Archives for category: Harris, Kamala

Linda Ronstadt, one of the greatest singers of our time, posted her endorsement in the 2024 Presidential campaign.

“Donald Trump is holding a rally on Thursday in a rented hall in my hometown, Tucson. I would prefer to ignore that sad fact. But since the building has my name on it, I need to say something.

It saddens me to see the former President bring his hate show to Tucson, a town with deep Mexican-American roots and a joyful, tolerant spirit.

I don’t just deplore his toxic politics, his hatred of women, immigrants and people of color, his criminality, dishonesty and ignorance — although there’s that.

For me it comes down to this: In Nogales and across the southern border, the Trump Administration systematically ripped apart migrant families seeking asylum. Family separation made orphans of thousands of little children and babies, and brutalized their desperate mothers and fathers. It remains a humanitarian catastrophe that Physicians for Human Rights said met the criteria for torture.

There is no forgiving or forgetting the heartbreak he caused.

Trump first ran for President warning about rapists coming in from Mexico. I’m worried about keeping the rapist out of the White House.

Linda Ronstadt

P.S. to J.D. Vance:

I raised two adopted children in Tucson as a single mom. They are both grown and living in their own houses. I live with a cat. Am I half a childless cat lady because I’m unmarried and didn’t give birth to my kids? Call me what you want, but this cat lady will be voting proudly in November for Kamala Harris and Tim Walz .”

Michael A. Cohen (NOT the ex-Trump lawyer) writes that this debate might change the views of independent, uncommitted voters. Trump’s behavior and Harris’s cool were a stark contrast. Republicans are complaining that the moderators fact-checked Trump but not Harris, and were biased. But a few of Trump’s many lies were so egregious that the moderators were compelled to correct him, such as his debunked claim that Haitian immigrants in Springfield, Ohio, were stealing and eating pets, and his claim that Democrats support “post-birth” abortion. The moderators pointed out that the pet story was a hoax and that no state allows murdering a baby after birth.

Cohen writes:

Presidential debates usually don’t matter. A trove of political science literature suggests that most debate watchers have already decided whom they are supporting. While a winning candidate might get a temporary boost from a strong performance, the polling bump often fades. 

However, last night’s showdown between Kamala Harris and Donald Trump could be the exception to the rule. Why? Because never before in American presidential politics has there been a debate as one-sided as what we saw Tuesday night in Philadelphia. 

If this had been a heavyweight fight, a towel would have flown across the ring and the referee would have stopped the bout. This was such a rout that even conservative pundits bemoaned Trump’s disastrous performance. Over and over, Harris threw fresh chum into the water. In practically every one of her answers, she included at least one line that she knew would firmly lodge itself under Trump’s infamously thin skin. 

She needled Trump about his boring political rallies and pointed out that his alma mater, the Wharton School of Business, had thrown cold water on his economic plans. She listed his litany of criminal indictments and prosecutions. She repeatedly called him a disgrace and an easy mark for foreign leaders.

And each and every time, without fail, Trump took the bait. The result was a series of angry, disjointed and incoherent rants at ever-increasing decibel levels. He claimed without evidence that “many of those [Wharton] professors … think my plan is a brilliant plan.” He defended his political grievance fests by claiming they are the “most incredible rallies in the history of politics.” And in the debate’s most bizarre moment, he falsely claimed that immigrants in Ohio are stealing and killing pet animals. The contrast between sullen, angry Trump and polished, even-keeled Harris couldn’t have been starker. While much of the analysis from last night will focus on Trump’s lunacy, Harris’ performance may have been more decisive.

By and large, voters know what they think about Trump. Nine years in the political spotlight will have that effect. But Harris has been a 2024 presidential candidate for just seven weeks. If recent polling is to be believed, going into last night many voters saidthey want to know more about her. In a New York Times poll released Sunday, 28 percent of voters “said they felt they needed to know more about Ms. Harris, while only 9 percent said they needed to know more about Mr. Trump.” The number is close to half among the small segment of undecided voters. Along with last month’s Democratic convention, Tuesday’s debate was one of Harris’ best opportunities to introduce herself to the public. Did last night seal the deal? CNN’s instant poll taken immediately after the debate showed Harris trouncing Trump 63-37. That’s almost a mirror image of its poll after the Biden-Trump debate earlier this year. It’s similar to the margins for Joe Biden, Hillary Clinton and Mitt Romney in the first debates of the last three presidential elections — each of which led to a bump in the polls.

But a strong debate performance is no guarantee of victory. In 2004, John Kerry trounced George W. Bush in all three presidential debates. The same was true for Clinton against Trump in 2016. In 2012, Romney wiped the floor in his first debate with a listless Barack Obama. None of those three ended up in the Oval Office. 

Still, the differences between Harris and Trump were so significant — and considering the potential boost to a candidate not as well known as her opponent — it’s hard to imagine last night’s debate will not have at least some effect on voter opinion. At the very least, she might have given the sliver of the electorate still unsure about Harris enough information to win their vote in November.In the near term, the debate should generate days of coverage about the former president’s mental state. Perhaps it will also move the news media away from continuing to claim that Harris has not explained herself and her plans to the American people.

But ultimately, the question for Democrats is: Did Harris swing enough voters in her direction to ensure she wins the White House? Even if her poll numbers improve in the next week, will those gains remain in place until Election Day?

Time will tell. But if Trump remains a high-floor, low-ceiling candidate, with a strong base of support and a limited ability to bring in new voters, even a small move of undecided voters to Harris could be decisive. And it’s hard to imagine any presidential candidate having a better night than Harris did on Tuesday. Democrats can’t ask for much more than that from their new standard bearer.

Michael A. Cohen

Chris Tomlinson of the Houston Chronicle believes that the debate will not matter to the partisans on either side. Not so clear is the impact of the debate on those not aligned with either party.

He writes:

The Sept. 10 presidential debate between Donald Trump and Kamala Harris was must-see TV for people who closely follow politics. For those who love the genre, the candidates delivered an instant classic.

Trump brought his stump speech to national television, while Harris proved up to the task and avoided any major gaffes. But will it make a difference?

The June debate between Trump and Joe Bidendrew 51.3 million viewers, well below the 73 million people who watched their 2016 debate. Overnight numbers, which tend to underestimate viewership, estimated 65 million people tuned in Tuesday night.

Folks who watched the debate live more than likely tuned in to watch their champion do battle with their opponent. While nearly two-thirds of uncommitted focus groups said Harris dominated, Trump’s and Harris’ partisans declared their candidate the winner. No surprise there.

This week, I wrote about Colin Allred’s campaign to unseat Ted Cruz in the U.S. Senate. I said Allred was naive to believe he could attract Republican voters. Reader emails confirmed that party affiliation is far more critical than any politician or their policies.

“Many of us would otherwise vote for Allred if control of the Senate was not at risk.  As is, we cannot take the chance of losing a Republican Senate seat,” Clay Spires wrote.

“I can’t bring myself to send Chuck Schumer another rubber-stamp vote in that highly polarized environment,” Greg Groh wrote about his ballot. “Only when both parties run moderates will voters have to start thinking again.”

By this reasoning, many Republicans will hold their nose and vote for Trump, no matter what he says. He really could shoot someone on Fifth Avenue and not lose any votes.

If the debate has any impact on independents, it will likely take place on social media, where people who didn’t watch it live will see snippets. The highly partisan editing, though, risks turning off voters disgusted by politics.

The real wildcard came after the debate when Taylor Swift felt compelled to make her position clear to 283 million Instagram followers that AI-generated images of her endorsing Trump were false. The world’s most famous childless cat lady has spoken.

Voter enthusiasm will decide this election, and women will likely make the difference, not the debate.

Karl Rove was the strategist behind the rise of George W. Bush. When he speaks, Republicans listen. He wrote the following article in The Wall Street Journal. The headline writer at the conservative journal described Trump’s performance as “catastrophic.” Trump has repeatedly described Harris in demeaning terms as dumb, a “DEI hire,” and a woman who rose in politics by giving out sexual favors. Yet she made mincemeat of him on the debate stage.

Rove wrote:

Tuesday’s debate between Kamala Harris and Donald Trump was a train wreck for him, far worse than anything Team Trump could have imagined…

Mr. Trump had to know the vice president would try to get him to lose his cool. She did. She went after him on his multiple indictments. She called him “weak” and belittled him as a six-time bankrupt, spoiled inheritor of wealth. She said his former national security adviser thought him, in her words, “dangerous and unfit” for the Oval Office.

As is frequently the case with Mr. Trump, he let his emotions get the better of him. He took the bait almost every time she put it on the hook, offering a pained smile as she did. Rather than dismissing her attacks and launching his strongest counterarguments against her, Mr. Trump got furious. As her attacks continued, his voice rose. He gripped the podium more often and more firmly. He grimaced and shook his head, at times responding with wild and fanciful rhetoric. Short, deft replies and counterpunches would have been effective. He didn’t deliver them…

There was no sustained, specific indictment of her record on almost any issue. Mr. Trump offered angry responses, pursed lips and eyes darting mostly down, seldom looking at her. And what was it with his makeup that left white circles around his eyes? This was his most important opportunity to make an impression of strength and relative stability.

Both candidates made significant misstatements. Ms. Harris said her opponent “left us the worst unemployment since the Great Depression” and Mr. Trump declared inflation under Biden-Harris “probably the worst in our nation’s history.” But his false statements far outnumbered hers by my count…

It matters how debating candidates carry themselves. There, it was no contest. Ms. Harris came across as calm, confident, strong and focused on the future. Mr. Trump came across as hot, angry and fixated on the past, especially his own. She mastered the split screen, projecting confidence and wordlessly undercutting him by smiling while shaking her head as he spoke…

Trump enthusiasts will be upset that the ABC interviewers fact-checked the former president far more than they did Ms. Harris. Then again, he gave them plenty of material to work with—such as repeating the bizarre claim that Haitian migrants in Springfield, Ohio, are eating the pets of local residents. That was probably Team Trump’s lowest moment.

Will this debate have an effect? Yes, though perhaps not as much as Team Harris hopes or as much as Team Trump might fear. But there’s no putting lipstick on this pig. Mr. Trump was crushed by a woman he previously dismissed as “dumb as a rock.” Which raises the question: What does that make him?

I admit that I was very nervous before the debate. Trump is a polished entertainer, Harris is an experienced prosecutor.

She beat him. She baited him and he took the bait every time. He got angrier and angrier. He was furious. His face was contorted with rage. He sulked, he pouted. She stayed cool, collected, calm, and smiling. She was fearless and strong. She looked at him with amusement and disdain. She was never defensive.

She was terrific on abortion. She spoke about women who were having a miscarriage, bleeding in the back of their car because the doctors are afraid to give her the abortion she needs, because doctors are afraid of being arrested. She made it real.

Trump lied. He said that “everyone” wanted Roe v. Wade overturned–Republicans, Democrats, and independents. Every legal scholar, he said, wanted it gone. Lies.

Daniel Dale, the CNN fact-checker, said that Trump told 33 lies, Harris told one. Open the link to see the fact check.

The funniest moment was when Trump said that Haitian immigrants were eating cats and other pets in Springfield, Ohio. This story was circulated yesterday and was debunked by the police and city manager in Springfield. Why didn’t anyone on Trump’s staff let him know.?

I don’t know whether the debate will affect the vote. I hope it does.

Trump looked like a tired old man. She looked presidential.

Fred Smith usually write a Christmas poem but this year he decided to write an election poem.

Here it is:

The days are swift passing until it’s December

But Christmas will dawn on the 5th of November.

Two months ‘fore Election Day and throughout the land

Joy is a-stirring, hopeful relief near at hand.

Just one month ago, there was a sense of despair.

Optimism was fading and breathing foul air.

Then Biden withdrew; ‘twas all very sudden.  

Harris stepped up, and light started to flood in.

Cheerful Kamala smiled without missing a beat,

Catching a bone-spurred bully off guard on flat feet

She’s a Black-Asian woman who married a Jew.

See your priest or your rabbi if that troubles you.

So, Karma took over when Joe lost the debate;

Poetic justice, at last, dictating Trump’s fate. 

Running strong against Donald whose gospel is hate

Whose bloody rage keeps him in a constant red state.

She picked as her running mate, Governor Walz,

A true everyman, who responds to all calls.

When fast off they flew to swing states and rallied,

As Trump more and more scowled and dilly dallied.

He who had chosen JD Vance as his veep

Whose loyalty outweighed how much he’s a creep.

A wide-eyed senator dreaming on his love couch;

A perfect match partner for the impious grouch.

And as Grumpy campaigns with his sidekick Goofy,

This ragged tag team has been double down doofy.

Years back, there were signs Trump was non compos mentis,

Strutting his ruthlessness skills on the Apprentice,

Firing everyone at his ultimate whim

With unchecked power reserved only to him.

And twenty years ere that reality show

Wayne Barrett mapped the deets of Donald’s M.O.,

His inherent racism, the shield of Roy Cohn,

Dirty dealing and cheating, this all was well known.

This self-proclaimed titan whose casinos went bust;

A big entrepreneur no contractor could trust.

Now Trump’s mainly consumed by the size of each crowd,

Ranting in blue whale-ish suits that fit like a shroud.

With MAGA fanatics clinging to every word,

His saga of falsehoods far beyond the absurd.

Carrot-faced, his puss locked in a fixed grimace,

Stewing up gripes in a big steamy tsimmes

That he feeds to his base in a crock full of lies,

Which he always refills with unending supplies:

About how he built walls to bar immigration

That’s turning us into a third world nation.

And why it made sense to oppose vaccination,

Or how he lowered our high rate of inflation.

He has no policies, just makes rash decisions,

Blurting out confused, head-spinning revisions.

So, let’s figure out where he stands on abortions,

As he bends yes – no – maybe into contortions.

And he’s only become more misogynistic

With a baseline temper that starts at ballistic.

Who’s used the court system to dodge Judgment Day.

But like Yertle, he’s doomed to crash down the same way.

As Karismatic Harris along with the Coach

Continue to roll out, facing little reproach.

While last week’s convention put more wind in their sails,

And Felonious Trump stares at his choice of jails.

As he increasingly takes his roadshow on tour,

We get a chance to recount each faux pas du jour.

Effronteries and distractions almost non-stop:

Those losers at Arlington now serve as a prop;

And will he face Harris; will his mike be open;

And what might he say when he is gropin’?

But we must be careful.  Victory’s not in the bag

With twisted judges flying the upside-down flag,

Abetting Trump, concocting legal protections

Re the insurrection and stealing elections.

Yet there’s one Harris Poll that counts most of all,

When people show up to cast ballots this fall,

And tell Donald Trump where to go with his fury.

Voters will reach the verdict. We are the jury. 

Fred Smith retired from the New York City public school system

as an administrative analyst. His occasional poems and op-eds

have appeared in the Daily News and other newspapers.

John Merrow spent many years as PBS’s education reporter. Now retired, he continues to be a well-informed and well-respected observer of education issues.

Merrow writes:

If Kamala Harris wins the Presidency, public education isn’t likely to be shaken up as much as it needs to be. If Donald Trump is elected and has his way, public education will be turned upside down. But no matter who wins, American higher education is in big trouble….although, as you will see, every crisis is also an opportunity.

If Trump wins in November, the world of education faces rough seas.  His “Project 2025” pledges to abolish the federal Department of Education, without specifying what agencies would be responsible for what the Department now does, such as enforcing civil rights laws in education.  “Project 2025” pledges to abolish Head Start, the preschool program that now serves about 833,000 low income children, send Title One money directly to states (while phasing it out over a 10-year period), and turn over Pell Grant administration to the Treasury Department.   While many in education want the Pell Grant cap of $7,395 per year to be raised (given the cost of a college education), “Project 2025” does not address this.

President Biden has made forgiving student debt a goal, but most of his efforts have been stymied by the courts. “Project 2025” would end the practice completely.

Trump and his team promise to advance “education freedom” by vigorously promoting “school choice.”  In practice, this would provide parents with cash vouchers that can be spent at private and religious schools, as well as federal tax credits for money spent on private school tuition. In simplest terms, Trump and his team want as much of the money that now goes to public schools to go to parents instead, and they want it to be tax-deductible, as it now is in Arizona. 

“Project 2025” calls for restricting free breakfast and lunch to low income students. Doing that would probably bring back separate lines and separate entrances for those paying and those eating ‘for free.’  That practice led some poor kids to skip meals entirely, to avoid humiliation, which is why many school districts have opted to feed all kids. (There’s some evidence that feeding everyone is actually cheaper, because it eliminates the need for special passes, separate accounting, and so forth. Ask Tim Walz about it.)

A significant change that I experienced as a reporter was the treatment of children with handicapping conditions.  Prior to 1975, many of those children were institutionalized or kept at home. “The Education of All Handicapped Children Act” (PL 94-142) moved the revolution that had begun in Massachusetts and Minnesota to the national level. While it’s not perfect today, the federal government contributes more than $14 Billion to pay for services for those youngsters.  “Project 2025” would distribute the money to states directly with few if any strings attached and would ask Congress to rewrite the law so that some money could go directly to parents. That doesn’t seem to me to be a step in the right direction.

All of these provisos and directives seem likely to do major damage to public education, as well as to the life chances of low income students.

Charter schools, which are publicly funded but privately run schools, seem unlikely to fare well no matter who wins. They aren’t private enough for most Republicans, and they are too private for most Democrats.

What lies in store for education if Harris wins in November?  The Biden-Harris Administration promised far more than it delivered, particularly in higher education, and its Secretary of Education has been largely missing in action, as far as I could tell. The party’s platform calls for free pre-school, free public college for families earning under $125,000 per year, making college tuition tax-deductible, smaller classes, and more ‘character education,’ whatever that is.

My own wish list would be for an energetic Secretary of Education who would encourage and lead conversations about the purposes of education, and the roles that schools play.  Too often today public schools are merely rubber-stamping the status children arrive with; but schools are supposed to be ladders of opportunity, there to be climbed by anyone and everyone with ambition.

The federal government cannot change how schools operate, but its leadership could and should shine a bright light on what schools could be….and how they could get there.

If I am allowed one wish, it’s that President Harris and Vice President Walz propose National Service, a 2-year commitment for all, in return for two years of tuition/training.  It’s long past time to put the ‘me-me-me’ self-absorption of the Ronald Reagan era in our rear view mirror. Our young people need to be reminded that they live in a great country and ought to show our appreciation by serving it in some capacity.

Whoever wins, Harris or Trump, American higher education’s rough years will continue, because a growing number of young people are questioning the value of, and necessity for, a college education.  This is a genuine crisis, and American higher education is in the fight of its life: Last year nearly 100 colleges shut down, roughly two per week.  While we still have more than 4,000 higher education institutions, many of those may not make it to 2030.  The rising cost of college defies common sense, the rise of Artificial Intelligence threatens some professions that now require a college degree, and many young people seem inclined to opt out of the high-speed, high stakes chase for a credential.  How many of the 31,000,000 Americans between the ages of 18 and 24 will continue to enroll in college this year and next is an open question.  

Of course, colleges aren’t standing pat. For example,  Community Colleges are reaching down into high schools to keep their enrollment up; about one-fifth of all current Community College students are also enrolled in high school. Those institutions also enroll lots of older students–the average age of a Community College student is 28.

Four-year colleges and universities are fighting to enroll the 40,000,000 Americans who have some college credits but not enough for a degree.  They are also doing their best to attract on-line learners of all ages, and the most ambitious institutions are working hard to enroll (full paying) students from all over the world.  

If Trump wins, his immigration policies might shut the door on foreign students, a cash cow for a large number of institutions.  If Harris wins, federal aid probably won’t be slashed, but that won’t stop the questioning.

Questioning is long overdue. For too long elitists in the Democratic and Republican parties have looked down their noses at those not going to college, ignoring the wisdom of the great John Gardner:  “An excellent plumber is infinitely more admirable than an incompetent philosopher. The society which scorns excellence in plumbing because plumbing is a humble activity, and tolerates shoddiness in philosophy because it is an exalted activity, will have neither good plumbing nor good philosophy. Neither its pipes nor its theories will hold water.”

Every crisis is also an opportunity:Some of those shuttered college campuses might be repurposed for housing for senior citizens, or veterans.  Some of those facilities could become Head Start centers, hubs for small businesses, community hospitals, and so forth. I’d like to see a Harris-Walz Administration embrace the possiblities, with energy and imagination.

So please pay attention. Vote intelligently, and urge your friends and neighbors to vote.

The AP wrote about the annual conference of Moms for Liberty, where the guest speaker was convicted felon Donald Trump. The organization is supposed to be “non-political,” to preserve its tax-free status, but its partisan political views are undisguised. The rightwing group favors censorship, book banning, and unhinged alarmism about teachers “grooming” students to be gay or transgender.

WASHINGTON (AP) — In her welcoming remarks at Moms for Liberty’s annual gathering in the nation’s capital on Friday, the group’s co-founder, Tiffany Justice, urged members to “fight like a mother” against the Democratic presidential ticket.

Later that evening, after she had interviewed Republican nominee Donald Trump onstage, she made a point to say she was personally endorsing him for the presidency. Their talk show style chat was preceded by a “Trump, Trump, Trump” chant from the audience.

The weekend’s gathering, drawing parent activists from across the country, has showcased how Moms for Liberty has moved toward fully embracing Trump and his political messaging as November’s electiondraws nearer. The group is officially a nonpartisan nonprofit that says it’s open to anyone who wants parents to have a greater say in their children’s education, yet there was little pretense about which side of the nation’s political divide it has chosen.

A painting that was prominently displayed on an easel next to the security station attendees had to pass through before being allowed into the conference area showed Vice President Kamala Harris kneeling over a bald eagle carcass, a communist symbol on her jacket and her mouth dripping with blood. A Moms for Liberty spokeswoman said she hadn’t seen the gruesome painting and noted that the only official signage for the event included the group’s logo….

Many communities where Moms for Liberty candidates took over a majority of the school board have been frustrated by their laser-like focus on removing books, questioning lessons around race and rejecting LGBTQ+ identities. A lack of progress toward academic improvement has in turn led to a counter movement among more moderate and liberal parents and teachers unions.

Moms for Liberty says it won’t make an official endorsement in the presidential race, but it isn’t shying away from getting involved. The group’s founders recently wrote an open letter to parents warning that Harris and her running mate, Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz, a former high school social studies teacher, would be “the most anti-parent, extremist government America has ever known.”

The group spent its first three years becoming synonymous with the “parents’ rights” movement in local school boards but recently has become more involved in national politics. It participated in the controversial conservative blueprint for the next Republican administration, Project 2025, as a member of its advisory board. The group also has invested more than $3 million in four crucial presidential swing states. The money has paid for advertising in Arizona, Georgia, North Carolina and Wisconsin, including messages critical of the Biden administration.

But, here’s some good news:

Around the country, some school board members backed by Moms for Liberty or who carry out the group’s agenda have been recalled in recent months by community members who say their policies have caused chaos.

In Woodland, California, north of the state capital, a school board member backed by Moms for Liberty members was recalled in March after she raised fears that children were coming out as transgender “as a result of social contagion ” during a school board meeting in 2023.

In Southern California, a trustee with the Temecula Valley Unified School District Board of Education was recalled after he and two of his colleagues voted to reject a social studies curriculum because it included a history of the gay rights movement.

And in Idaho’s heavily Republican panhandle, community members from across the political spectrum rose up to recall two right-wing members of their board last year who sought to root out critical race theory and institute a conservative agenda.

Katie Blaxberg, a Pinellas County candidate who will run against the one remaining Moms for Liberty-linked candidate for that county’s school board this fall, said the “nastiness” and “divisiveness” of the group “isn’t conducive to any sort of good wor

Senator John McCain’s son Jimmy was so disgusted by Trump’s actions at Arlington National Cemetery that he announced that he will vote for Kamala Harris. Jimmy McCain had ample reason to despise Trump for the way he insulted his father.

Jimmy McCain is a career military man.

CNN reported:

When former President Donald Trump held a campaign event at Arlington National Cemetery last week, 1st Lt. Jimmy McCain says he viewed it as a “violation.”

The youngest son of the late Sen. John McCain had already been moving away from the Republican Party — just weeks ago, he changed his voter registration to Democrat and plans to vote for Kamala Harris in November, he told CNN in an exclusive interview this week.

But he is speaking out now for the first time about Trump because of the former president’s conduct at the hallowed ground where several generations of McCain’s family, including his grandfather and great grandfather, are buried.

“It just blows me away,” McCain, who has served in the military for 17 years, told CNN. “These men and women that are laying in the ground there have no choice” of whether to be a backdrop for a political campaign, he said.

“I just think that for anyone who’s done a lot of time in their uniform, they just understand that inherently — that it’s not about you there. It’s about these people who gave the ultimate sacrifice in the name of their country.”

McCain’s decision to speak out now is part of his broader shift away from the Republican Party and his family’s famously conservative roots. After years as a registered independent, he says he registered as a Democrat several weeks ago and plans to vote for Kamala Harris in November, adding that he “would get involved in any way I could” to help her campaign.

It’s a significant move for the son of a former GOP presidential candidate and Arizona senator. While other members of the McCain family have distanced themselves from Trump — including Jimmy McCain’s mother Cindy, who endorsed then-candidate Joe Biden in 2020, and his sister Meghan — none except Jimmy have publicly abandoned the Republican Party.

Despite her harsh criticisms of Trump, Meghan McCain indicated last week that she would still not endorse Harris. “I’m a lifelong, generational conservative,” she tweeted.

Jimmy McCain, who enlisted in the Marine Corps at age 17 and now serves as an intelligence officer in the 158th Infantry Regiment, had until now deliberately sought to avoid entering the political fray. Trump’s attacks on his father — that he was “not a war hero” because he was captured in Vietnam, and his reported description of the elder McCain as a “loser” — were deeply hurtful on a personal level, but not out of bounds politically, Jimmy McCain believes.

“One thing about John McCain is that he chose a public life,” McCain said. “So to attack him is really not out of the realm of his job description.”

For the younger McCain, though, the Arlington episode and how the campaign has reacted to it represents a whole new level of what he perceives as Trump’s disrespect for the fallen. And he believes it stems from Trump’s own insecurities about not having served.

“Many of these men and women, who served their country, chose to do something greater than themselves,” McCain said. “They woke up one morning, they signed on the dotted line, they put their right hand up, and they chose to serve their country. And that’s an experience that Donald Trump has not had. And I think that might be something that he thinks about a lot.”

McCain emphasized that he is speaking on his own behalf and his views do not represent those of the US Army. McCain received his commission and became an officer in US Army intelligence in 2022.

I don’t know about you but I was disappointed by the CNN interview of Kamala Harris and Tim Walz. Interviewer Dana Bash wanted her colleagues to say she was tough, so she asked several gotcha questions. In particular, I was annoyed by the “what will you do in your first day in office?” question. It seems to be a standard question, but the answers it elicits are either banal or unrealistic. I recall that Trump told Sean Hannity that he would “drill, baby, drill” and “build the wall” on his first day. Oh, and he would be a dictator on day one. Harris just offered some platitudes about starting “the opportunity culture.” The realistic answer might be “I’m going to meet with my new staff; I’m going to find out where the bathroom is; I’m going to check out the desk drawers and arrange my family pictures; I’m going to plan our legislative agenda.” If Harris were coming in after Trump, she would have many executive orders to sign, reversing his bad ideas. But she follows Biden, and it is unlikely she will reverse anything.

Thom Hartmann was disappointed by the CNN interview. He explains here:

CNN shows everything that’s wrong with 2024’s repeat of 2016’s election coverage. In an interview with Vice President Harris and Governor Walz Thursday night, CNN’s Dana Bash chose to repeat pathetic rightwing attacks on the candidates instead of engaging in issues of importance to a majority of Americans. Only four of the questions she asked during the entire interview were not rightwing talking points. She could have asked about their pledge to protect Social Security and Medicare after Trump proposed cuts to both programs every year for his 4 years in office, or the 90% of Americans who want weapons of war off our streets, or their efforts to revive labor unions in the face of GOP opposition, or how they feel about Republicans on the Supreme Court thwarting Biden’s efforts to cut student loan debt, or what they’d do about the severe ethics problem with bribed Supreme Court justices Alito, Roberts, and Thomas, or their support for the queer community in the face of unrelenting attacks by JD Vance and other rightwingers, but, no. Instead, she had to ask about a one-word misspeak by Walz five years ago, whether Harris identified as Black or Indian or what, and why Walz implicitly lied when he said he and his wife had undergone “IVF” treatment for infertility when, in fact, they’d undergone the similar “IUI” treatment. As if anybody, anywhere, gives a damn. Probably the best analysis of the interview is here on Substack by Jeff Teidrich. Meanwhile, CNN’s management is ebullient about having pulled in a “whopping 6 million viewers.” Like I said, money over country…