RNC, Day 2: Send in the Clones

Mirror, mirror on the wall, which Republican is Trumpiest of all? The official theme of the second day of the Republican National Convention was "Make America Safe Once Again." But one could not help but notice another theme, namely "Republicans who will never be president," as a parade of politicians whose White House dreams were crushed by Donald Trump competed to see who could most aggressively grovel before the former president, parroting his favorite talking points. We certainly weren't buying these people's shticks, and we don't think that the crowd at the Convention—a.k.a., the base—was largely buying it, either.

If you wish to watch, here is the main session from Day 2, courtesy of C-SPAN:

Alternatively, if you would like something more lively, reader S.G. in Durham, NC sent in this video of paint drying.

And now, our rundown (again, in chronological order, as much as is possible) of the most notable storylines of RNC Day 2:

1. Looking Backward, Part I: Before we talk about Day 2, we wanted to double back on a few Day 1 stories. To start, we noted in yesterday's write-up that reality star Amber Rose, in her speech, declared that the Trumpublican Party does not care if you are Black or white, gay or straight. We suspected that would not sit too well with some members, and we were right. In fact, there was much vitriol directed at Rose by far-right elements of the GOP, such as this from Daily Wire pundit Matt Walsh:

   The RNC gives a primetime speaking slot to a pro-abortion feminist and self-proclaimed slut with a face tattoo whose only claim to fame is having sex with rappers. Truly an embarrassment. Not a single voter will be mobilized by this person.

   Note that Rose is part of an anti-rape movement called SlutWalk, so that's the context for that part of Walsh's comment. That does not make it better, mind you; the misogyny veritably drips from the tweet, as is often the case with him. Walsh is a world-class a**hole, but he does speak for, and to, a segment of the modern-day GOP.
   
   
2. Looking Backward, Part II: There have been a few bits of news on the J.D. Vance front since his selection as the VP candidate was announced Monday. To start, and to nobody's surprise, he was a last-minute pick. Trump Sr. was inclined to go with Gov. Doug Burgum (R-ND), but Trump Jr. and Eric managed to sell Vance to their father. Reportedly, a MAJOR selling point was that Karl Rove thought Burgum was the best pick. Can't be on the same page with a member of Team Bush, now can we?
   
   Moving along, in yesterday's item, we observed that one problem with Vance is that he tends to shoot from the hip, and to say impolitic things. Regular U.K. correspondent A.B. in Lichfield, England, UK, promptly sent in this story from The Guardian, which talks about a speech that Vance gave just last week, in which he said:

   And I was talking about, you know, what is the first truly Islamist country that will get a nuclear weapon, and we were like, maybe it's Iran, you know, maybe Pakistan already kind of counts, and then we sort of finally decided maybe it's actually the UK, since Labour just took over.

   This is not a misstatement in the sense of "macaca" or "legitimate rape," it's Vance doing what he does, which is frame things in a way that makes hard-right partisans' blood boil. That's the calling card of the New Right, as personified most prominently by Vance and Sen. Josh Hawley (R-MO). The problem is, this kind of rhetoric is a turnoff to everyone else. It doesn't matter so much in this case, since Britons can't vote in the U.S., but Vance is guaranteed to say something like this about some group of Americans, at some point during the campaign.
   
   Incidentally, A.B. concludes by noting that there was not time to write and submit a longer piece about Vance's remarks, because "ever since Sir Keir Starmer (may Allah bless him with good health and long life) passed the Forced Conversion to Islam Act of 2024, I find I have much less time for writing you e-mails over lunch, what with my new obligations to carry out the cycle of Zuhr and Asr afternoon prayers."
   
   Finally, we also remarked yesterday that we don't believe that blue-collar folks are actually buying Vance's "hillbilly" bit. That produced a number of e-mails from readers pointing out that his book was very popular in the part of the country from whence he hails. Maybe so, but even if we assume that many of his readers were "hillbillies," he has completely betrayed the arguments of the book, which included "don't blame other people for your problems" and "Trump is America's Hitler." We saw a number of op-eds yesterday from fellow Appalachia-residents-turned-writers, like this one, in which author Neema Avashia declares:

   I barely read 30 pages before I saw the book Hillbilly Elegy for what it was: a political platform masquerading as memoir. Before I saw J.D. Vance for what he was: an opportunist. One willing to double down on stereotypes, to paint the people of Appalachia with a culture of poverty brush, rather than be honest about the ways in which both electoral politics and industry have failed our region.
   
   Here's the thing: J.D. Vance doesn't represent Appalachia. JD Vance only represents himself.

   We stand by our view that "hillbilly" voters aren't buying what Vance is selling. Many of them may vote GOP anyhow, but that is because they were already Trumpers, not because of Vance.
   
   
3. Looking Backward, Part III: In yesterday's write-up, we also noted our surprise that, per Teamsters president Sean O'Brien, the Republicans are allegedly now the pro-union party. On that note, the corporate sponsors of the RNC were made public earlier this week. A lot of them are what you would expect, like Turning Point USA and the American Conservative Coalition. But also in there is... Starbucks. Typically, given that corporation's leadership and base of operations in Seattle, they are regarded as left-leaning. However, there is one big way in which Starbucks and the GOP are simpatico: union-busting. Indeed, just over a month ago, the seller-of-mediocre-coffee won a major lawsuit in service of its anti-union efforts.
   
   
4. Now, Now, Children: Former speaker Kevin McCarthy is in Milwaukee, of course, because he's trying to land himself an appointment in a second Trump administration. And while he was being interviewed, Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-FL) crashed the conversation in order to mock McCarthy for not being given a speaking slot at the convention (Gaetz is speaking tonight, according to the published schedule). Is it any surprise that nearly everyone in the House hates Gaetz? He's the Ted Cruz of the lower chamber.
   
   
5. Disunity: There have been several pieces in the last few weeks, many of them based on reporting from The New York Times' Maggie Haberman, that Trump's criminal conviction scared the daylights out of him, and really brought home the reality that he could end up spending much of the rest of his life behind bars if he doesn't regain the White House. This, in turn, reportedly caused him to be newly open to possibilities he would not previously have considered, like keeping his mouth shut during Joe Biden's time of crisis, or preaching unity in hopes of reaching beyond the base and getting some moderate votes. This, plus the assassination attempt, set the stage for Day 1 of the Republican convention, which was about as kumbayah as the modern-day GOP gets. Well, except for Sen. Ron Johnson (R-WI), and his "oops, wrong version" speech.
   
   The problem is that unity just does not work for Trump, at least not for long. First of all, it's just not his personality, anymore than Joe Biden could be a demagogue, or Barack Obama could be "Scranton Barack," or George W. Bush could be an egghead. More importantly, Trump's movement was built on disunity, on the message that it's "us" versus "them," with "them" being a host of allegedly un-American evildoers, from immigrants to deep staters to liberals to trans women (and did you notice, it's ALWAYS the trans women and not the trans men?) to Muslims and beyond.
   
   Truth be told, the Republicans were never serious about unity or pulling together or kumbayah or any of that. What really happened was that the assassination attempt, in particular, put Trump & Co. in a position (temporarily) to demand that Democrats stop their criticism of him and of the GOP, while Republicans could continue to say whatever they pleased. This is, of course, terribly hypocritical. It's also unsustainable, since it runs contrary to the fundamental nature of Trumpism, and because anyone and everyone is eventually going to notice that people are talking out of both sides of their mouth, and saying "Unity!" with one breath and "Damn, aren't those Democrats evil?" with the next.
   
   Trump himself made pretty clear what the tone of Day 2 would be with a late-night message on his being-shot-added-$10-a-share social media platform:

   The Radical Left Democrats are desperately trying to "Play the Ref" by calling for an illegal and unConstitutional attack on our SACRED United States Supreme Court. The reason that these Communists are so despondent is that their unLawful Witch Hunts are failing everywhere. The Democrats are attempting to interfere in the Presidential Election, and destroy our Justice System, by attacking their Political Opponent, ME, and our Honorable Supreme Court. We have to fight for our Fair and Independent Courts, and protect our Country. MAGA2024!

   Tuesday's speeches were, on the whole, much, much darker than Monday's were. There were also a lot more attacks on (and cheap shots at) Joe Biden and Kamala Harris, a whole lot of anti-immigrant rhetoric (no surprise, given the theme of the day) and the return of election denialism. None of this is unexpected since, in the end, Trumpers gotta Trump. But, boy howdy, it did not take long for the Trumpy water to re-find its level.
   
   
6. Savannah Chrisley: "Don't be divisive"/"vitriol for our enemies" was not the only hypocrisy on display yesterday. Another big one was "we are the party of law and order, except when law and order means that one of us gets in trouble." And that was certainly the gist of Savannah Chrisley's remarks. This RNC has been particularly heavy on reality TV stars; maybe that is an attempt to appeal to the kiddies, or maybe because the party's candidate is himself a reality TV star, we don't know. In any case, Chrisley starred on the show Chrisley Knows Best until both of her parents were popped for tax evasion and wire fraud, and were sentenced to substantial prison sentences (about a decade each).
   
   Chrisley talked about how important it is to back the badge and support law enforcement, and then went on an extended harangue about how prosecutors in Fulton County (wonder why she included that detail... hmmmmm) framed her parents and sent them to the big house. We were not in court, of course, but we'll note that financial crimes tend to be among the biggest slam dunks out there, because of the paper trail. In any case, as Chrisley continued her complaining, she also launched into a tirade about how unfair it is that Hunter Biden has been convicted of multiple crimes, and yet he's still walking around free while his appeals are pending. We are not clear if anyone in the room saw the irony in that comment, especially the guy in the front row who's still walking around free while his appeals are pending.
   
   
7. Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX): As we note above, Day 1 may have been vaguely kumbayah, but Day 2 was all about the dark forces that are trying to destroy the country, and how only Donald Trump can stand up to them. Of all the speeches, Cruz' was the darkest, so if you want to see what we're talking about, click on the link (as a reminder, all of the list headers in this section that are blue are links to the moment in the proceedings that we are describing, so if you click on Cruz' name, it will take you to his speech). If you don't want to watch, here's a representative quote:

   Americans are dying, murdered, assaulted, raped by illegal immigrants that the Democrats have released. Teenage girls and boys wearing colored wristbands are being sold into a life of sex slavery.

   We suppose it's not surprising that a guy from Texas is particularly good at delivering large amounts of red meat. Too bad he couldn't provide a little BBQ sauce, but Texans don't really do that. Now if he was from Kansas City...
   
   
8. Nikki Haley and Gov. Ron DeSantis (R-FL): We think it is not a coincidence that this duo appeared one after the other; they initially weren't even given speaking slots, and their pairing was a none-too-subtle reminder of who is, and who is not, the boss when it comes to the Republican Party.
   
   Haley's main purpose was to explain how, when she was critical of Trump, she wasn't REALLY criticizing him. She is also a particularly clear example of the general phenomenon we describe above, of talking about how it's terribly wrong to demonize your opponents, and then using the next breath to demonize your opponents.
   
   As to DeSantis, he was also more than happy to eat crow/kiss some a**. That said, the most notable thing about his speech was the "jokes." We put that word in quotations because you would have struggled to recognize them as such, but for the fact that the Governor would pause and smile at how clever he is. If you don't want to click and watch, we'll give you a sense of things by telling you that his biggest zinger was a reference to the movie Weekend at Bernie's (it was a "Joe Biden is basically dead" joke and not a joke at the expense of Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-VT). That movie came out in 1989—way to keep your cultural references fresh, there, Governor.
   
   
9. Madeline Brame: There were three more "everyday American" speakers yesterday, and since the theme of the day was ostensibly making America safe, all of them were relatives of victims of violent crime. Brame was the most forceful of them, and got the biggest reaction out of the crowd. Given that she is also Black, and thus serves to argue that the Republican Party is "diverse," don't be too surprised to see her end up as a contributor on one of the right-wing networks, à la the now-defunct partnership of Diamond and Silk. Brame's speech, like Cruz', is a good illustration that "unity" was most certainly not what was being preached yesterday.
   
   
10. Ben Carson, Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL) and Lara Trump: This trio was charged with bringing the night's festivities to a close. Unfortunately, someone forgot to wake Carson, while someone else forgot to oil MarcoBot. Those two are terrible at public speaking. Trump was much, much better. Was she given the most plum spot because organizers know she's a better speaker, and thus a better closing act? Or because, in the end, the Republican Party belongs to the Trump family? Probably both.

Perhaps this review was a little on the acidic side, but we gotta call 'em as we see 'em. There were a staggering 44 speakers yesterday, and we continue to struggle to understand how you can connect with voters when you trot out an endless parade of people saying the same things, over and over, for hours on end. Maybe the goal is to give everyone a chance to produce a meme-worthy moment, and to hope that three or four of them actually pull it off.

Anyhow, even if we are dubious that this is moving the needle, we'll be back at it tomorrow, because that's what we do. (Z)

Don't Forget about Joe Biden...

Yesterday, Joe Biden made a very interesting move. In an effort to move past his debate/mental infirmity issues, and to give his campaign a shot in the arm, he announced his backing for significant Supreme Court-related reforms: a more substantive ethics code (with teeth), term limits for justices, and a constitutional amendment establishing that presidents are not immune to prosecution from crimes.

This is a pretty savvy move by the President. His main focus has been on the evils of Donald Trump. And while one might think that would be a compelling argument, the fact is that it didn't work for Hillary Clinton (admittedly, under somewhat different circumstances), and it hasn't been working especially well this cycle. If Biden makes Supreme Court reform a major part of his pitch, then he gives voters a forward-looking reason to vote for him, as opposed to "I'm better than the alternative" or "I already did stuff and should be rewarded."

At the same time, it speaks to a level of desperation on the part of Biden. He knows full well that, even if he's reelected, the legislative reforms he proposes are longshots, while the constitutional amendment is an even longer shot. On the whole, Democratic candidates do not like to over-promise and under-deliver. But when your back is up against the wall, you do what you gotta do.

On that point, some of the Democratic natives are still restless. Speaker Emerita Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) is reportedly working the phones in hopes of getting Biden to step down. Many of her colleagues in the House are circulating a letter asking the DNC to postpone plans to nominate Biden prior to the Democratic National Convention. And pollster Stanley Greenberg has prepared a series of memos providing evidence that Biden is not only slipping in the polls, but he's at risk of taking other Democrats down with him.

We've had several readers write in to point out that if Biden WAS going to leave the ticket, the very best day for him to announce that would be Thursday, so as to steal most of the RNC's thunder. Those readers make a good point, but Biden definitely does not seem like someone who is 48 hours from bowing out. Or who is inclined to bow out at all. (Z)

...Or about the Assassination Attempt

We doubt you've already forgotten that there was an attempt on Donald Trump's life. Certainly, you didn't forget it if you watched any part of the RNC, since there were constant references to his heroism on that day, not to mention people wearing ear bandages that mirror the former president's. As a sidebar, (Z) was also once shot at with a semi-automatic weapon, and he also ducked to avoid being killed (though his shoes remained in place). Please send e-mails congratulating him on his heroism to comments@electoral-vote.com.

Anyhow, the RNC might be the big story of the day and the week, but there has still been news on the assassination front. Here's a rundown:

• Polls: There have been three national preference polls conducted since the shooting. Reuters/Ipsos has it Trump 43%, Biden 41%. Morning Consult has it Trump 46%, Biden 45%. Redfield and Wilton Strategies has it Trump 43%, Biden 42%. In all three cases, the numbers were basically the same before the shooting.
  
  There's also one other poll that may be of interest; it is from InsiderAdvantage/WAGA (Atlanta). According to their numbers, Biden lags Trump in Georgia by three points, 47% to 44%, while Kamala Harris lags Trump in Georgia by ten points, 47% to 37%. We do not know which voters are with Biden but not (yet) Harris, but it's clearly the case that a switch in candidates would mean a loss of support in some key states. The $64,000 question is whether that loss would be temporary or permanent.
  
  
• Calls: While 95% of the attention has been paid to Donald Trump, the real victim of the shooting was Corey Comperatore, who died protecting his family from injury. As of Tuesday morning, one of the two major-party candidates had called Comperatore's widow Helen to express condolences, and it was not Trump. She declined to take the call from Biden, given that she is a Trumper. Later in the day, someone brought the oversight to Trump's attention, and he finally put in a call to Helen Comperatore. This is reminder #729 that empathy just isn't Trump's thing. Some people have it, some don't, and he doesn't.
  
  
• Demolition Ranch: It has now been reported that the shooter was wearing a Demolition Ranch t-shirt. Demolition Ranch is a YouTube channel for gun lovers. This is being treated as VERY IMPORTANT. We do not know why, but we pass it along, in case it says more to readers than it does to us.
  
  
• $15: Many Democrats are hanging their hats on the fact that the shooter was a Republican. Many Republicans are hanging their hats on the fact that the shooter once donated a few bucks to a lefty group. For a day or so, there was a story circulating that the $15 donation to Progressive Turnout Project was actually from a different guy with the name Thomas Crooks. Snopes points out that is not the case; the donation and the voter registration have the same address.
  
  At this point, if there was some obvious indication as to the motivations behind the shootings, it would surely have been found by law enforcement, or reporters, or both. That no such evidence has come to light strongly suggests we're not going to learn much more than we already know. And based on the information that is currently available, it looks a lot like the shooter was just a loner looking to lash out, and was not politically motivated.
  
  
• Profit Motive: If you had "3 days" in your "How long before Trump tries to make money off this?" pool, you're a winner. Yesterday, a Trump-owned company announced a limited-edition commemorative assassination attempt shoe:
  
  
  
  These beauties can be yours for the low, low price of $299. But hurry, because you wouldn't want your friends to show up at your place wearing their assassination shoes before you're able to get yours.
  
  
• Israel: You surely didn't expect to see this here, but it's a strange world. In short, the once-warm relationship between Trump and Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu grew somewhat frosty because Netanyahu had the temerity to congratulate Joe Biden on his victory in 2020. "Fu** him," was Trump's exact response, and they have not spoken since. Since Saturday, the PM has been using the shooting to rekindle his relationship with the former president, primarily by making the case that he knows what it's like to feel unsafe in public.

And that's the latest news on this front. (Z)

Menendez Guilty on All Counts

In an outcome that should be a surprise to nobody, Sen. Bob Menendez' (D-NJ) habit of using his political offices to enrich himself finally caught up with him yesterday, as a jury found him guilty on 16 felony counts, including acting as a foreign agent, bribery, extortion, obstruction of justice and wire fraud. If he were to get the maximum on each count, and the sentences were to be served consecutively, then he would be in prison until 2246, getting out just in time to see the next Chicago Bears Super Bowl victory. As a first-time offender, he's not going to get the max, of course. But with 16 felony convictions, he's not going to get a slap on the wrist, either. And at 70 years of age, even a relatively short sentence could be a de facto life sentence.

Menendez claims he's not guilty, and that the jury misunderstood the evidence, and that the judge applied the laws wrong and yada, yada, yada. Pretty much all convicted white-collar criminals say the same thing. Blue-collar criminals, too. After all, as Red tells Andy in The Shawshank Redemption: "Everyone in here is innocent, you know that?" Anyhow, the Senator has now been convicted in one trial, and he escaped conviction in a second trial based on a technicality. So, he's exhausted the benefit of the doubt. Plus, all we really care about is the political situation, a story that has a maximum shelf life of about 4 months. Since his appeal will not be heard until next year, his criminal status is not going to change between now and the election.

So, what is the political situation? Well, after the verdict was announced yesterday, more than a dozen Senate Democrats called on him to step down. The most significant, among that dozen-plus, are Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) and Menendez' junior colleague, Cory Booker (D-NJ). If he goes gentle into that good night, it would make life easier for his fellow Democrats.

That said, Menendez does not seem to be the type to fall on his sword, even if doing so is clearly called for. Thus far, he's largely been in denial of his circumstances, up to and including launching an independent run to keep his seat even after New Jersey voters signaled that they were done being represented by him. Staying the course would certainly be consistent with his insistence that he's innocent, and that this is all a sham, and that he will ultimately be vindicated.

If Menendez does not go willingly, then what? Certainly, the Senate could expel him. This is very rare; a senator has not been formally expelled since 1862, when a whole bunch of Democrats were booted for supporting the Southern rebellion. The last senator expelled for commission of a crime was William Blount (D-R, TN), who got tossed a mere 227 years ago. The caveat here is the reason it's been so long is that most senators, when they find themselves in hot water, take the hint and spare themselves and their colleagues the necessity of an expulsion vote. In 1982, for example, Harrison A. Williams—another New Jersey Democrat—resigned in order to avoid expulsion for his role in the Abscam scandal. And in 1995, Bob Packwood—an Oregon Republican—resigned to avoid expulsion for enriching himself (sound familiar?) and for gross sexual misconduct.

Is there any chance that Menendez could avoid expulsion? Sure, there's a chance. In 2008, Ted Stevens (R-AK), was convicted of corruption a week before Election Day. Rather than expel him, the Senate left his fate to voters, and the voters decided to send Stevens packing (although, in his case, the conviction actually WAS vacated). It's possible Schumer & Co. could decide an expulsion would harm the chances of Rep. Andy Kim (D-NJ), who is running for Menendez' seat right now, perhaps by driving some voters into the "Menendez is a martyr" camp. Alternatively, Republicans would like to associate the Democratic Party with the stench of corruption to the greatest extent possible. So, there may not be the necessary Republican votes (approx. 17 of them) to cashier Menendez.

If Menendez does vacate his seat, voluntarily or otherwise, it would fall to Gov. Phil Murphy (D-NJ) to appoint someone to serve the balance of the Senator's term. So, who might he turn to? One possibility is Kim, with the notion that would give him a jump start on learning the ropes and on seniority. However, that would leave a seat in the House vacant, at a time when every vote counts. Another possibility is Murphy's wife, who was running for the seat this year, until it became clear she could not win. But that would be very bad optics.

Our guess, if Murphy does get to choose, is that he will go in one of two directions. He could take the Gov. Gavin Newsom (D-CA) approach, and pick someone like Sen. Laphonza Butler (D-CA) as a tip of the cap to one or more left-wing constituencies. For example, Murphy could tap Lillian Corcoran, director of New Jersey's Women's Rights Information Center. Alternatively, Murphy could choose a former senator, with the notion that they already know the song and dance. As chance would have it, there are three former Democratic senators from New Jersey who are still living: Bill Bradley, Robert Torricelli and Jon Corzine. Yes, they are all 72 or older, but that's young by the standards of present-day Washington, DC. And they would only have to serve for a few months, at a time when the Senate will often be in recess.

Whatever is going to happen, it will happen pretty quickly. So, we should know Menendez' political fate within the week. (Z)

Musk Is All-in on Trump...

We have not read Walter Isaacson's book on Elon Musk. Maybe one day we will, and we will find out if Isaacson knows what is behind the dramatic change in Musk's public persona in the last few years. He's gone from being center-left-but-kind-of-agnostic to being pretty hard-right.

Yesterday, sources close to Musk told The Wall Street Journal that the multi-billionaire is planning to give $45 million a month to a super PAC backing Trump's candidacy. If so, that would be a pretty big chunk of change. Of course, you never know if these rich folks will follow through on their promises (see Bankman-Fried, Sam), but even $200 million (or so) is small potatoes to Musk. The bigger question is what he hopes to achieve in electing a president who wants to get rid of electric vehicles. You know, like Teslas.

One possible explanation for Musk's behavior is that, particularly since ensconcing himself in the bubble that is eX-Twitter, he's become swept up in the culture wars. On that front, Musk was incensed by California's passage of a law on Monday that prohibits schools from forcing teachers to report students' gender identities to parents. The point of the law, of course, is to protect children who may have anti-LGBTQ parents.

This seems pretty commonsense to us: Essentially, leave the decision about whether to talk to parents or not to the teachers/staff, who should be best positioned to know whether that is what is best-suited to the needs and safety of the child. We read numerous stories about the law, and could not get a clear idea of why people oppose it, beyond vague claims of "transparency" and "trust between schools and parents." Doesn't it seem to put teachers/staff in a really terrible place if they are REQUIRED to talk to parents, but know it will put the child at risk?

Anyhow Musk is furious. He described the new law as the "final straw," and said that "laws of this nature [will] force families and companies to leave California to protect their children." Again, we don't really grasp the reasoning, since even the opponents of the law appear to be talking about harm to parents, not children. But, in any case, Musk really believes it. So, he announced yesterday that he's moving the headquarters of SpaceX and eX-Twitter from California to Texas. That does not represent all that many jobs, especially in a state with 33 million people. And note that he's not moving Tesla's California production facilities, which would be rather more difficult and costly. So, this is more about making a statement than significantly changing the operations of his businesses. Still, it speaks to his move in an aggressively Trumpy direction. (Z)

...But What About RFK Jr.?

As is the case with approximately 100% of stories involving Robert F. Kennedy Jr., this one's kind of weird. Consistent with his desire to do anything possible to secure reelection (see above), Donald Trump called the independent candidate to talk about a possible deal. In short, the former president proposed that Kennedy should drop out of the race and endorse Trump, and in exchange there would be a place for Kennedy in a Trump v2.0 administration.

That's not the weird part, though. Where things got weird was that, during the call, Trump went on an extended diatribe about babies and vaccines:

When you feed a baby, Bobby, a vaccination that is like 38 different vaccines, and it looks like it's meant for a horse, not a, you know, 10-pound or 20-pound baby. And then you see the baby all of a sudden starting to change radically. I've seen it too many times. And then you hear that it doesn't have an impact, right? But you and I talked about that a long time ago.

Maybe Trump was trying to curry favor with the notoriously anti-vaxx Kennedy. Or maybe Trump was just freestyling. Though if Joe Biden had said such things at a press conference, it would have been front-page news across the country, regardless of the reason he said them.

And the story gets weirder still, because the reason that Trump's words went public is that RFK Jr.'s videographer recorded the phone call, and then Bobby Kennedy III posted the video to the Internet. Kennedy III says he did so to expose Trump as a hypocrite. Kennedy Jr. says he had no idea his son was going to do that, and apologized to Trump. That said, Kennedy Jr. certainly set things up nicely to be able to pull this particular stunt (including having someone take video of a phone call), so maybe take his explanation with a grain of salt.

We actually doubt that Kennedy would be able to transfer many of his voters to Trump; the reason they are supporting Junior is that he's not Trump and he's not Biden and he's not "establishment." In any case, now that the Kennedy campaign has embarrassed Trump publicly, one has to assume that any possible alliance is off. (Z)

---

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