward anyone in the chamber.
A new court filing places Republican Florida Rep. Matt Gaetz at a party at the center of a sex trafficking scandal.
Paul Kane of the Washington Post reports Senate Democrats, sensing pickup opportunities, are pushing party leaders to invest more in senate races in Texas (Ted Cruz) and Florida (Rick Scott).
Polling and Demographics
By Natalie Jackson for National Journal: “Forecasts and Betting Markets Won’t Get You a Better Prediction Than Polls” (“We can calculate probabilities all day long, but we have no idea what their accuracy is. Polls have margins of error, plus additional error. Models have error of their own. Judgment calls made by those constructing the models have error. We don’t know how big all of that cumulative error is. I know we all want something to quiet our nerves and tell us what will happen in an incredibly consequential contest, but no person or model can do that.”)
Intriguing: An Iowa poll found Trump leading Harris in Iowa 47-43%. That represents a 14 point drop for Trump since this spring, when he led Biden by 18 points.
From a New York Times article by Claire Cain Miller titled “How the Last Eight Years Made Young Women More Liberal”
NBC News reports there has been a dramatic rise in deaths among pregnant women in Texas since the state implemented its six-week abortion ban, rising 56% while the national rate rose 11%.
Brian Mann of NPR reports the number of deaths from drug overdoses in the United States is plummeting, with some states seeing 20-30% declines.
Cameron McWhirter and Zusha Elinson of the Wall Street Journal report on the growing number of progressive gun owners in the United States.
The Economy
The Federal Reserve lowered interest rates by half a point, the first reduction in four years.
Following the rate cut, the stock market rose to a new all-time high.
Nevada is often a bellwether for the health of the nation’s economy, and signs there indicate the US will stick its soft landing.
International News
Thousands of people were injured in Lebanon while several were killed (including children) when the new pagers they received from Hezbollah exploded. The following day, the attacks spread to people using walkie-talkies. The Washington Post has details on how Israel carried out the attack.
American officials are beginning to worry that Israel is preparing an offensive against Hezbollah in Lebanon.
Rick Noack of the Washington Post reports on the draconian new laws now being enforced in Afghanistan by the Taliban that strictly regulate the lives of women. As Noack writes, “The new religious code issued late last month bans women from raising their voices, reciting the Quran in public and looking at men other than their husbands or relatives. It requires women to cover the lower half of their faces in addition to donning a head covering they were already expected to wear, among other rules.”
Garbage Time: A WNBA Playoffs Preview
(Garbage Time theme song here)
Thanks to the Caitlin Clark Effect, the 2024 WNBA regular season has set both attendance and viewership records. Over 2.3 million people bought tickets to see a game in person this year, a 156% increase over 2023. Clark’s Indiana Fever, which more than quadrupled their attendance to become the first WNBA team to ever draw more than 300,000 paying fans, led the way, but every team has seen interest take off. That’s evident in TV ratings as well, with major network games averaging more than 1.3 million viewers, which is about triple last year’s mark. League games not only rival viewership for MLB games, but the most-watched match-ups—those between the Fever and Angel Reese’s Chicago Sky—drew over 2 million viewers, a mark a single MLB game hasn’t come close to reaching this season.
As fans have tuned in to watch Clark break both the single-season rookie record for points scored and the single-season WNBA record for assists, they’ve also familiarized themselves with other teams and players around the league. It helps that the WNBA only has twelve teams at the moment, making it easy for fans to get to know each team’s roster and playing style. If you’ve been watching, you should be well primed for the WNBA’s postseason, which begins today. If not, that’s OK, it’s been a crazy summer. Let’s get you caught up.
We’ll start with the two-time defending WNBA champions the Las Vegas Aces, who are led by center A’ja Wilson. Wilson already owns two MVP awards and is all but guaranteed to take home her third this season after becoming the first player to record 1,000 points in a single season. (She also broke the single-season record for rebounds, but that record had been shattered earlier this year by Reese, whose season ended a few weeks ago due to injury.) Eighty percent of the Aces’ starting line-up (Wilson and guards Chelsea Gray, Kelsey Plum, and Jackie Young) made up one-third of the 12-member USA women’s national basketball team that won gold last month in Paris, yet Las Vegas has only managed to land themselves a four-seed in the playoffs. That’s mainly due to a 7-6 start when they were without Gray due to injury (they’re 20-7 since) but they haven’t performed as the superteam most assumed they were.
What gives? It seems like it’s a lot of little things. Plum is usually the team’s number-two option, but her scoring average is her lowest since 2021 and she sometimes slips into the background of games. Gray has been inconsistent, and Young, who picked up the slack when Gray was hurt to start the season, has faded down the stretch. Coach Becky Hammon is still searching for a way to squeeze more production out of her bench and has been disappointed in the team’s defensive effort. Weirdly, there are times when the Aces just don’t seem to click on the court. Maybe they’ll be able to flip a switch in the playoffs, but Las Vegas this year scans more as a good team than a championship team.
Meanwhile, the league’s best team is the New York Liberty, which features the league’s standout big three in last season’s MVP Breanna Stewart (fourth in points per game at 20.7), Sabrina Ionescu (second in three-pointers made at 2.8 per game and fifth in assists at 6.2 per game) and 2021 MVP Jonquel Jones (sixth in rebounds at 9.0 per game.) The Liberty are an extremely well-balanced team. Stewart and Ionescu get all the attention, but from what I’ve seen, Jones is the difference maker, the player doing all the little things to set up the big guns. Twenty-four-year old rookie Leonie Fiebich is in line to win Sixth Player of the Year. New York came up a point short last year in a low-scoring Game 4 that would have forced a decisive Game 5 in the WNBA Finals. I’m sure that memory still stings for Stewart, Ionescu, and Jones.
The season’s biggest surprise is the Minnesota Lynx, who are led by perhaps the best all-around player in the league right now, forward Napheesa Collier (5th in the league in scoring [20.4 per game], 3rd in rebounds [9.7], 2nd in steals [1.9], and the favorite to win defensive player of the year.) The Lynx finished last season 19-21, which was good enough for the sixth seed in the playoffs, but ended the season this year with a 30-10 record and the two-seed. Guard Kayla McBride has a good shot at making an all-WNBA team, and coach Cheryl Reeve, who kept Team USA’s Olympic win streak alive and returned home to lead Minnesota to a 13-2 record since the break, will almost certainly win the Coach of the Year Award. Some will wonder if the Lynx have enough depth to make a deep run in the playoffs, but it doesn’t make sense to bet against the versatile Collier this year.
The big question heading into the playoffs, however, is how Caitlin Clark and the Indiana Fever will fare. It’s been a down and then very up season for the Fever, who began the season 1-8. Not only were fans assuming Indiana was destined to win the Paige Bueckers sweepstakes, but given Clark’s far less-than-stellar play, some were speculating as to whether she was cut out for the league. But then the schedule eased up, the team was able to practice, and Clark began to find her rhythm. She adjusted to the league’s physical play, grew more comfortable shooting threes (although she shot a relatively low 34.4%) and emerged as the WNBA’s best and most daring passer (although she also led the league in turnovers by a lot). Since that 1-8 start, Indiana has gone 19-12, including 9-5 since the break, and finished the season with a .500 record. Not only did Clark break those aforementioned records, but she added two triple-doubles to her resume, which is two more than any WNBA rookie in the history of the league has ever had. She’s a lock to win Rookie of the Year and will likely be named first team All-WNBA. It’s been amazing watching her growth as a player over the past four months.
Even though Indiana is only a six-seed, no team is looking forward to playing them. They’re not a great defensive team (defense is the glaring weakness in Clark’s game) but they make up for that by blitzing their opponents on offense. Their season seemed to take off when Indiana shifted their main 1-2 punch from Clark and center Aliyah Boston to Clark and veteran guard Kelsey Mitchell. In fact, the super-scrappy Mitchell is tied with Clark for the team lead in scoring (19.2 points per game) and has a better three-point percentage (40.2%) than Clark. Early in the season, it was clear Clark and Mitchell had no idea how to play alongside one another; now they’re almost too much for teams to handle.
Indiana will face the Connecticut Sun in the first round of the playoffs. The Sun dismantled the Fever in the first game of the season, with Connecticut guard DiJonai Carrington introducing Clark to the league by locking her down. That was the first of Connecticut’s nine straight wins to start the season and part of their 13-1 overall start. Connecticut lost to Indiana toward the end of August, however, and have only been playing .500 basketball since. Perhaps Connecticut’s veteran leadership and stellar defense (they hold teams to a league best 73.6 points per game) will result in a series win, but no matchup screams upset more than this one.
If Indiana does advance, it’s likely they’ll play the Lynx in the second round. Minnesota won the season series 2-1 and have only lost twice since the Olympic break. Indiana has no one on their roster who can guard Collier. Maybe Indiana’s offense can overwhelm Minnesota’s second-ranked defense, but it seems more likely the Fever’s playoff inexperience will ultimately catch up to them.
The second-round match-up you should be paying attention to is the seemingly inevitable showdown between last year’s finalists, the top-seeded New York Liberty and the defending champs the Las Vegas Aces. This series feels like the true Finals. As I mentioned earlier, the Aces just aren’t clicking, so I’m picking New York to advance. And no matter who they face—the Sun, the upstart Fever, or my pick, the Lynx—I’ve got the Liberty winning in a sweep and taking home a well-deserved championship.