Why Harris Will Win in a Landslide

By "landslide" I mean that Harris will win all of the swing states--Nevada, Arizona, Wiconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Virginia and North Carolina.

I don't include Indiana, which went for Trump by 16 and 19 points in the past two elections. The polls putting Trump's lead at only 4% have to be off.

Harris doesn't need Georgia, and shouldn't waste her time there, as she is about to do this week with her bus tour.

I base this assessment on the temendous enthusiasm for her campaign. Record numbers of donations are coming in, many of them first-time donors; new voters are being registerd at a record pace, and new volunteers are signing up at a record pace.

Trump continues to embarrass himself with deranged comments on the campaign trail and on social media. He is fairly likely to become unhinged and self-destruct in the upcoming debate, as he detests Harris and has no impulse control sufficient to hide his hatred.

I continue to believe that there is a strong parallel between Trump and General MacArthur in 1952. MacArthur came back from Asia extremely popular, but that popularity waned as he spent his speeches nursing his personal grievances against Truman for being fired, instead of talking about the issues in the 1952 election.

Does the VP Pick Matter?

I ran across an article today discussing the approval ratings of various VP candidates, and this got me to thinking about whether VP picks matter. I think they do matter, but in a different way than usually contemplated.

The way they matter is that they show the judgment, or lack thereof, of the presidential candidate, because it is the first major decision which a presidential candidate has to make.

Donald Trump bungled the choice, as shown by the fact that surveys have Vance's net disapproval rating at -9%, the worst ever for a VP candidate. Worse even than Tim Kaine's -4%, and Sarah Palin's -2%.

A review of past choices over the years reveals some interesting blunders. Goldwater's choice of obscure Congressman Bill Miller in 1964 certainly did his campaign no good. Nixon's choice of Spiro Agnew in 1968 and 1972 was a bad choice, but he could have won those elections running with Mickey Mouse.

Moving on to 1972, we have the biggest blunder ever made, when George McGovern failed to properly vet his choice and had to remove him from the ticket after the convention. The excuse given by his campaign manager was totally lame. He said that they were too busy trying to hold their coalition together at the convention to pay any attention to the VP choice. He ludicrously claimed that the gay rights caucus was threatening to bolt. Huh? Where were they going to go?

Jimmy Carter in 1976 demonstrated the right way to pick a VP. Prior to the convention, he had the top three candidates fly down to Plains, Gerogia and he met with each of them one-on-one. His pick, Walter Mondale, was a good pick.

However, Mondale in 1984 made a poor pick, when he chose an obscure Congresswoman, making the same mistake Goldwater did in 1964. Moving ahead to 2000, Al Gore blundered by choosing Joe Lieberman. The moralistic Leiberman had made hiimself infamous by roundly denouncing President Clinton's personal shortcomings in a strident speech on the Senate floor. The choice of Lieberman represented a faulty campaign strategy of running away from Clinton, who left the presidency with one of the highest approval ratings in modern history for a retiring president.

John McCain made the infamous blunder in 2008 of picking Sarah Palin, but this was not actually his mistake. Hwe wanted to run with Joe Lieberman, who was willing to switch paarties and run with McCain, but the party bosses vetoed the idea. Hillary Clinton's pick in 2016 was weak, as Tim Kaine added nothing to he ticket and nothing to the campaign.

And now we have the fascinating race shaping up in 2024. Trump flunked his test by picking Vance, and Harris passed her test with flying colors with her inspired pick of Wulz. The final result seems preordained.

Biden Bungles Both Wars

The success of the Ukrainian army in its incursion into Russia just exacerbates my anger at Joe Biden for his refusal to tolerate any Ukraine action inside Russia for so long. I think about how the war could have gone so much better for Ukraine if its hands hadn't been tied by Biden.

And then we have Israel's war against Gaza, where Biden's blunder has been just the opposite. Biden still refuses to rein in Israel, choosing instead to allow the slaughter of tens of thousands of innocent Gaza women and children.

Biden's war blunders were foreshadowed by his ill-conceived vote on 10/11/02 to authorize Bush to go to war against Iraq. Twenty-two of his Senate Democratic colleagues were astute enough to vote against it, but Biden supported it and thereby demonstrated his incompetence when it comes to war matters.

Harris Surges Ahead

The polls as of today have Harris aheaqd 281-241 in the Electoral vote, with 16 (North Carolina) tied. The surge in the few weeks since Biden dropped out has been incredible. The crowds she and Wulz have been getting have been among the most enthusiastic I have ever seen at a political rally. Many tens of thousands are volunteering and registering to vote for the first time.

A focus group I saw this morning of former Trump voters was instructive in that they are all now anti-Trump. Most mentioned Trump's negativity and meanness, but, surprisingly, several mentioned that Vance "scares" them. Trump is reportedly disappointed with Vance, but he can't switch now without seeeming weak and ineffective.

The line of the day, from the journalist who conducted the focus group: "Harris reminds men of their first wife; Trump reminds women of their first husband's divorce lawyer."

"The Next Civil War", by Stephen Marche

Blending actual events with imagined future events, the author paints a picture of how the next civil war could come about.

But the most interesting thing to me was the topic of secession as an alternative to a civil war. This is an area I have long been interested in. Marche discusses the active secession movements in Texas and California. I was disappointed that he didn't mention the long-time secession movement in Vermont, a movement known as The Second Republic, which is a reference to the period of 1787-1791, when Vermont functioned as an independent republic.

Secession certainly wouldn't solve all of the grievance problems, because the divisions in our country are not strictly defined by geography. Even in the reddest of states, 35% or more of the residents vote blue, and 35% or more of blue state residents vote red.

Marche envisions four different countries which could arise from a beak-up. When I wrote about this subject in my post of 9/19/08, I envisioned as many as six or seven. But the principle is the same. The idea is to create countries which have more cohesiveness than the U.S. does now. More cohesiveness would bring less strife, less crime, less hate, and a greater sense of community, which is badly needed these days.