Harris Meets with Netanyahu

As expected, Kamala Harris had a chat with Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu yesterday. She then held a press conference to review what was discussed. By the end of the day, Netanyahu was not a happy camper.

There's no readout on the meeting, so Harris' press conference is the only public source of information for what was said. She apparently started by reiterating that she's a firm supporter of Israel's right to exist. "I've said it many times, but it bears repeating. Israel has a right to defend itself and how it does so matters." However, she then turned to the Palestinians, explaining:

I made clear my serious concern about the dire humanitarian situation there with over 2 million people facing high levels of food insecurity and half a million people facing catastrophic levels of acute food insecurity... The images of dead children and desperate hungry people fleeing for safety, sometimes displaced for the second, third or fourth time. We cannot look away in the face of these tragedies. We cannot allow ourselves to become numb to the suffering and I will not be silent.

The strong pro-Israel stuff is pro forma for American politicians of both parties, and could well have come from the mouths of Biden, or Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) or Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA). However, Harris' comments on the Palestinians were rather more assertive than we've seen from the current administration, signaling a pretty clear difference between her views and those of Biden.

It was the comments on Palestine that upset Netanyahu, of course, and he complained that she might have made a cease-fire more difficult with her choice of words. We are, once again, not experts in this area. Not. At. All. But we do know politics, and Netanyahu sounds a lot to us like a politician who is trying to pass the buck. Readers may reach different conclusions, of course.

What we do know is that Harris' words were chosen carefully, and with considerable forethought. This was her first press conference as the presumptive candidate, and her first opportunity to stake out a position on Israel. There is zero chance she was just winging it, and she undoubtedly had input from many people as she determined what she was going to say.

We also wonder if Harris has more room to maneuver on this issue because her husband is Jewish. Certainly, would-be First Gentleman Doug Emhoff has hit the ground running, and has shown that he's willing to throw a few punches, and to talk about who does, and does not, have credibility on this subject. Yesterday, he described Donald Trump as a "known antisemite." Emhoff could be an X-factor in this race, especially since his counterpart is nowhere to be found. (Z)

The Twenty-Eighth Amendment: Taking the Wood to Corrupt Future Presidents

You knew it was coming, and now Rep. Joe Morelle (D-NY) has made it happen. Backed by 49 co-sponsors, he has filed proposed text for a constitutional amendment meant to de-kingify the presidency, following the recent Supreme Court decision on presidential immunity.

Here is the complete text, as proposed by Morelle:

SECTION 1

No officer of the United States, including the President and the Vice President, or a Senator or Representative in Congress, shall be immune from criminal prosecution for any violation of otherwise valid Federal law, nor for any violation of State law unless the alleged criminal act was authorized by valid Federal law, on the sole ground that their alleged criminal act was within the conclusive and preclusive constitutional authority of their office or related to their official duties, except for Senators and Representatives acting pursuant to the first clause of the sixth section of the first article.

SECTION 2

The President shall have no power to grant a reprieve or pardon for offenses against the United States to himself or herself.

SECTION 3

This amendment is self-executing, and Congress shall have the power to enact legislation to facilitate the implementation of this amendment.

You can see how it's trying to solve multiple problems at once, specifically presidential (and vice-presidential and congressional) immunity, as well as self-pardons. It might be nice to include verbiage barring pardons for accomplices in committing crimes, but maybe that raises tricky legal issues that are not obvious to us. Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-MD), widely regarded as Congress' foremost authority on constitutional law, is a co-sponsor, so you can be sure he went through the text with a fine-toothed comb.

Undoubtedly this will end up as a messaging bill, since it would require significant Republican buy-in to pass Congress and be sent to the state legislatures. We pooh-pooh a Republican messaging bill below, but we think this one is a little different than that one. First, any Republican member who votes against the bill is at risk of being asked, over and over, "So, you think the president should be above the law?" Or, perhaps more pointedly, "So, you think Donald Trump should be above the law?" In deep-red districts, the answer is "yes." But in purple/swing districts? We don't see a good answer.

Further, most messaging bills come up for a vote, the vote happens, one party or the other makes whatever point they were trying to make, and that's pretty much it. With this one, however, Joe Biden could make it a point of emphasis for the balance of his term, talking about how much he respects the office of president (a theme of his speech on Wednesday) and how ready he is to sign. If he really wants to keep the issue in the news, he could issue an outlandish executive order (say, instructing federal marshals to arrest any members of Congress who are deemed to have supported the insurrection on 1/6). Then, he can withdraw the XO the next day, and say: "This was just an object lesson. Is everyone SURE they want a president who is above the law?"

Recall that after Lyndon B. Johnson bowed out in 1968, he continued to use the powers of his office to try to help Democratic candidate Hubert H. Humphrey. And it almost worked, but for Richard Nixon and his team interfering with negotiations over the conflict in Vietnam. Undoubtedly, Biden will spend much time trying to bring some version of peace to Gaza, but he's got time and opportunity to pursue other options, as well. (Z)

J.D. Vance: More Proof of Trump's Tin Ear

Surely, someone must have pointed out to Donald Trump that Sen. J.D. Vance (R-OH) has serious liabilities as a running mate, right? But Trump chooses not to hear what he does not wish to hear, and so he went forward with it anyhow. Reasons for the former president to regret his choice continue to mount.

To start with, and as we have pointed out several times already, Vance has a long history of saying inflammatory things. And he has done so while being recorded. Did Trump really think that these recordings would not come back from the dead? The one that's running wild on social media right now, in large part because the Harris campaign posted it to her campaign's eX-Twitter feed, is the speech where Vance suggested that the votes of childless people should be watered down, because they don't have as much skin in the game.

Since Harris' campaign posted that tweet, it's gotten more than 4 million views. And the problem for Vance is that the speech was only a few years ago (2021). He might be able to say that the anti-Trump comments from 2015 and 2016 are outdated, and he's changed his mind. But it's rather harder to argue that the Vance of 2021 and the Vance of 2024 are totally different guys. And there are, of course, dozens of clips like this. Vance's extremist tendencies will also get renewed attention on September 24, when the book Dawn's Early Light: Taking Back Washington to Save America is released. That book, by Heritage Foundation president Kevin Roberts, is a rundown of why Project 2025 is such a great thing. And who wrote the intro to the book? Why, that would be J.D. Vance. Between that, and the fact that the actual Project 2025 was written substantially by a bunch of former Trump staffers, it's going to be rather hard for the Trump/Vance ticket to distance themselves from the whole thing.

Vance is also getting smacked around on the meme front. This one, as you can see, was viewed millions of times before being taken down:

It achieved wide enough currency that both the AP and Snopes did fact-check items making clear that the claim is not true, although the AP later withdrew their item, apparently believing that they were unwillingly helping to create a Google bomb for Vance (in essence, increasing the odds that people searching for Vance would end up with results for "Vance couch" or "Vance-turbation").

This is something of a double problem for Vance. First, lots of people who saw the original tweet aren't going to be aware of the fact checks. Second, these sorts of rumors tend to take off when people are suspicious of the target, and find the alleged behavior to be believable. So, this is probably not the only time this is going to happen to him.

Vance is also being targeted by Democrats playing the role of attack dog. Taking the lead is Gov. Andy Beshear (D-KY), in part because Beshear has credibility on how genuine a hillbilly Vance really is (more on this below), and in part because Beshear really, really wants to be Harris' running mate. Appearing on MSNBC yesterday, the Governor said: "I want the American people to know what a Kentuckian is and what they look like, because let me just tell you that JD Vance ain't from [Appalachia]." Vance fired back by arguing that Beshear is a nepo baby who owes his career to his father (former Kentucky governor Steve Beshear). Before Vance goes down that path again, he might want to take a look at how his running mate's business career got started.

At this point, Vance has become enough of a problem that he might indeed be cashiered from the ticket. In fact, former Trump adviser Anthony Scaramucci thinks that Vance is "doomed":

He is not doing well on the stump for Donald Trump. He's hurting him, the memes on social media are killing him, the net negatives are terrible for the vice president. The vice president on the Trump campaign is supposed to get out of the way, and he has become an issue for Donald Trump. So he could have picked Nikki Haley, or he could have picked somebody, but Trump is such a narcissist he didn't want anybody taking credit for his electoral success. He didn't want somebody on CNN saying, "Yeah, he won that and Nikki Haley helped him," so he picked J.D. Vance and now he's got to live, at least for now, with this millstone on his neck. I mean, he may or may not make it to November 5th.

He also wondered "how many Scaramuccis J.D. is going to last."

If Trump is going to get rid of Vance, he's going to have to do it pretty quickly. First, if he's going to eat that particular batch of crow, he'd want to put as much distance between that and the election as is possible. Second, by the end of August, we'll start hitting state deadlines for ballot information. It will be somewhere between "very hard" and "impossible" to remove Vance once we get to September. As a reminder, the last time a VP was booted from a major-party ticket was in 1972. In that year, Thomas Eagleton was dumped 18 days after the Democratic convention. The 2024 Republican Convention ended 8 days ago. (Z)

Harris-Trump Debate(s): The Crystal Ball Is Murky

Will there be another presidential debate (or two)? Will there be a vice-presidential debate? The short answer: Who knows?

Donald Trump has said, at various times, that he thinks presidential candidates have a responsibility to debate, and that he very much wants to debate his opponent, whoever they might be. He already committed, of course, to a second debate with Joe Biden, on September 10, to be hosted by ABC News. However, now that Kamala Harris is the presumptive Democratic nominee, Trump is equivocating, saying that he just can't commit right now, because the Democrats might change candidates again.

This is, on its face, nonsense. First of all, when Trump initially committed to the two debates, Joe Biden was as much the Democratic nominee as Harris is right now. Sure, something might happen with Harris. But something could have happened (and did happen) with Biden. There are no guarantees in life. Further, at this point on the calendar, what's important is the date and time, so Trump can block it out on his schedule. Until he begins prep, it does not matter who will be standing at the other podium.

So, what is going on here? We can come up with three possible explanations:

• This is just a clumsy attempt at messaging, trying to bring added attention to the claim that the Democrats changed candidates, and this therefore means they are in terrible disarray and/or that they broke the law.
  
  
• Trump is searching for a way to skip future debates, knowing that a matchup against Harris presents a number of serious potential pitfalls that a matchup against Biden did not.
  
  
• Trump is trying to, in effect, reopen negotiations, so as to replace the ABC debate with one hosted by Fox.

Which of these it is, we do not know. However, we will say again that if Trump dodges Harris, after having debated Biden, he's going to get a lot of blowback. "Trump is afraid to debate Harris," Democrats and pundits will say, over and over and over. Maybe that blowback is less damaging than showing up and getting wrecked by Harris in front of a national audience. Although even if that is the case, given Trump's ego, and in particular his macho persona, he simply may not be able to handle accusations of being afraid, and may show up even if it's not the smart thing to do. (Z)

GOP Messaging: Like a Bull in a Porcelain Shop

We remain shocked that, after showing the chops of a proper, professional political operation throughout much of this campaign cycle, the Trump campaign and the Republican Party seem to be totally clueless when it comes to their new presumptive opponent. Certainly, they have been losing the messaging battle over the past few days.

To start, Donald Trump called into Fox yesterday, and went on an extended, only semi-coherent rant about Kamala Harris. Needless to say, that isn't going to do him much good, since Fox viewers already despise her. But, on top of that, the Harris campaign was watching, and quickly put out a press release with the heading: "Statement on a 78-Year-Old Criminal's Fox News Appearance." The statement runs down, in bullet-point form, all the ways in which voters might find Trump's words objectionable, and ends with "If anyone wants an alternative, Kamala Harris is offering one."

And that was not all. One of the things Trump said during his Fox appearance is that Harris is further left than Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT). The Senator appeared on CNN last night, and was asked about that claim. He had a very Bernie-esque response: "Uhhh, probably not. It is just possible for the 83,000th time that Trump is lying. No, I don't think that is the case." He did have kind words to say about Harris' work in the Senate and as VP, but reiterated: "But no, I don't quite think that her record is where mine is in terms of being progressive."

Harris was not the only target of Trump's invective yesterday. In an attempt to slur her by association, he also went after Gov. Gavin Newsom (D-CA), who just announced an executive order allowing law enforcement officials to clear homeless encampments. Trump's message:

Why didn't Gavin Newscum do this a long time ago? He's only doing it because, just like Crooked Joe Biden, his Radical Left Democrat Presidential Candidate, Lyin' Kamala Harris, is losing BIG in the Polls. They just did it for Political Reasons, because she comes from California, and looks terrible. Right after the Election, it will go back to SLUM LIKE condition, unless we WIN — THEN, AMERICA WILL BE GREAT AGAIN!

We must say, "Gavin Newscum" is rather better than "Lyin' Kamala Harris." However, we are very doubtful that making a tenuous connection between the policy choices of a California politician and the sitting VP will work very well as a line of attack.

House Republicans are also getting in on the game. Yesterday, they voted on a resolution slamming Harris for her failures as border czar. The measure passed, with all Republicans and six Democrats voting for it. Here are the six Democrats, along with the PVI of their districts: Jared Golden (D-ME; R+6), Yadira Caraveo (D-CO; EVEN), Don Davis (D-NC; D+2), Marie Gluesenkamp Perez (D-WA; R+5), Henry Cuellar (D-TX; D+3) and Mary Peltola (D-AK; R+8). These are the blue doggiest Democrats, with many of them trying to hold on in very red districts.

While we see some potential in the messaging bill on presidential immunity (see above), we are skeptical that this one will have any real impact. First, because it's one thing to vote for or against a policy (like, say, presidential immunity). It's another thing to vote for or against a proclamation that someone has been a naughty VP. Voters and pundits are far less likely to take note of a person's vote on the latter, we think. On top of that, it's about 100 days to the election. Do you think anyone is going to remember this in November? There are ways the proposed constitutional amendment could reappear in the headlines (as we describe above). But this is pretty much one and done.

And finally, we'll add one last bit of information here. During his Wednesday appearance before a House committee, FBI Director Christopher Wray was asked about the injury done to Donald Trump, and bent over backwards to avoid saying that he (Wray) is not so sure it was a bullet, and that it might well have been shrapnel. If it's proven that it was indeed shrapnel, or even if it's not proven but that understanding begins to take hold among the voting public, then it will make Trump's "I took a bullet for democracy" bit a lot less effective.

Presumably, the pros who work for Trump's campaign will rein things in, and the campaign will stop flailing about the way it has been for the last several days. But maybe not. What's very clear, at least at the moment, is that: (1) Trump and his acolytes have very little idea as to how to deal with Harris, and (2) Trump is enraged that he doesn't get to run against Biden. (Z)

Ethics 101: Is Silver Crossing the Line?

Nate Silver is still the country's best-known psephologist. However, for various reasons, he's not quite the golden boy he once was (see what we did there?). He's now completely divorced from the site he founded, and he's also gotten in the habit of replacing analysis with punditry, and of getting into flame wars on eX-Twitter.

Now, perhaps in the process of squeezing as much value out of his fame as is possible, Silver has gone in a new, and ethically questionable direction. For better or worse, we are now in an era where betting on sports is as easy as it's ever been in the U.S. (and it's going to get easier). The various books that do business with American bettors are trying to drum up as much action as possible, and so have become increasingly enthusiastic about something that European books also do: taking bets on politics.

To that end, Silver has just been hired by a predictions market called Polymarket. At the moment, the site does not collect actual money from players. However, they do foresee that in the future, one way or another. It's not entirely clear what Silver's role will be; whether he will advise on broad organizational issues, or he'll be involved at a more granular level, perhaps even setting the odds for various possible outcomes.

We're not sure that Silver HAS crossed a line here. But we're also not sure he HAS NOT crossed a line. He's already well-known as a gambler (in particular, tournament poker). He's going to be in a position to set the markets' expectations for various political and news events. He's also in a position, as a pundit and analyst, to actually influence political and news events. It would not be too difficult, for example, for him to encourage the betting markets to add a wager that Donald Trump will drop J.D. Vance, and then for him to write a number-crunching piece about how Trump simply must drop J.D. Vance.

Undoubtedly, Silver has persuaded himself that he can maintain the walls between his careers as a pundit/psephologist, a professional gambler, and a professional gambling consultant. Maybe he can, but it's pretty easy for these things to get blurrier and blurrier over time. Certainly, the walls are already blurry to the point that we would not be comfortable saying "yes" if someone contacted us and asked us to consult on politics-based gambling. And we have nowhere near the reach that Silver does. (Z)

I Read the News Today, Oh Boy: Sun, Moon, and Pearl

Whew—it's been a while since we've been able to do a headline theme. Large quantities of major news, much of it breaking on Thursdays, will do that.

For our last set of themed headlines, we gave this clue on Friday: "L.A. sports fans are maybe at an advantage with this one." And then we added this on Saturday: "Here's a second hint for this week's headline theme: Homes. Wait, that's not quite right. HOMES. That's better." And now, the answer key, courtesy of reader C.H. in Atlanta, GA:

The reference to the Lakers is what gave it away for me. Each of these refer to lakes:

• Debate Details Are Set: Biden Channels His Inner Franklin D. Roosevelt: Lake Roosevelt, WA
• Election 2024, Part I: There Goes Biden's Rainy Day Fund: Rainy Lake, MN
• Election 2024, Part II: Trump Can't Bear to Let Biden "Win" a News Cycle: Bear Lake, UT
• Trump Legal News: Loud and Clear: Clear Lake, CA
• I Read the News Today, Oh Boy: A Mountain Lodge, among the Sequoias: Mountain Lake, VA or Sequoia Lake, CA
• This Week in Schadenfreude: "Trump Supporters" Leech Money from Trump Supporters: Leech Lake, MN
• This Week in Freudenfreude: Lynn Conway, 1938-2024: Conway Lake, NH

As it turns out, there are a LOT of lakes in the U.S., and so a lot of lake names. In fact, E.V. in Manchester, MO was the first of several readers who brought to our attention that the whole theme can be satisfied just with lakes in California: Channel/Franklin/Roosevelt, Rainy, Big Bear, Clear, Lodge/Sequoia, Leech and Conway. It also works with just Minnesota lakes, as H.B. in State College, PA, was the first to point out: Franklin/Roosevelt, Rainy, 5 Bear (Lakes), 17 Clear (Lakes), Mountain and Leech. Similarly, per the headline of this item, there is a Sun Lake (FL), a Moon Lake (UT) and a Pearl Lake (CO).

This theme was harder than we expected, maybe because it was so broad. Here are the first 25 people to get it:

1. K.M. in Ypsilanti, MI
2. D.E. in Ann Arbor, MI
3. C.H. in Atlanta
4. G.K. in Blue Island, IL
5. J.F. in Fayetteville, NC, who adds: "And in what may be a sign of things to come, there is a Trump Lake in Wisconsin, but no Biden Lake."
6. J.N. in Zionsville, IN
7. E.V. in Manchester
8. D.L. in Uslar, Germany
9. D.E. in High Springs, FL
10. D.S. in Layton, UT
11. M.B. in Albany, NY
12. D.M. in Austin, TX
13. C.A.G. in Athens, GA
14. D.M. in Oakland, CA
15. P.C. in Austin, TX
16. H.B. in State College
17. D.D. in Portland, OR
18. R.S. in Milan, OH
19. K.R. in Austin, TX
20. D.H. in Portland, OR
21. N.K. in Cleveland Heights, OH
22. A.S. in Springfield OR
23. G.G. in Long Beach, CA
24. R.S. in Philadelphia, PA
25. J.K. in Honolulu, HI

As to this week, we will tell you that the theme would fit in the Trivial Pursuit category Culture, that it relies on only one word from each headline, and the headline from the first item is not included. As to a hint, we'll tell you that the theme words appear in the correct order. For example, if the theme was "The Beatles," then "She Loves You" would appear in a headline before "Hey Jude" does. If the theme was Big Mac ingredients, then "two all-beef patties" would appear before "special sauce," which would appear before "lettuce," which would appear before "cheese."

If you have a guess, send it to comments@electoral-vote.com with subject line "July 26 Headlines." (Z)

This Week in Schadenfreude: Even the Ruby Red States Are Laughing

We prepared this for last Friday, and then ran out of time to actually write it up. So, we're just going to use it this week.

As you will know, if you read our write-ups, Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-FL) was pictured on the floor of the Republican convention on Monday (harassing Kevin McCarthy), and then gave a speech a couple of days later. The difference in his appearance, across those two days, was... striking:

This instantly launched a million memes, and we went through and picked the 10 best. So:

1. Note, This Is From One of His Colleagues:
   
   
   
   
2. Score One for Biden:
   
   
   
   
3. And Score Another One for Biden:
   
   
   
   
4. I Can't Put My Finger on It...:
   
   
   
   
5. Infinite Diversity in Infinite Combinations:
   
   
   
   
6. Has Anyone Seen Jim Carrey and Gaetz in the Same Room?:
   
   
   
   
7. Vegas Act, Part I:
   
   
   
   
8. Vegas Act, Part II:
   
   
   
   
9. Vegas Act, Part III:
   
   
   
   
10. Ouch:
    
    

In general, it's not nice to make fun of someone's appearance. However, Gaetz is a giant putz. Further, it's not so much his appearance that is being mocked; it's his clumsy attempt to reinvent himself while thinking nobody would notice. Further, Gaetz himself has mocked other people's appearances, particularly those of women he does not like. So, we're going to disregard the normal nicety, and enjoy a little schadenfreude at the expense of the terrible work he had done. (Z)

This Week in Freudenfreude: The Gold Standard for "Hillbillies"

We have noted several times that we agree with Andy Beshear (see above) that J.D. Vance's "hillbilly" persona is as phony as all get out. Last week, we linked to an op-ed on the subject by Neema Avashia, who writes "J.D. Vance doesn't represent Appalachia. J.D. Vance only represents himself." We were taken to task for our choice of op-ed by a reader who thinks it is laughable that a first-generation immigrant could somehow understand what it means to be a hillbilly.

Now, that reader—who bravely chose not to provide their name or their city of residence—is clearly a bigot. And so, we do not care about their stupid opinion. However, we do like to show our work, and cross our t's, and dot our i's. So, here's a whole bunch of op-eds from people from Appalachia arguing that Vance is a phony:

• Real hillbillies like me don't trust JD Vance. You shouldn't trust him either.
• I know what a true hillbilly is, and it's not J.D. Vance
• JD Vance and I both have Appalachian roots. We took away very different lessons
• JD Vance is no hillbilly - and knows nothing about real conservative values
• J.D. Vance Never Was and Never Will Be the Voice of Appalachia
• J.D. Vance's Hillbilly Hokum
• J.D. Vance's book 'Hillbilly Elegy' was a con job. Don't let it slide
• JD Vance and I share Appalachian roots. He's just the latest to exploit the region for personal profit.
• J.D. Vance's Phony Populism Thrilled the RNC. The Rest of Us Shouldn't Be Fooled.
• In His Tales of Appalachian Life, JD Vance Ignores People Like Me

We think this makes our point, namely that the people running the Republican Party and the Trump campaign might think Vance can connect with blue-collar/Appalachian voters, but may well be fooling themselves.

Now, all of the above are 1,000, maybe 1,500 words. You can knock something like that out in an hour or two. If you really and truly want to be on top of your "phony J.D. Vance" scholarship, then you're going to need to buy and read J.D. Vance Is a Fake Hillbilly: Think Twice Before Calling (All) Coalfield Appalachians Racists, Sexists, and Ignoramuses. That one is a 180+ page, 12-chapter takedown of Vance's persona; the chapter "Women and Other Innovators" is particularly pointed.

The author of that book (which is currently a bestseller on Amazon, by the way) is Frank Kilgore, whose ancestors were among the first Europeans to settle Appalachia, and whose immediate forebears were coal miners. Kilgore was quite devoted to the region, getting his law degree and then practicing law there for more than four decades. His résumé as a pro-Appalachia activist also includes the following:

• Writing four other books on Appalachia, most notably a textbook for the region's students, The Virginia Headwaters of the Big Sandy River: A Story of Revitalization and Nature's Resilience
  
  
• Founding and publishing Mountain Peeks Magazine, which features pictorials of Appalachia
  
  
• Founding the Appalachian College of Pharmacy
  
  
• Founding the Appalachian School of Law
  
  
• Donating his legal services to union workers, particularly coal workers
  
  
• Paying for newspaper ads that celebrated Appalachian students' high standardized test scores
  
  
• Establishing the Mendota Trail for hikers
  
  
• Donating land for, and helping to establish, Clinch River State Park
  
  
• Helping reintroduce native species, like elk, to the region

As you can, perhaps, tell from this list, education and environmentalism top his list of interests. That said, he did so much to market the region, in hopes of persuading people to pay a visit, that he acquired the nickname "Unofficial Chamber of Commerce for Southwest Virginia."

Given Kilgore's goals, fealty to just one political party was not a smart play. Many of the local politicians are Republicans, but many of the state politicians are Democrats. So, he registered as an independent. That said, he did back politicians whose goals were in alignment with his, and he was outspoken on certain issues. For example, though the son and grandson of coal miners, he told anyone who would listen that coal mining is not the future of Appalachia.

Anyhow, from where we sit, this is what a real hillbilly looks like. And by that, we mean someone who is not only steeped in the culture of the region, but is dedicated to making it better. Oh, and as the book about Vance makes clear (specifically, in Chapter 3), Kilgore did not believe that to be a part of the community and the culture, a person had to be multi-generational or white.

Now, much of what you see above, we prepared during the Republican National Convention. If any of the days had fallen short of our "10 things to talk about," we were going to write a section comparing Vance and Kilgore. As chance would have it, on the last day of the Convention, we got an e-mail from reader M.W. in Richmond, VA, who proposed a Vance-Kilgore comparison, while also sharing the news that Kilgore passed away on July 14. M.W. writes: "During my 24 years in southwest Virginia, I had the privilege of knowing Frank Kilgore. Given the recent prominence of a fake hillbilly, I hope you will consider the life story of a real hillbilly to be worth a mention in Freudenfreude."

So, here is to a life well lived. One can only hope that if there's a heaven, Frank Kilgore's corner of it looks like southern Virginia.

Have a good weekend, all! (Z)

Today's Presidential Polls

Given that Kamala Harris' presidential campaign is less than a week old, she and her staff have to feel pretty good about this first wave of post-Biden polls. (Z)

State	Kamala Harris	Donald Trump	Start	End	Pollster
Arizona	44%	49%	Jul 22	Jul 23	Emerson Coll.
Georgia	46%	48%	Jul 22	Jul 23	Emerson Coll.
Maine	54%	45%	Jul 23	Jul 25	U. of New Hampshire
Michigan	42%	41%	Jul 22	Jul 24	Glengariff Group
Michigan	45%	46%	Jul 22	Jul 23	Emerson Coll.
New Hampshire	50%	44%	Jul 24	Jul 25	St. Anselm Coll.
New Hampshire	53%	46%	Jul 23	Jul 25	U. of New Hampshire
Pennsylvania	46%	48%	Jul 22	Jul 23	Emerson Coll.
Wisconsin	47%	47%	Jul 22	Jul 23	Emerson Coll.

Click on a state name for a graph of its polling history.

---

If you wish to contact us, please use one of these addresses. For the first two, please include your initials and city.

• questions@electoral-vote.com    For questions about politics, civics, history, etc. to be answered on a Saturday
• comments@electoral-vote.com   For "letters to the editor" for possible publication on a Sunday
• corrections@electoral-vote.com To tell us about typos or factual errors we should fix
• items@electoral-vote.com            For general suggestions, ideas, etc.

To download a poster about the site to hang up, please click here.

---

Email a link to a friend or share:

---The Votemaster and Zenger