Heather Cox Richardson reviewed the debate and the calls for Biden to step down. As always, she brings a long historical perspective to her comments.

She wrote:

Tonight was the first debate between President Joe Biden and presumptive Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump, and by far the most striking thing about the debate was the overwhelming focus among pundits immediately afterward about Biden’s appearance and soft, hoarse voice as he rattled off statistics and events. Virtually unmentioned was the fact that Trump lied and rambled incoherently, ignored questions to say whatever he wanted; refused to acknowledge the events of January 6, 2021; and refused to commit to accepting the result of the 2024 presidential election, finally saying he would accept it only if it met his standards for fairness. 

Immediately after the debate, there were calls for Biden to drop out of the race, but aside from the fact that the only time a presidential candidate has ever done that—in 1968—it threw the race into utter confusion and the president’s party lost, Biden needed to demonstrate that his mental capacity is strong in order to push back on the Republicans’ insistence that he is incapable of being president. That, he did, thoroughly. Biden began with a weak start but hit his stride as the evening wore on. Indeed, he covered his bases too thoroughly, listing the many accomplishments of his administration in such a hurry that he was sometimes hard to understand. 

In contrast, Trump came out strong but faded and became less coherent over time. His entire performance was either lies or rambling non-sequiturs. He lied so incessantly throughout the evening that it took CNN fact-checker Daniel Dale almost three minutes, speaking quickly, to get through the list. 

Trump said that some Democratic states allow people to execute babies after they’re born and that every legal scholar wanted Roe v. Wade overturned—both fantastical lies. He said that the deficit is at its highest level ever and that the U.S. trade deficit is at its highest ever: both of those things happened during his administration. He lied that there were no terrorist attacks during his presidency; there were many. He said that Biden wants to quadruple people’s taxes—this is “pure fiction,” according to Dale—and lied that his tax cuts paid for themselves; they have, in fact, added trillions of dollars to the national debt. 

Dale went on: Trump lied that the U.S. has provided more aid to Ukraine than Europe has when it’s the other way around, and he was off by close to $100 billion when he named the amount the U.S. has provided to Ukraine. He was off by millions when he talked about how many migrants have crossed the border under Biden, and falsely claimed that some of Biden’s policies—like funding historically Black colleges and universities (HBCUs) and reducing the price of insulin to $35 a month—were his own accomplishments.

There is no point in going on, because virtually everything he said was a lie. As Jake Lahut of the Daily Beast recorded, he also was all over the map. “On January 6,” Trump said, “we had a great border.” To explain how he would combat opioid addiction, he veered off into talking points about immigration and said his administration “bought the best dog.” He boasted about acing a cognitive test and that he had just recently won two golf club tournaments without mentioning that they were at his own golf courses. “To do that, you have to be quite smart and you have to be able to hit the ball a long way,” he said. “I can do it.” 

As Lahut recorded, Trump said this: “Clean water and air. We had it. We had the H2O best numbers ever, and we were using all forms of energy during my 4 years. Best environmental numbers ever, they gave me the statistic [sic.] before I walked on stage actually.”

Trump also directly accused Biden of his own failings and claimed Biden’s own strengths, saying, for example, that Biden, who has enacted the most sweeping legislation of any president since at least Lyndon Johnson, couldn’t get anything done while he, who accomplished only tax cuts, was more effective. He responded to the calling out of his own criminal convictions by saying that Biden “could be a convicted felon,” and falsely stating: “This man is a criminal.” And, repeatedly, Trump called America a “failing nation” and described it as a hellscape.

It went on and on, and that was the point. This was not a debate. It was Trump using a technique that actually has a formal name, the Gish gallop, although I suspect he comes by it naturally. It’s a rhetorical technique in which someone throws out a fast string of lies, non-sequiturs, and specious arguments, so many that it is impossible to fact-check or rebut them in the amount of time it took to say them. Trying to figure out how to respond makes the opponent look confused, because they don’t know where to start grappling with the flood that has just hit them.

It is a form of gaslighting, and it is especially effective on someone with a stutter, as Biden has. It is similar to what Trump did to Biden during a debate in 2020. In that case, though, the lack of muting on the mics left Biden simply saying: “Will you shut up, man?” a comment that resonated with the audience. Giving Biden the enforced space to answer by killing the mic of the person not speaking tonight actually made the technique more effective.

There are ways to combat the Gish gallop—by calling it out for what it is, among other ways—but Biden retreated to trying to give the three pieces of evidence that established his own credentials on the point at hand. His command of those points was notable, but the difference between how he sounded at the debate and how he sounded on stage at a rally in Raleigh, North Carolina, just an hour afterward suggested that the technique worked on him. 

That’s not ideal, but as Monique Pressley put it, “The proof of Biden’s ability to run the country is the fact that he is running it. Successfully. Not a debate performance against a pathological lying sociopath.” 

A much bigger deal is what it says that the television media and pundits so completely bought into Trump’s performance. They appear to have accepted Trump’s framing of the event—that he is dominant—so fully that the fact Trump unleashed a flood of lies and non-sequiturs simply didn’t register. And, since the format established that the CNN journalists running the debate did not challenge anything either candidate said, and Dale’s fact-checking spot came long after the debate ended, the takeaway of the event was a focus on Biden’s age rather than on Trump’s inability to tell the truth or form a coherent thought. 

At the end of the evening, pundits were calling not for Trump—a man liable for sexual assault and business fraud, convicted of 34 felonies, under three other indictments, who lied pathologically—to step down, but for Biden to step down…because he looked and sounded old. At 81, Biden is indeed old, but that does not distinguish him much from Trump, who is 78 and whose inability to answer a question should raise concerns about his mental acuity. 

About the effect of tonight’s events, former Republican operative Stuart Stevens warned: “Don’t day trade politics. It’s a sucker’s game. A guy from Queens out on bail bragged about overturning Roe v. Wade, said in public he didn’t have sex with a porn star, defended tax cuts for billionaires, defended Jan. 6th. and called America the worst country in the world. That guy isn’t going to win this race.”

Trump will clearly have pleased his base tonight, but Stevens is right to urge people to take a longer view. It’s not clear whether Trump or Biden picked up or lost votes; different polls gave the win to each, and it’s far too early to know how that will shake out over time. 

Of far more lasting importance than this one night is the clear evidence that stage performance has trumped substance in political coverage in our era. Nine years after Trump launched his first campaign, the media continues to let him call the shots. 

James Fallows is a veteran writer about American politics. What follows is the beginning of his reaction to last night’s debate. Open the link to read it all. Lies went unrefuted.

He begins:

Deb and I watched every minute of the dreadful “debate” tonight on CNN. I grabbed the remote to turn off the TV the instant the pundit-panels kicked in. A man can take only so much.

So what follows is my own “certified organic” reaction to what I just saw. It may or may not match the prevailing reaction tone—I haven’t seen or listened to any of it. That’s for the morning. Apologies in advance for inevitable late-night typos. 


1) The overview: A disastrous start.

Thirty minutes in I tweeted out this summary:

Things shifted—in Biden’s favor, and against Trump—as the night went on. But I can’t imagine that many people stuck it out as long as I felt obliged to. And what made the opening-minutes performance so striking is the “range” point I mention in the tweet, which is a version of the famed “expectations game.”

Biden’s range. Everyone know that Joe Biden is old. And everyone has seen the way his carriage, his gait, his facial expressions have become stiffer and more labored during his time in office.

But anyone who has watched Biden in office has seen him time and again“exceed expectations”—seeming to shake off the years and come on strongest when the stakes were highest. The best-known recent example was this year’s State of the Union address. In the days before, Fox and the GOP were presenting him as comatose. On the day after, they were saying that he’d shouted too much and must have been on pep pills — what else could have made him come across so forcefully? 

The State of the Union wasn’t the only example. Biden also did very well with his big D-Day address just this month, with his commencement speech at Morehouse before that, and in most other recent performances. His trademark had become “beating the spread,” rallying when it counted most.

That is what I was expecting tonight. The Trump forces must also have been expecting it, given their revival this week of the “pep-pills” line to pre-discount a strong Biden performance. 

So that is why his labored, halting, raspy, fact-clogged, uneasy sounding first set of answers was so startling. Without consciously realizing it, I had gotten used to the idea that in a crunch he could sound younger than he looks. This time he sounded very old. That’s what I meant by the bottom of his range.

The range for Trump. Everyone knows that Trump rambles and rants and makes things up as he plays to the crowd. And in its sentence-by-sentence content, what he said this evening was as outrageous a slurry of insults, nonsense, narcissism, and lies as any of his standard rally speech. I can type fast, but I literally could not note the lies down as quickly as he uttered them. Daniel Dale and others at CNN tried to keep up in an online tally here

But sentence by sentence, the Trump of these opening minutes sounded more polite, less ranting, more concise, and generally more “normal” than the man who spins his stories about sharks or shouts that everything is rigged. That’s what I meant about the high end of his range. In one of the debate chronicles I wrote back in the pre-Trump era, I noted that sometimes you can judge a debate’s effect by watching it with the sound turned off, and just noting the expressions and body language. In tonight’s case, if you listened “with the words turned off” — ignoring content and just listening to tone of voice — you’d hear sounding much more confident and forceful, and, bizarrely, calmer, than Biden did.

And for CNN. The moderators, Jake Tapper and Dana Bash, are both fully capable of very tough follow-up questioning. They did almost zero of that tonight, presumably because of whatever pact CNN had to sign to make the debate happen.

As a result, Trump could reel off one preposterous, defamatory, easily disprovable lie after another—for instance, that Biden is a “Manchurian Candidate” paid by the Chinese government, or Trump’s repeated claim that Democratic governors favored making it legal to kill babies “even after birth”—and Bash or Tapper would respond with, “Thank you. And now to you, President Biden…” 

Even at his best, Biden wouldn’t have been able to keep up with the torrent of lies. No one could: You can get out a lie in one sentence, but it can take three or four to explain the truth. (For instance: Trump’s claim that Biden was going to “wipe out” Social Security and Medicare by putting “millions and millions” of illegal immigrants on the rolls. In fact, immigrants improve the finances of those programs, because they are on average young. But, as you see, it takes more words to lay that out.) 

The net effect: Trump started out the debate lying but sounding controlled; Biden started out fact-clogged and sounding unsteady; and CNN became the sluice for this toxic lie-dense fare.

Robert Hubbell was not discouraged by the debate, as so many other Biden supporters were. He explains why:

By media consensus, Joe Biden lost the debate on Thursday evening. I disagree. Joe Biden did what he had to do in the debate. He was okay; not good; not bad; okay. But that was enough. Joe Biden will win the 2024 election if we do not surrender to defeatism.

I won’t make any excuses for Joe Biden’s sometimes tentative performance and hoarse voice during the debate. He did the best he could with an opponent who is unconstrained by the truth and moderators perfectly willing to allow Trump to lie. Unfortunately, Biden started weak and finished strong, while Trump started strong and finished weak. But many people had stopped watching after the first break.

What concerns me more than Joe Biden’s performance is the fragile and defeatist comments from many Democrats being quoted by media sources. I acknowledge that there may be biased reporting in choosing which Democrats to quote, but I saw the same thing in some of the remarks in the newsletter chat (before I closed it for technical reasons). Comments like, “I feel sick,” “Joe looks so old,” and “Why won’t he look into the camera?”

Worse, a few readers suggested Biden should drop out by repeating media lies that “Democratic operatives” are saying that the Democratic party will replace Biden. Those “democratic operatives” are paid consultants who say things off the record to give their buddies in the media baseless quotes to fill their headlines. It is a symbiotic, parasitic relationship.

The hypocrisy and double standard is sickening. One candidate on the stage lied from start to finish. And no one is suggesting that he drop out.

Here’s my takeaway: Joe Biden learned a lot tonight. Every statement Biden makes from this point forward should include “convicted felon,” adjudicated sexual abuser, “hush money to porn star,” stolen classified documents, and Trump believing veterans are suckers and losers. Those statements are all true and they are what is necessary for Joe Biden to break through the constant stream of lies that spew from Trump’s mouth.

It is also clear that the debate format is broken. It is silly. It is unfair. But that is a topic for another night, not an excuse for tonight.

Here is what we need to do: Redouble our efforts. Go to Joe Biden’s official campaign site (Joe Biden for President: Official Campaign Website) and make a donation now—the amount doesn’t matter. Millions of donations will be a vote of confidence for Biden. And that is what we need—confidence, not defeatism.

How we comport ourselves, communicate the urgency of the cause, and articulate the issues will be the difference in the election. If we say Biden should drop out—even if we sincerely believe so—we are signaling to others that they should give up. Biden isn’t giving up, and neither should we. I mean this in the nicest way possible, but if you believe Biden should drop out, the best thing you can do for your country is to keep your opinion to yourself to avoid dispiriting others.

It is understandable and reasonable to be anxious. But, as I told one reader who said he was scared by tonight’s debate, “Buck up! We are better than that!” (No criticism of the reader implied; his is a great Biden supporter.)

Our job is made all the more difficult because the few remaining Democratic allies in the media panicked on Thursday evening. They took phone calls from their friends (allegedly) inside the campaign and suggested that even campaign members have lost confidence in Joe Biden. That is false. Three MSNBC reporters are mainlining their political connections and confusing the chatter from those inside the beltway pundits for the views of the American people.

During the debate, one candidate lied continuously. That fact got ZERO coverage on MSNBC during the first thirty minutes of analysis—except for Lawrence O’Donnell, who made that point repeatedly. Remember when lying mattered? We have descended into pure optics in the media. We are better than that.

And suggesting that we abandon Joe Biden because he did not “win” one debate in the eyes of the media is unforgivable. When Trump was convicted of 34 felonies, his supporters rallied around him. When he was adjudicated to be a sexual abuser, his supporters rallied around him. When he was fined hundreds of millions of dollars for running fraudulent businesses in New York, his supporters rallied around him. So, when Joe Biden has an off night in a debate against a geyser of lies, we are going to abandon him? Seriously???? We are better than that, we are tougher than that, and we should be more loyal than that.

In many ways, this is the start of the fight, not the end. Trump lied every moment he opened his mouth. We can deal with that when we are not constrained by two-minute alternative sound bites. Joe Biden needs to do better, true. But his surrogates in the administration must also be unleashed to carry part of the burden. MAGA extremists are everywhere, like invasive weeds. Democratic surrogates must match their reach but spread truth and hope instead of lies and hate….

Here is my concluding thought: Joe Biden is the most successful president in the last 75 years. If he isn’t the smartest, he is the wisest and most experienced, except for FDR. He polls better than any of the fantasy-football “players to be named later” who would allegedly replace him. On the merits, it is not a close contest. As Americans get closer to election day, they will pay attention to the ways that their lives will be worse under Trump and better under Biden. That truth will decide the election.

And it is time for Joe Biden to take off the gloves and start speaking the unvarnished truth about Trump at every opportunity.

We are made of stronger stuff than the panicked reactions exhibited by some this evening. For Joe Biden to win, we need to be resolute, hopeful, and tireless—just like the heroes on whose shoulders we stand. We would not be at this moment but for their abiding courage and faith despite setbacks and losses. We don’t need to win every battle, just most of them—including the battle on November 5, 2024.

I mean this with the utmost sincerity: We have every reason to be hopeful but no reason to be complacent. It is always so—and is true tonight, just like all other nights.

Talk to you tomorrow. In the meantime, go give Joe Biden some money. Joe Biden for President: Official Campaign Website

The lingering question after last night’s debate: Why did the moderators never correct Trump’s egregious lies? Dana Milbank can’t understand it, and neither could I. He concludes that lying won last night.

He writes:

It was a big night for the big lie. And the little lie. And every size lie in between.
The first and probably last meeting between Donald Trump and President Biden wasn’t a debate. It was a 90-minute disinfomercial promoting the former president, who uttered one egregious fabrication after the other, with barely a pause for breath between his inventions. The truth never had a chance.

The debate host, CNN, apparently decreed that its moderators could offer not a word of correction nor check a single fact, so instead they validated each stupendous lie by responding with no more than a mild “thank you.” But the ultimate failure was Biden’s: He looked weak and lost, mouth agape, mumbling and meandering and losing his train of thought.

Even when he had good lines and on-point rebuttals to Trump’s barrage, he delivered them so poorly that their effect was lost.

The truth needed a standard-bearer on that stage in Atlanta on Thursday night. Biden plainly was not up to the job.

Trump was so off-kilter in his claims, even for him, that a worthy opponent would have had an easy time exposing the nonsense and setting the record straight. Instead, the incumbent president was woefully and painfully ineffective. This was disastrous for Biden, and for Democrats — but also for the critically endangered idea that truth still matters.

Not a question was asked without Trump turning the debate into a vehicle for deceit. Of Biden, Trump fabricated:

“He gets paid by China. He’s a Manchurian candidate.”

“He wants to raise everybody’s taxes by four times.”

“He allowed millions of people to come in here from prisons, jails and mental institutions to come into our country and destroy our country.”

“He has killed so many people at our border.”
“He’s got the largest deficit in the history of our country.”

Trump lied about former House speaker Nancy Pelosi: “She said, ‘I take full responsibility for Jan. 6.’”

He lied about Democrats, saying they “will take the life of a child in the eighth month, the ninth month and even after birth.”

He lied about his former chief of staff’s statement that he called fallen soldiers “suckers” and “losers.” Trump said Biden “made that up,” too.

He lied that immigrants who are in the country illegally are receiving Social Security and being housed in “luxury hotels.”

And he lied extravagantly about his own record. The economy was “perfect” when he left office, he’s the one who reduced insulin prices, he deserves credit for “getting us out of that covid mess,” the government was “ready to start paying down debt” during his presidency, he had “the best environmental numbers ever,” and there was “no terror at all during my administration.”

These were all obvious howlers — yet none of it was corrected by the moderators and little by the struggling president. Capping the performance, Trump had the chutzpah somewhere in this litany of lies to say of his opponent: “I’ve never seen anybody lie like this guy.”

The few things the former president said that weren’t outright lies were arguably even worse. Trump absolved himself of any responsibility for the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on Congress, claiming that “we were respected all over the world” on that day. He wouldn’t commit to accepting the election results this time, either. He called Ukraine’s Volodymyr Zelensky a “salesman” and said that “we shouldn’t be spending” money to help Ukraine defend itself against Russia.

The statements were so outrageous, the zany claims so easily refuted, that Biden should have made quick work of Trump. Instead, he looked stunned, he spoke in a faltering and raspy voice (his campaign explained belatedly that he had a cold), and he had difficulty forming coherent answers. He spoke, for example, about “what I’ve been able to do with the, uh, with the covid. Excuse me, with, um, dealing with everything we have to do with, uh — look, if — we finally beat Medicare.”

Biden explained the Roe v. Wade trimester provisions by saying: “First time is between a woman and a doctor. Second time is between the doctor and an extreme situation. A third time is between the doctor — I mean, between the woman and the state.” On Ukraine, he ventured: “We found ourselves in a situation where, if you take a look at what Trump did in Ukraine, he’s — this guy told Ukraine — told Trump, do whatever you want and do whatever you want.”

Attempting to discuss the border, Biden said he would “continue to move until we get the total ban on the — the total initiative relative to what we’re going to do with more Border Patrol and more asylum officers.”

Asked to respond, Trump said: “I really don’t know what he said at the end of that sentence. I don’t think he knows what he said, either.”
It was devastating.

Biden recovered slightly from the unmitigated disaster of the debate’s early minutes, though the rest was only a slightly mitigated disaster. He protested the lies. (“I’ve never heard so much malarkey.”) He delivered a few barbs. (“You’re the sucker. You’re the loser,” and “You have the morals of an alley cat.”) Late in the night, he offered a strong rejoinder to Trump’s constant refrain that the United States is a “failing country.” Said Biden: “I never heard a president talk like this before. We’re the envy of the world. … We’re the strongest country in the world.” But seconds later, he allowed himself to be drawn into ludicrous bickering with Trump about his golf game. “I got my handicap, which, when I was vice president, down to a six,” the president said.

If the country is “failing,” it’s because it is experiencing a relentless, disciplined and coordinated attack on everything that is true — and because the one person the reality-based community was counting on to save us has just shown himself to be unequal to the task.

Tim O’Brien is executive editor of Bloomberg Opinion. He was formerly a writer and editor for The New York Times. His book TrumpNation caused Trump to sue him for saying that Trump was not a billionaire. Trump’s lawsuit was dismissed by the courts.

O’Brien wrote:

Joe Biden could have started writing the final chapter of his political career a year or so ago, when he still controlled the narrative.

“I’ve capped my long journey in public service by defeating Donald Trump, revivifying our economy and moving the US past the Covid era,” he might have said. “Therefore, I’ve decided not to seek a second term so the next generation of Democrats can succeed me and secure the White House and democracy for the American people.”

Instead, a humiliating and unsettling debate performance on Thursday night is now writing Biden’s final chapter for him. He shuffled onto the debate stage like the old soul that he is, rarely answered questions with more than a whispering rasp, often looked bewildered and failed to land enough memorable blows. Biden was so abysmal that Donald Trump, a convicted felon and sexual predator, effectively mastered the debate’s momentum and left Biden appearing like little more than a punching bag.

It may be time for Biden to consider moving on — and an intervention might be necessary to speed that along before the Democratic National Convention in August…

Biden ran for president three times before finally winning in 2020, and his ego may prevent him from letting go. He has spent most of his adult life in the Senate and the White House. He also took an admirable, courageous and necessary gamble by choosing to debate Trump so early in the election cycle, which I noted in a previous column this week. Biden wagered that he could stand shoulder-to-shoulder with Trump and prove he was more vital and acute.

Biden lost that bet.

While Trump lied broadly and shamelessly throughout the debate, he was sharp-tongued and much faster on his feet than he has been in recent campaign appearances. He overshadowed Biden and the president’s loping, nebulous presence, reinforcing doubts about his ability to steer the ship of state.

None of this means Trump is fit for higher office. Biden’s Cabinet is populated by judicious and talented people, and the president himself has been purposeful throughout his career. Trump is a dangerous and unpredictable anarchist who has rarely attracted top-flight talent into his orbit.

But this is an election, not a management report card. Voters often respond to candidates emotionally, and perceptions of leadership can be deeply subjective. In that universe, Thursday’s debate was a monumental and debilitating setback for Biden. He failed to give full-throated and linear arguments for where he stood on core issues such as abortion and immigration. Some questions that he initially handled effectively, such as one about inflation and the economy, wound up following a meandering, perplexing path.

Biden’s most loyal supporters may forgive all of this, just as Trump fans have endless patience for his predations, lawlessness and buffoonery. But moderate and independent voters in swing states have had little patience for either man, and the debate may leave them permanently wary of Biden.

The president put on such a petrifying show that Trump got away with all of his usual atrocities.

Trump was impeached twice as president, and he was recently found guilty in three different courtrooms of sexual assault and criminal and civil fraud. He faces three other criminal prosecutions. Yet he managed to try labeling Biden a “criminal” during the debate.

Trump is a pathological liar who has dissembled with gusto for most of his 78 years. During the debate he offered a list of fabrications, including claiming Biden wants to quadruple personal tax rates and has been bribed by China; that the federal deficit is the biggest it has ever been; that he passed the Veterans Choice bill; that Biden indicted him; that more than 18 million undocumented immigrants have entered the US during Biden’s presidency; that the US footed 100% of NATO’s defense spending prior to his own presidency; that no terrorist attacks occurred during his presidency, and that states led by Democrats allow babies to be executed after they’re born.

Yet Trump tried labeling Biden a “liar” during the debate.

Biden, on the other hand, was spot on when he told Trump that he has “the morals of an alley cat” for romancing a porn star during his third marriage. Trump himself also briefly indulged the truth when he said he wouldn’t accept the outcome of this year’s election should he lose.

Trump also mentioned during the debate that he was running for the presidency because he thought Biden has been a singularly bad executive. I suspect the primary factor motivating Trump’s bid is his belief that a second White House stay will allow him to escape the multiple legal prosecutions bearing down on him.

Trump’s sordid business and political history, and his statements during the debate, are all reminders of how imperative it is that voters don’t send him back to the Oval Office. He and Biden are slated to debate again in September, and perhaps Biden envisions that as an opportunity to turn around his candidacy. It may be too late, alas.

The US is in perilous waters and Biden has always recognized that. He’s also done enormous good in protecting and preserving democracy at home and abroad. But he’s had his chance and he’s now come up short. He should consider stepping aside.

Scott Maxwell is a regular columnist for Tthe Orlando Sentinel. In this article, he discusses the meanest, most heartless, most inhumane law passed by the legislature. How about letting workers have a water and heat break in Florida’s hot, humid climate? Employers don’t want workers to take time off. They prefer to let them struggle under a fiery sun, even if they collapse.

Maxwell writes:

I’ve written a lot of pieces about a lot of cruddy bills in Florida.

But I can’t recall one that generated more universal disgust among readers than the one lawmakers passed a few months ago banning cities and counties from making sure outdoor workers get shade and water on blistering hot days.

Miami-Dade was discussing local regulations that would guarantee roofers, farmworkers and others who toil in Florida’s blistering sun basic things like water breaks, shade and first-aid treatment for heat stroke — the kind of precautions most people with a conscience would provide for their dog.

Yet Florida’s big business lobby didn’t want to be forced to provide any of that. So they got their puppets in the Legislature to pass a law making it illegal for any local government to pass heat-safety regulations. Yes, their target was water and shade.

I described it as “The most shameful law Florida passed this year.” And readers overwhelmingly agreed. The disgust came from Republicans, Democrats and independents all around the state.

“This is so wrong in so many ways,” said reader Ingrid, who noted that, as a homeowner, she offers shade, water, seating and bathrooms to workers painting the outside of her house. “It is the American and right thing to do…”

And multiple conservative and independent readers said this was the kind of bill that made them think the pendulum of one-party power has swung too far. “So often, I no longer support Democratic legislators because I feel they are too far left,” Bruce said. “After reading this, I must vote for them anyway because others are too far to the right.”

But a question I also received over and over was: Why?

Why would lawmakers — most of whom have families and many of whom claim to be people of faith — support a bill that denies guaranteed access to things so fundamental as water and shade?

Well, here’s the remarkable reality: They normally wouldn’t. In fact, they didn’t.

Just two years ago, Republican legislators joined Democrats to unanimously pass a bill out of committee that would’ve guaranteed similar heat-safety protections to workers across the entire state.

At the time, GOP legislators described the heat protections as simply humane. One said it was “heartwarming” to see everyone agree on such a basic concept. The bill’s sponsor, Miami Republican Senator Ana Maria Rodriguez said: “It’s really about health and wellness and making sure people are protected.”

But then, as the Seeking Rents website that tracks the way money influences public policy in Florida recently revealed, the state’s homebuilding and business lobby got involved. And the bill died.

Then this year, the business lobby put the push on steroids. The Florida Chamber of Commerce not only wanted to make sure that no state laws guaranteed workers heat-safety protections; they wanted lawmakers to pass a law that banned counties from doing the same.

The chamber even warned lawmakers that if they didn’t do as instructed, the politicians’ scores would be docked in the business group’s annual “How They Voted” report card. The chamber told lawmakers that their votes on this one issue would be counted twice.

That is how badly the chamber — which is funded by companies like Disney, Publix, U.S. Sugar and Florida Power & Light — wanted to make sure no companies in this state would be subject to local heat-safety regulations.

We’ve all watched ugly politics transpire in Tallahassee. But this was uglier than usual. Veteran Tallahassee journalist Bill Cotterell — who has covered Florida politics for more than half a century — wrote that this was an example of how “the pay-to-play system goes beyond regular back-scratching and turns into cruelty.”

Mark Wilson, the president of the chamber, disagrees. He says readers who are outraged and observers like me and Cotterell don’t understand the issue.

He says the reaction is union-generated “hysteria,” that the chamber is “working to make Florida the safest state in the nation,” that the U.S. division of Occupational Health and Safety Measures already requires companies to protect their workers and that most companies want to do so anyway.

You probably don’t need me to tell you how silly that last argument sounds. If all companies were already doing all these things, they wouldn’t have been so frantically lobbying against them. House Bill 433 bans counties from requiring employers to provide things like “water consumption,” “cooling measures” and “appropriate first-aid measures.”

OSHA does not regulate these things the same way.  Instead, it has something called a “general duty clause” that broadly says employers shall provide a work environment “free from recognized hazards that are causing or are likely to cause death or serious physical harm to his employees.” Its website explicitly says: “OSHA does not have a specific regulation regarding heat stress.”

And while Wilson said OSHA is working on more specific heat-safety provisions, the simple fact is they don’t exist now.

The reality is that businesses in Florida have gotten so used to having their way, they don’t want anyone telling them what to do — even when it has to do with worker safety. And this state has a political majority willing do whatever they’re told, so that they can continue getting endorsements and campaign donations. Even it means opposing basic safety measures they previously supported.

That’s something for you to remember the next time you see a campaign mailer telling you that some politician has an “A-plus” business rating. This is the kind of thing they had to support to earn it.

smaxwell@orlandosentinel.com

Steve Dyer, former legislator and perennial budget hawk, tracks wasteful spending on charter schools in Ohio in this post. Ohio is throwing away billions on charters and vouchers, at the expense of its public schools, which typically outperform its privatized schools. A pro-charter analyst concluded that Ohio’s charter schools were among the worst in the nation.

Dyer writes on his blog Tenth Period:

It’s difficult to say that a $1.3 billion state program can go under the radar, but lately it seems that Ohio’s charter school industry has done just that, thanks in large part to the absolute explosion of taxpayer funded subsidies given to wealthy private school parents.

And while the state’s largest taxpayer ripoff ever — in excess of $200 million plus — happened as the result of the infamous ECOT scandal (the state is only going after about $100 million of the $200 million plus that I calculated because they just didn’t do the forensic audit of years prior to the couple prior to the school shutting down), the per pupil funding explosion in Ohio’s charter schools has been equally remarkable.

The amount of money the state sends, on average, to Ohio’s charter schools is now more than what 129 Ohio School Districts SPEND per equivalent pupil, including all locally raised property and/or income taxes. 

That’s right. 

Ohio now provides Ohio’s Charter Schools (all but 5 of which rated in the bottom 25% of all schools nationally) more money on average than 1 in 5 Ohio school districts spend per equivalent pupil, including all their local property tax money. 

I’ve included a list of all the school districts that spend less per equivalent pupil than Charter Schools receive on average in state aid.

That’s quite a list, don’t you think?

This explains how Ohio’s charter schools now get nearly $1.3 billion in state aid while having fewer students than they had in the 2013-2014 school year, I suppose. That year — the record for number of charter school students — had about $300 million less going to charters despite having about 1,000 more students than today.

This is why it’s critical to keep our eyes on all the privatization efforts, not just the shiniest one in front of us. 

It is. Inevitable.

Organize and vote accordingly.

Because if there’s one thing I’ve learned in about 25 years of following, analyzing and writing Ohio education policy, it’s that there is nothing more certain than Ohio Republican elected officials taking tax dollars out of the hands of our 1.4 million public school students and instead stuffing the bank accounts of political contributing profiteers and wealthy private school parents. 

I couldn’t watch it continuously. It was too painful. Joe Biden mumbled and misspoke; Trump lied nonstop. The CNN moderators could have, should have stepped in to correct blatant misstatements by both candidates. They didn’t. Watching Trump call Biden a criminal who should be in jail, watching Trump blame Nancy Pelosi for the January 6 insurrection, was more than I could bear to watch.

This was a good night for Trump, and a bad night for our democracy.

Ryan Walters, the far-right Superintendent of Schools in Oklahoma, was inspired by the passage of a law in Louisiana requiring every public school classroom to post The Ten Commandments. He decided that he could go even further. He just ordered every public school to teach the Bible. Given the religious diversity of students in Oklahoma, will he mandate the sacred texts of every religion? Will he mandate the Old Testament or the New Testament? Which version? Personally, I think the sacred books should be taught in their original language. Or not at all.

The wisdom of our nation’s Founders, who did not want religion and government to be entangled, becomes clearer every day. Is Supt. Walters imposing his own faith on others? Of course.

The New York Times reported:

Oklahoma’s state superintendent on Thursday directed all public schools to teach the Bible, including the Ten Commandments, in the latest conservative push testing the boundaries between religious instruction and public education.

The superintendent, Ryan Walters, described the Bible as an “indispensable historical and cultural touchstone” and said it must be taught in certain grade levels.

“The Bible is a necessary historical document to teach our kids about the history of this country, to have a complete understanding of Western civilization, to have an understanding of the basis of our legal system,” Mr. Walters, a Republican, said in his announcement, adding that “every teacher, every classroom in the state will have a Bible in the classroom.”

The directive is likely to be challenged in court and could provoke the latest tangle over the role of religion in public schools, an issue that has increasingly taken on national prominence.

“The basis of our legal system”? “An eye for an eye”? Or “feed the hungry”? Is this a warning in the New Testament to billionaires: “Blessed are you who are poor, for yours is the kingdom of God. Blessed are you who are hungry now, for you will be filled… But woe to you who are rich, for you have received your consolation. Woe to you who are full now, for you will be hungry.” Or, “it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God.”

Dan Rather anticipates the debate between Trump and Biden by pointing out that Trump has repeatedly engaged in bizarre analogies and metaphors.

In the article below., he points to recent Trump statements that make no sense. The press ignored them, though they are ready to jump on Biden for any misstatement, no matter how trivial.

Rather writes:

First, let’s get something straight. The 90-minute political event airing Thursday night on CNN is not a debate. It is a joint appearance by two candidates running for president. A debate would be wonderful. I would welcome an actual debate, which is a discussion between opponents in which rival arguments are put forward directly. That is not what you will see on Thursday night, should you choose to watch. You will see two men answer questions, if we are lucky, in a kind of a dual press conference and television show. I’m pretty certain one will answer the questions. The other? It’s anyone’s guess.

Now, let’s talk about expectations. The MAGA media universe, with an assist from the mainstream media (more on that later), has been working overtime to paint Joe Biden as a senile old man who doesn’t have the mental capacity to be president. 

The problem with this strategy is that the bar is now so low for Biden that if he just walks on stage and waves he will have exceeded expectations. The right-wing media has painted themselves into a corner and is now thrashing to get out of it. 

To do so, Fox “News” and Donald Trump himself are telling anyone who will listen that the only way President Biden will be coherent is if he is “jacked up” on medical supplements. Trump even mentioned cocaine. I can’t believe I just wrote that sentence. A former president of the United States has accused the current president of taking illegal drugs. And that is not front-page news.

The expectations for Trump aren’t much better. If past is prologue, we have a pretty good idea of how he will perform. In an op-ed in today’s New York Times, Hillary Clinton described what it was like to appear on a “debate” stage with Trump.

“I know the excruciating pressure of walking onto that stage and that it is nearly impossible to focus on substance when Mr. Trump is involved. In our three debates in 2016, he unleashed a blizzard of interruptions, insults and lies that overwhelmed the moderators and did a disservice to the voters who tuned in to learn about our visions for the country.” 

In the ensuing eight years, we have seen actual evidence of cognitive decline in Trump. Recently it has been more of a plummet. His extemporaneous speeches have become a mishmash of incoherent tangents. Calling it word salad would be a disservice to lettuce.

Share

His recents rants have included confused musings about sharks and electrocutions, at the same time. At a Philadelphia rally on Saturday, he started talking about water. 

“You ever try buying a new home and you turn on – you want to wash your hair or you wanna wash your hands – you turn on the water and it goes drip, drip,” he said. 

The solution to not enough water is rain, he explained. “There’s so much water, you don’t know what to do with it. You know, it’s called rain. It rains a lot in certain places … There is a problem. They don’t want you to have any water. They want no water.”

At this point Fox, which was airing the speech live, cut to commercial. That may have been their programming plan all along, but considering Trump is ratings gold for the cable channel, the more likely reason is that they were protecting the convicted felon/presumptive presidential nominee from himself. 

Many say it is just Trump being Trump. No. Not any more. 

“In 2016, Trump said outrageous things at his campaign rallies to be entertaining. In 2024, his tangents raise serious questions about his mental fitness,” according to The Washington Post’s Eugene Robinson.

Robinson went on to suggest that if President Biden had gone off on illogical diatribes about hand-washing or shark attacks, it would have led every broadcast and headlined every newspaper, questioning his mental stability. Congress would have called for hearings.

But Trump’s behavior has become so normalized that outlets like the Times and the Post sometimes fail to even mention nonsensical blatherings like the ones at the Philadelphia rally. 

Speaking of the mainstream media and coverage of the candidates: A case study conducted by the University of Pennsylvania concluded that “the choice of the Times to publish almost three times as many articles about Biden’s age as about Trump pulling the US out of NATO represents a clear example of biased coverage.”

Back in February, special counsel Robert Hur declined to indict Biden over classified documents he had removed from the White House while vice president. But Hur — a lawyer, not a doctor — said he found Biden a “sympathetic, well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory.”

Here’s how the Times covered it, according to the UPenn study: “During the week that the Special Counsel’s report came out, we examined the top 20 articles on the Times’ landing page every four hours. In that time, they published 26 unique articles about Biden’s age, of which 1 of them explored the possibility that Trump’s age was of equal or more concern.” Meanwhile, Trump’s threat to withdraw from NATO and “encourage” Russia “to do whatever the hell they want” garnered only 10 unique articles in that timeframe. Ending 75-plus years of a military alliance and jeopardizing world stability? No big deal.

The New York Times is a great journalistic enterprise, one of the world’s best. But how can we allow the normalization of Trump’s behavior? It should be called out. Every time. If Trump is barking at the moon, report it, broadcast it. News organizations may be tired of the craziness, but we voters are not.  

If nothing else, being able to evaluate both men on a stage together at Thursday evening’s joint appearance will be a welcome relief from all the noise. One, or maybe both of them, could surprise us.

If you value independent journalism that brings you critical information when the mainstream media fails us, please consider joining as a supporting member. It allows me