Category Archives: Daily Broadside

by

A Difficult Truth or a Convenient Lie?

When you’re talking with someone who sees themselves as their own absolute, they’re living in a manufactured reality where there’s no such thing as truth, only personal opinions. Truth only exists in the context of what they’re comfortable with – a preference that’s unique to every individual as opposed to an Absolute that applies to all individuals. That’s why when you try to tell them that they’re wrong, you’re heard as someone who’s just trying to force your beliefs on them.

All the boundaries represented by logic, common sense, morality, and even rational thought are now nonexistent because there’s no fixed point of reference.

  • There are no Divine Absolutes, those are “your beliefs.”
  • That isn’t irrevocable evidence, that’s just your perspective.
  • Those aren’t indisputable facts, those are just your personal preferences.

Truth is defined exclusively according to whether or not a person wants to believe it – there’s no kind of accuracy that exists independently of the way a person thinks or feels. If they’re not comfortable with what’s being said, it is automatically untrue. There are no principles, only preferences.

That is the key difference between a Conservative and a Liberal. The Liberal gauges everything according to whatever best reinforces their core assumption that they are the standard by which all things are measured. Every resource, be it a news outlet, a personality, a poll, a statistic, a picture, or a study – however credible they may be – none of it is considered as admissible evidence if it resonates as a threat to the way they want to see themselves and the world around them.

The Conservative, on the other hand, believes in something greater than themselves which means that they are focused on a Standard that doesn’t change and is coming from a Source that is morally and intellectually flawless (“In God We Trust”). That doesn’t mean that the Conservative is never beyond reproach. What it does mean is that they see themselves as being accountable to someone other than the one who stares back at them in the mirror every morning.

The Liberal, on the other hand, because they see themselves as their own bottom line, they are never responsible for their actions as much as their oppressed by a system that is corrupt. They may be different, perhaps they’re damaged, but they’re never wrong.

What can make this exhausting is that when you accuse a Liberal of basing their convictions on preferences rather than principles, they will insist that you’re doing the same thing. They cannot process the concept of a transcendent reality that prevails over an individual’s desires and appetites. In fact, they see it as unhealthy distraction.

Katherine Maher, the CEO of NPR, captures that mentality in a presentation she made entitled, “What Wikipedia Teaches Us About Balancing Truth and Beliefs” featured on ted.com. At one point she says:

We all have different truths. They’re based on where we come from, how we were raised and how other people perceive us.

That perhaps for our most tricky disagreements, seeking the truth and seeking to convince others of the truth might not be the right place to start. In fact, our reverence for the truth might be a distraction that’s getting in the way of finding common ground and getting things done.1

The problem with Maher’s approach, and the Liberal perspective in general, is that it contradicts the very definition of what truth is. The dictionary definition of truth is, “…the body of real things, events, and facts.”2. Truth is an objective absolute and is not something that can be established simply by speaking it into reality anymore than you can change your gender simply by changing your pronouns.

To insist that truth is relative is a self-defeating statement because if truth is relative than even declaring it as such is relative and is therefore meaningless.

Yet, this is a necessary premise in order for the Liberal mentality to function. Once you introduce the idea that truth is nothing more than a word that’s used to elevate your personal disposition to the level of a universal given, then everything from your testimony in court to the way you evaluate the behavior and the credibility of other people depends solely on how that scenario either weakens or strengthens your ability to maintain the illusion that your definition of the human experience is the only definition that matters.

This is why the immorality of a particular individual is labeled as heinous and the same behavior in another individual doesn’t even justify a headline. It’s not a “double standard.” To the Liberal, there are no standards, only situations. The Liberal isn’t as concerned with the behavior as much as they are in demonizing anyone who represents a philosophy that promotes the practical existence of objective truth.

This is why they can lie in court because, again, there is no truth apart from whatever is preferred in that moment. You can’t be lying if you have eliminated the standard by which your statement would otherwise by measured.

Inevitably, this is more than just a self-serving philosophy. This is a spiritual condition.

There are only two religions in the world: Either God is God or you are. Every religion on the planet empowers the individual with the ability to facilitate their own salvation. You can do something or abstain from something to the point where you can merit the favor of your preferred deity. This is the lie that satan fed Eve in the Garden of Eden in Genesis 3:5:

“For God knows that when you eat from it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil.” (Gen 3:5)

Christianity, on the other hand, says you’re a spiritual corpse. The only thing you contribute to your salvation is the sin that makes it necessary. The gospel is the only religious doctrine that positions mankind as absolutely subordinate to his God.

That doesn’t work in the mind of a Liberal.

You can’t be your own absolute and be subordinate to a holy God at the same time. It’s one or the other and that’s why the separation of church and state is such a volatile issue.

It’s not just American History, nor is it a Sunday morning tradition. It is toxic in the mind of the person who is determined to be their own bottom line.

However unsustainable or nonsensical that approach may be, it can nevertheless be championed very effectively by insisting that, as Katherine Maher said, “We all have different truths,” and that it is ultimately a “distraction.”

But it’s not distracting, it’s stabilizing. And when that stability is in place, it’s liberating.

The death and resurrection of Christ aren’t certified as actual calendar events simply because I find the notion of a loving and forgiving God appealing. It either happened or it didn’t. However I “feel” about the empty tomb doesn’t validate its authenticity one way or the other.

The question isn’t, “How do you feel?” Rather, you need to ask, “Is it real?”

The question isn’t whether or not I can force my beliefs on you. The question should be, “Is what I’m saying…”

…true?

The word “truth” is used frequently in our society. Even in the context of swearing to, “…tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth so help you God.”

But when truth is nothing more than one’s personal version of reality as opposed to that which is genuinely real, then you are attempting to function in a manner that is not only completely inconsistent with the way the universe operates, but you have cast off every reliable metric that would otherwise guide you in your pursuit of happiness, and redefined rights, not as gifts given to you by God to guard your way, but as weapons you use to get your way.

As long as you’re determined to ignore principles in favor of your preferences, you are missing the life and freedom afforded to you by what is, at times, a difficult truth, and exchanged it for the frustrated existence supplied by a convenient lie.

1. “What Wikipedia teaches us about balancing truth and beliefs”, ted.com, https://www.ted.com/talks/katherine_maher_what_wikipedia_teaches_us_about_balancing_truth_and_beliefs, accessed March 30, 2025

2. “truth”, “Merriam Webster Dictionary”, https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/truth, accessed March 30, 2025

by - 2 Comments

A Time to Speak

I’m seeing several posts coming from well meaning people saying that we need to just love everybody and avoid any kind of confrontation.

Last year, President Trump narrowly missed being assassinated. This after several years of his opponents calling him a Nazi, a fascist, and a threat to democracy.

We need to just pray and not argue…

Where in Scripture does God tell us to be quiet and remain in our prayer closet while everyone else is voting, debating, knocking on doors, and basically pushing back against the narrative that says there is no absolute save the person who stares back at you in the mirror every morning?

This is the time to speak!

Here’s what I see:

First of all, to process Christ’s approach to the cross as our template for the way we confront evil is to forget that Jesus at one point said,

Every day I was with you in the temple courts, and you did not lay a hand on me. But this is your hour—when darkness reigns. (Lk 22:53).

Jesus’ willingness to be crucified was not meant to be an example for the way we resist evil and fight back against corruption. He had to go to the cross in order for the Scriptures to be fulfilled and to pay our debt (Matt 26:54). While there may be a time when Christ asks you to sacrifice yourself, simply laying down and doing nothing in the face of being attacked or not standing up for what’s right, believing that you’re an example of piety, is not an accurate interpretation of the whole of God’s Word.

John the Baptist wound up in prison for rightfully confronting the current administration and calling out Herod as being an immoral dirtbag. Jesus said that no human being was greater than John (Matt 11:9-11; Lk 3:19-20).

How many times in the Old Testament did a prophet confront a king or an entire nation and tell them that they were godless and offensive in the sight of God? Was Nathan vague in the way he spoke to David (2 Sam 12:7)? Did Elisha mince words when he told the king of Israel what was going to happen to him and his wife as a result of doing evil in the sight of God (1 Kings 21:21-24)?

Did David give Goliath a brochure? Did Paul try to be extra sensitive when he spoke to King Agrippa (Acts 26:24-29)?

There’s a difference between righteous indignation and the kind of rage that springs from thinking of no one other than yourself. Ephesians 4:26 says to not let your anger provoke you to the point where you do something wrong. That’s obviously something you want to avoid. Simply exchanging insults on social media is not accomplishing anything.

But at one point, David said…

Do I not hate those who hate you, and abhor those who are in rebellion against you? I have nothing but hatred for them; I count them my enemies. (Ps 139:21)

What David is saying is that he hates the work of sinners, and for good reason. Nothing good comes from those who intentionally try to do the wrong thing. And when you consider the pain and the problems that come from doing the wrong thing, you have every reason to detest that kind of mindset.

But, how do you respond to the “wrong thing?”

Have nothing to do with the fruitless deeds of darkness, but rather expose them. (Eph 5:11)

Expose them!

The person who doesn’t want to be “exposed” is not going to want to listen to you, nor do they want others to listen to you. They will be antagonistic and that kind of reaction is difficult to endure, which is why it’s so important to know what you believe and why you believe it so when it’s time to “expose them,” you sound like you have a point.

It also takes courage. For those who cringe at the thought of being criticized, it’s easy and convenient to retreat behind a biblical sounding excuse to not say or do anything.

That’s not discipleship, that’s cowardice.

What would’ve happened had our founding fathers not stood up to King George?

On one hand, they could’ve referred to Christ’s command to render to Caesar what is Caesar’s as well as the biblical admonishment to obey those in authority (Matt 22:21; Rom 13:1).

But rather than base their perspective on a mere portion of Scripture, they looked at God’s Word as a whole and were able to justify separating from England due to the fact that we are to obey God rather than man (Acts 5:29).

They stood up and they spoke out.

Your witness means very little if you smile at the things that send a person to hell and endorse the things that put Christ on the cross.

David didn’t just sing, Paul didn’t just write, and Jesus didn’t just pray.

There’s a time to be silent and there’s a time to speak.

This is the time to speak.

by

The Broadside | Mushhead Wants to Control the Supreme Court in Order to Save Democracy

Keeping it short this morning.

Failed career politician Joseph Robinette Biden, the first sitting president seeking re-election to withdraw from a presidential election, has decided that even though he’s incompetent to serve another term, he’s competent enough to demand changes to the Supreme Court, including term limits.

President Biden on Monday came to the LBJ Presidential Library to deliver a sweeping indictment of the U.S. Supreme Court, calling its rulings “dangerous,” its ethics code “weak” and its practices in desperate need of reform.

Biden, a former chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee who oversaw numerous confirmation battles, said the court has become unmoored from its traditional role. “We live in a different era,” he said during a 25-minute address in an auditorium filled with hundreds of people. “In recent years, extreme opinions the Supreme Court has handed down have undermined long-established civil rights principles and protections.”

What he says “extreme opinions” he means decisions that go against the commie Democrats’ evil inclinations to tear down Western civilization and finish fundamentally transforming the United States of America.

Biden had long resisted calls to reform the Supreme Court, and the announcement Monday marked a major shift in his posture. After the addition of three justices nominated by Trump, the court has veered sharply to the right — overturning Roe v. Wade, ending affirmative action in college admissions and weakening federal agencies’ power by overturning a 40-year decision. The conservative majority also invalidated Biden’s student-loan forgiveness program.

Roe v. Wade was written as law, not as a judicial opinion. Most legal experts agreed that it was a terrible decision. Affirmative action gave preference to minorities in a policy that was essentially reverse discrimination. Federal agencies were never meant to have the power they have, making rules that have the effect of federal law, a power reserved to Congress alone. And Biden doesn’t have the authority to forgive student loan debt.

So, yeah, Democrats are ticked because their extra-constitutional lawmaking is being rebuked.

Only one line in the WaPo article rang true: “Conservatives argue that proposals like Biden’s stem from a dislike of the court’s recent rulings, not a genuine desire for reform.”

Bingo.

If Resident Brandon wants to accomplish his attempts to interfere with the Supreme Court, he’ll have to do it with a constitutional amendment. As Ace says, SCOTUS is “an independent branch of government which is co-equal to both the Congress and the executive and therefore answers to neither.”

In my view, this is the first step in a psyop, plowing the ground among the radical progressives to get the seeds planted. What Brandon wants won’t happen, not now, but that won’t stop the anti-American Left from agitating for it.

by

The Broadside | Harris Gets a Bump in the Polls, But Will It Last?

I took a break from posting last week to concentrate on two major projects that were coming due by this weekend. I’m happy to report that I got them both done and they were well received.

So, anything happen while I was away?

The presidential race just got very interesting and is full of intrigue. When Joe Biden ceased to be useful, they turned on him, just like a Marxist would. The Democrats, true to form, forced out the candidate chosen by the people and installed a do-nothing diversity hire to be their flag bearer.

While that’s “exciting” and pumps some new life into the race, I expect that the bump she’s experienced in the polls will be short lived as people begin to discover how extreme her positions are and that she’s a vapid pol trading on nothing more than the color of her skin and her double-X chromosomes.

And don’t @ me about that, because the Left shoves that superficial nonsense down our throats and then calls us ‘racist’ when we point it out. Make up your mind, progressives—is skin color and XX virtuous or not?

Never mind. You can’t even tell us what a woman is, so don’t bother.

The likely 2024 presidential election campaign between Vice President Kamala Harris and former President Donald Trump begins with no clear leader, according to a new CNN poll conducted by SSRS after President Joe Biden ended his bid for reelection.

Trump holds 49% support among registered voters nationwide to Harris’ 46%, a finding within the poll’s margin of sampling error. That’s a closer contest than earlier CNN polling this year had found on the matchup between Biden and Trump.

Trump earlier led Biden in the same poll by 6 points. So Harris has improved the Democrat position by 1 point. Big deal.

The survey finds voters widely supportive of both Biden’s decision to step aside and his choice to remain in office through the end of his term. Democratic and Democratic-leaning voters are broadly enthusiastic about Harris and willing to coalesce around her as the new presumptive nominee, even as they remain deeply divided on whether Biden’s Democratic successor should seek to continue his policies or chart a new course.

[…]

But Democratic and Democratic-leaning voters are closely split over whether the next nominee should continue Biden’s policies (53%) or take the country in a new direction (47%). Desire for a new direction is largely concentrated among younger voters and voters of color.

This ought to be interesting. Continue with the extremist policies on energy, immigration and the economy? Or take it in a new direction toward … what? Even more extreme policies? The woman can’t even be bothered to meet with the president of Israel for fear of alienating the Islamists in Dearborn and Minneapolis.

The Democrats aren’t going to moderate anything.

But if we’re lucky, we’ll see Harris’s weaknesses start tripping her up, especially when (and if) she debates Trump. I expect that the polls will show her support dropping over the next few weeks.

The unspoken wild card remains the cheat. Democrats loathe being out of power and they will do anything they can to keep it. Just look at what they did to their own democratically-elected candidate.

by

The Broadside | Gross Incompetence or Intentional Malfeasance. Either Way, It’s Not Good

I’m still neck deep in a couple of projects so posting will be light this week, and maybe next. But after the assassination attempt on Donald J. Trump and what’s coming to light about the entire situation, I have to jump in.

The more information we get, the worse it becomes. We’re talking either gross incompetence or intentional malfeasance. Either way, heads should be rolling and both parties should be demanding answers. Of course, the anti-American leftists, the Democrats, after a momentary denunciation of violence, have returned to doing what they do best: criticizing anything and everything, including the oversized bandage on Trump’s wounded ear.

I have nothing good to say about any of them so, as my parents taught me, I won’t say anything at all.

But I will go loud and long about the absolute $#!+show that led up to and followed on from those five shots the 20-year-old would-be assassin squeezed off, killing one man, wounding two others, and narrowly missing the skull of president Trump.

How is this even possible?!

Crooks’s parents warned police he was missing and they were worried about what he was up to hours before the shooting.

The would be assassin, Thomas Matthew Crooks, was noticed as a “person of interest” hours before Trump took the stage.

He was seen using a rangefinder, a device to zero in the sights on a gun. He had a backpack.

There’s video of Crooks casing the area and looking up at the buildings over an hour before the shooting.

Law enforcement observed Crooks for 30 minutes prior to the attempted assassination.

Law enforcement even took a picture of Crooks before the shooting.

Video shows Crooks was seen climbing on the roof with a gun, positioning himself. Rally goers shouted for police but were ignored.

One police officer peeked over the edge of the roof where Crooks was aiming. Crooks turned his gun toward the officer and the officer immediately dropped off to protect himself. He and the officer holding him up on a ladder alerted others that an armed individual was on the roof moments before Trump was shot.

There were LEOs and / or countersnipers in the same building that Crooks was perched on.

A sniper protecting the president had Crooks “in glass” (watching him through a rifle scope) prior to shots being fired.

The Secret Service was aware of the potential threat 10 minutes before Donald Trump took the stage in Pennsylvania but let Trump go on stage anyway.

Once the shots were fired, Secret Service agents immediately returned fire and killed the shooter. WHY DID THEY WAIT UNTIL HE HAD FIRED? None of that makes any sense.

In my opinion, the team of SS agents looked like a bunch of Keystone Kops. They were yelling “what are we doing?!” and one female officer couldn’t even holster her gun. Watch the video in the embedded X post by Michael Yon and look at how lost they look and how uncoordinated their movements are. None of them were in sync:

There aren’t really many choices here. Sean Davis lists four:

For now, I’m on option (2) but wondering how plausible (3) is. What got me to (2) is the obvious lie that a “sloped roof” was too dangerous for agents according to Secret Service Director Kimberly Cheatle.

Finally, remember this from two weeks ago?

by - 1 Comment

The Broadside | The Unthinkable Happens And Trump Literally Dodges a Bullet

I’ve long warned that we’re on a trajectory toward another civil war and that the failed efforts of the Democrats and the Deep State to “get Trump” were leaving them with the unthinkable: assassination. I never wrote that, of course, not wishing to draw unwanted attention to myself, but I implied it all the same. There have been lots of other people warning that could happen including Tucker Carlson and J.J. Sefton.

Well, now it’s happened, or has been attempted. Since it’s now out in the open, let’s talk about it.

It’s only common sense, given the deeply ingrained Trump Derangement Syndrome that the progressive Left suffers from. Everything from the Russian collusion hoax to the two sham impeachments to the J6 “insurrection” to the “classified documents” raid on Mar-a-lago to the open lawfare on trumped up charges with politically compromised prosecutors, judges and juries, have all failed to stop Trump or his comeback campaign. Now, the ultimate attempt: shooting him dead.

It’s playbook: Destroy his reputation. Doesn’t work? Imprison him. Doesn’t work? Kill him.

Do I believe that the shooter, a twenty-year-old loner, was somehow part of a broader plot to kill Trump? Not in the classic sense of a conspiracy, with him meeting clandestinely with a handler and sitting in smoke-filled rooms plotting his moves. But I think it’s too early to say he acted alone.

Proof? Nothing yet, but remember: I don’t believe anything the government tells me. Not any more. And neither should you. That goes especially for the CIA, the FBI and the DOJ. Ditto DHS, the Secret Service, the ATF, and the IRS.

I’ve got questions.

I was enjoying some Beethoven on the lawn when reports started to trickle in that shots had been fired at a Trump rally. That turned into reports and photos that showed Trump with blood on the side of his face and confirmation that the shooter was dead and so was one rally-goer.

Of course I watched the replay immediately. Trump speaking, the gunshots, Trump flinches, raises his hand to his ear, ducks below the podium.

Then we see two men in black with rifles on top of the buildings behind Trump firing immediately back toward who we assume is the sniper.

The instant I watched that I said out loud: “How did these guys acquire the shooter and return fire so quickly!?!”

They were already positioned with their guns and were aiming in the direction of the shooter. It did not look like they were caught by surprise.

If you don’t know a shot (or shots) are coming, you don’t know where to look. You hear them, but it will take several seconds to acquire where they originate from. It was easy to see that’s true by the security officers standing in front of the podium looking around and looking lost. It was clear they had NO IDEA what was going on or what they should be doing.

But the team of two on top of the building were already dialed in and returned fire immediately. Lo and behold, they did have the shooter in their sights.

How?

Several citizens attending the rally noticed the shooter up on the roof and getting himself situated. Many of them yelled to call attention to him.

There are even reports that a cop confronted the shooter and yet he backed off. That smells fishy.

And how did the Secret Service allow this to happen in the first place? A 20-year-old non-military-type manages to climb up on a roof in full view, lies down to take aim, and squeezes off eight rounds before he’s taken out?

How?!?

I’m sure the FBI and DHS and DOJ and SS will figure it out. But remember this:

House Democrats have introduced a bill that would strip Secret Service protection from convicted felons sentenced to prison, a move directly targeting former President Trump who is currently on criminal trial in New York City for alleged hush money payments made during the 2016 election campaign and faces several other cases which could land him behind bars.

By the way, the guy that introduced that bill, Rep. Bennie Thompson, had to fire one of his staffers who allegedly posted a comment after the shooting that read in part, “don’t miss next time,” in reference to the shooter. So we know what kind of character he and his staff have.

The good news is that Trump survived the assassination attempt. The bad news is that the anti-American Left has taken the rhetoric and violence to new heights, starting with Trump’s election in 2016.

Brandon tried to “unify” the country last night by telling us that we aren’t enemies. Says the guy who has called Trump a wannabe dictator, a threat to the country, and half the country “ultra-MAGA” semi-fascist right wing white supremacist terrorists.

Too little too late, Jack. How about you start with your own house?

I can’t and won’t have anything to do with the progressive left or with anyone who considers themselves a Democrat. That party, as I’ve been saying for a while now, is evil. There’s no making peace with them.

We’re in a war for the country. More and more people are starting to wake up to the fact.

by

The Broadside | Ladies and Gentlemen, I Give You President Putin and Vice President Trump!

OK Big Boys and Big Gurls, are we convinced yet that (10 percent for) the Big Guy can last another four years? Did you watch the Big Boy presser? That’s not me mocking Biden, that’s the press and the White House, who announced a couple of days ago that Resident Biden would be giving a “Big Boy” press conference after the NATO Summit on Thursday.

And Big Boy, did he deliver.

To be fair, he did realize his “vice president Trump” gaffe and tried to pass it off with some lame excuse about thinking too much about Trump. The point is, Biden’s brain is misfiring on all three cylinders that still work and there’s no coming back from that.

Not to mention that he’s been visited at the White House by a doctor (not Dr. Jill Biden!) who specializes in treating Parkinson’s disease. That came to nothing, but the White House didn’t make things easier for itself by not being forthcoming.

Last night’s attempt to reassure the public that Biden has more stamina than George Clooney (!) to fulfill the duties of being president has failed spectacularly again.

The Democrats’ self-inflicted dilemma is delicious to watch, but it’s anybody’s guess how it will end. Rumors abound that Barack Hussein Obama and Nancy Pelosi are working behind the scenes to pressure Joe to step down.

But if this report is anything to anyone, that may be easier imagined than done.

A CEO friend of President Joe Biden reportedly said that there is “no way” the president is dropping out, that he “hates” the party elite, and that he will tell them all to “f*ck off.”

According to Charles Gasparino, senior contributor to Fox Business and columnist for the New York Post, a CEO who knows Joe Biden closely said that the president will stay in the race and that he will not bow down to party elites.

“NO F*CKING WAY he’s dropping out,” the friend reportedly said.

“Joe Biden couldnt care less what the elite in his party thinks, what the elite fundraisers think or anyone else. He really hates them; he’ll take their money but he knows they look down on him as some rube,” the friend reportedly added.

“Plus he thinks he earned the presidency after trying so many times and there’s no way he’s giving it up to go down in history as a loser who dropped out because he isn’t tough enough. He only cares about his wife and family and he will tell everyone else to f*ck off,” the friend reportedly concluded.

Still, the Democrats are vicious and are skeered of losing power. Especially to Trump.

Have a good weekend.

by

The Broadside | The Spectacular Implosion of the Democrats Continues

So I have a couple of significant projects that are requiring a lot of attention and time these days. I’ll try to get a couple of Broadsides in today and tomorrow.

In the wake of the debate disaster, not only have Biden’s numbers tanked, but Trump’s numbers are soaring. Since we know that the Democrats are lying liars who lie, I always have to issue the disclaimer to not get cocky because we also know that they are cheaters who will do anything to win. Just look at the 2020 election, the lawfare against Donald J. Trump, or the first Oath Keeper J6 trial.

The latest Emerson College Polling survey finds former President Donald Trump leading President Joe Biden in a national matchup, 46% to 43%; 11% are undecided. When undecided voters are asked which candidate they lean toward, 50% support Trump and 50% support Biden. 

Trump beats every Democrat candidate he’s matched with, meaning that Joe Biden can credibly claim that only he (and Harris) are in a position to beat Trump (should the undecided break for Biden).

In the same poll, Independents are breaking for Trump.

New election data shows independent voters breaking for former President Donald J. Trump after the 81-year-old incumbent Joe Biden’s disastrous debate performance on June 27—and the subsequent calls by leading Democrats that he drop out of the 2024 presidential race. The polling by Emerson College shows Trump leading among independents with 42 percent of the vote, compared to Biden’s 38 percent. This is an inversion from last month when Biden led 43 percent to Trump’s 41 percent.

On top of that, voter enthusiasm favors Trump.

In addition, Biden‘s impaired debate performance appears to be dampening Democrat enthusiasm ahead of November’s election. Nearly 80 percent of Republican respondents said they were extremely motivated to vote. Meanwhile, just 65 percent of Democrats and 63 percent of independent voters said the same.

As if that weren’t bad enough, a new report says that six states have swung toward Trump.

The Cook Political Report released on Tuesday showed that three states — Arizona, Georgia, and Nevada — have moved from “toss-up” to “lean Republican” while two other states — Minnesota and New Hampshire — have moved from “likely” to “lean Democrat.” Also, Nebraska’s 2nd Congressional District moved from “likely” to “lean Democrat.”

Dave Wasserman of the Cook Political Report said the Electoral Map shows that Trump has a “clear advantage” over Biden.

“The notion that the presidential [race] is a Toss Up was a stretch even before the debate,” Wasserman said on X. “Today, Trump has a clear advantage over Biden and a much more plausible path to 270 Electoral votes.”

There is definitely momentum building for Team Trump.

The report also showed that Trump has over a “3-point lead in Arizona, Georgia, and Nevada and Biden has less than a percentage point lead in Wisconsin and Michigan,” per the Washington Examiner, while Trump has a 0.7-point lead in Pennsylvania. Walter said that two-point shift in the race could be monumental.

“For example, if Trump were to win the national popular vote by three points, it would be a seven-point improvement from his 2020 showing,” Walter said. “In other words, any state or district that Biden carried by eight points or less would be competitive.”

I don’t know which polls to trust, since most national polls skew liberal. But the wider the gap they show, the better Trump is doing at overcoming any implicit bias in the polling.

Finally, when you’ve lost Jake Tapper, your humiliation is complete.

by

The Broadside | Yawn! Brandon Works 10-4 and Then Goes to Bed by 8:00. So Vigorous and Sharp!

I hope you had a great July 4th holiday! While we’re in dire straits as a nation, there are still millions of us who love the Red, White and Blue and are willing to tell the commies who have infected our national institutions to get bent.

Love this!

The major issue that has our attention these days is what the Democrats are going to do with the poser in the White House. After his poor showing during the first (and probably only) presidential debate on CNN, the Democrats are in full-fledged panic mode. Many have begun demanding that he drop out of the race so that he can be replaced with a candidate who is more viable.

But the dilemma for them is that the person next in line is Kamala Harris, who by rights as the Value Pick should be the unquestioned nominee should Biden bow out. Indeed, the Washington Post already has an article suggesting that they’re already considering her at the top of the ticket.

On a call Wednesday night with House Democratic leadership led by Jeffries, there was a lot of talk about if not Biden, then who. Many names were discussed but there was no real consensus.

“But there was general awareness that it would be difficult for it to be anyone but Harris,” according to a member who participated in the virtual meeting.

Tim Ryan, a former Ohio congressman and presidential candidate, said in an op-ed that while he loves Biden, Harris should be the Democratic nominee for president after Biden stumbled in a high-profile debate performance last week. Some other possible contenders — including Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer and California Gov. Gavin Newsom — probably wouldn’t jump in the race this year and would support Harris if Biden were to remove himself from the ticket, according to people familiar with the matter who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss private conversations.

Democrats’ growing move to rally around Harris as a potential nominee — almost always with the caveat that Biden remains the choice for now — is a sign that they are gaming out a world without Biden as the party’s standard-bearer, even as they try to blunt years of hand-wringing about Harris’s ability to win the White House on her own.

If you support Trump (as I do) then this scenario is only a little less appealing than if Biden stays in the race. Biden is now a (fatally?) weakened incumbant—his poor recall and inability to articulate a full sentence without slurring or mumbling or losing his train of thought is out there for all to see now.

No thanks to the press.

That bodes well for Trump, who looks absolutely vigorous and sharp—you know, those characteristics we were assured that Joey Sponge Brain demonstrated behind the scenes.

Other reports tell us that Brandon only works from 11:00 am to 4:00 pm. And that he needs a nap. And now that he will stop scheduling events for after 8:00 pm.

President Joe Biden told Democratic governors during a meeting at the White House on Wednesday that part of his plan going forward is to stop scheduling events after 8 p.m. so that he can get more sleep, according to three sources briefed on his comments.

The remarks, first reported by The New York Times, came as the 81-year-old Biden sought to reassure a group of more than 20 state leaders about his ability to defeat former President Donald Trump in November and govern effectively for another four years.

Totally vigorous and up to the challenge! Let’s hope nothing happens before 10:00 AM or after 8:00 PM that he needs to be available for.

The press is doing what they can to help Joey Snow Cone make a decision. The New York Times published a report that quoted an anonymous “ally.”

President Biden has told a key ally that he knows he may not be able to salvage his candidacy if he cannot convince the public in the coming days that he is up for the job after a disastrous debate performance last week.

via PowerLine

The White House denies the report, but other journalists have confirmed it. Who knows? It’s part of the battle of leaks and lies as the Dems try to figure out what to do.

It’s their own fault. The 2020 race was rigged and full of fraud. Serves them right to face a trainwreck of their own making.

Have a great weekend.