PLEASE REMEMBER TO SUBSCRIBE FOR DAILY NEWSLETTERS SENT DIRECTLY TO YOUR EMAIL!

WE FILTER NEWS SO YOU DON’T HAVE TO BECAUSE FACTS AND TRUTH MATTER!

This debate will showcase Vance's superior debating skills, his authentic connection with the American heartland, and his clear policy visions versus Walz's dishonesty and less effective communication style. Vance will expose the insincerities in Walz's campaign, thereby making Vance the obvious choice for those who value straightforwardness and traditional conservative values.

JD Vance:

• Debate Preparation and Background: Vance, with his Yale Law School education and experience in media via numerous podcasts, is well-prepared for the debate format. His background suggests a proficiency in articulating his thoughts clearly and persuasively, which could be advantageous in a debate setting where articulation and persuasion are key.

• Relatability and Background: Vance's personal story, as someone who has risen from a challenging background in the Rust Belt, will resonate with many Americans feeling left behind by current political elites. His narrative will appeal to voters looking for someone who understands their struggles.

• Policy Points: Vance has a clear, strong stance on issues like immigration, family values, and economic policies that resonate with conservative voters. His pro-natalist views and critiques of current cultural trends might appeal to those concerned with traditional values.

• Criticism of Opponent: Vance will highlight Tim Walz's weaknesses, painting him as out of touch or dishonest.

Tim Walz:

• Dishonesty: Walz has been involved in controversies or has made statements that were proven to be 100% dishonest and misleading. For instance, his military service record has been a point of contention, with allegations of "stolen valor" which, although contested, might be used to question his integrity.

• Gaslighting Accusation: Walz is a “gaslighter”, he does this by denying or twisting facts during the campaign, especially on policies or personal records. During the debate, Walz will probably look into the camera and make claims that are blatant untruths, manipulating public perception.

Kamala Harris, when pressed for concrete economic plans, resorts to recounting her personal background rather than delineating actionable policy steps. This approach was noticeable once again in her interview on "All The Smoke," where instead of leveraging the platform to reassure voters with economic strategies, she circled back to her upbringing. It’s obvious she has no idea what she’s doing, it’s evasive, it reveals a lack of depth or readiness in economic policy formulation.

Analysis:

• Avoidance of Policy Detail: Harris's tendency to discuss her life story when asked about the economy is a tactic to avoid showcasing a weak or nonexistent economic plan. This indicates a lack of detailed policy knowledge or an attempt to garner sympathy or relatability instead of offering solutions.

• Missed Opportunity for Clarity: Each media appearance is a chance to win over undecided voters with clear, actionable plans. By focusing on her personal story, Harris is seen as squandering opportunities to outline how she intends to tackle inflation, job creation, or tax reform, leaving voters in the dark about her economic vision.

• Perception of Authenticity vs. Substance: This does little to address the pressing economic concerns of the day. Voters are looking for leadership with concrete plans, not just relatable backstories.

• Contrast with Trump's Approach: Trump's economic narrative includes direct, if controversial, policy proposals like tax cuts and deregulation.

A 43-foot tall, nude statue of former President Donald Trump. This is absolutely disgusting, the group who did this needs to be held accountable. These actions prove the Democrat party is the party of hate and violence.

Analysis Expressing Disgust with Democrats and Liberals:

• The installation of a giant nude statue of Donald Trump in Las Vegas is a grotesque overreach of political commentary, emblematic of a deeper, more troubling trend within liberal expressions of dissent. It exemplifies the left's use of shock tactics to demean and dehumanize political figures they oppose.

• This statue can be linked to the broader narrative of violent rhetoric often perpetuated by left-leaning media outlets. Such rhetoric doesn't just stop at verbal or written attacks but manifests in physical expressions like this statue, which encourages a culture of disrespect and hostility.

• This event showcases a lack of decorum and respect for political differences, traits that are increasingly attributed to liberal tactics when dealing with opposition.

California Governor Gavin Newsom has recently signed legislation that prohibits local governments from requiring voter ID at the polls. This move has been met with significant controversy, voter ID laws are essential for ensuring the integrity of elections. Meanwhile, the SAVE (Securing America’s Voter Eligibility) Act, intended to enforce stricter voter verification processes, was bundled into a continuing resolution by the House last week, effectively delaying its consideration until December.

Analysis Expressing Disgust with Democrats:

The decision by Governor Newsom to bar local voter ID requirements is a distressing overreach by Democrats, highlighting a troubling trend where the security and sanctity of the electoral process are seemingly undermined for political gain. This bill raises several red flags:

1. Election Integrity: Voter ID laws are a basic measure to prevent voter fraud, ensuring that each citizen's vote is counted fairly and not diluted by illegal votes. By removing this requirement, Democrats like Newsom are ignoring or downplaying the risks of voter fraud, which could lead to a lack of trust in election outcomes.

2. Federalism and Local Control: The bill overrides local government's ability to enforce measures they deem necessary for secure voting. This centralization of power at the state level goes against the principle of allowing local jurisdictions to tailor their voting laws to their specific needs or concerns, reflecting what some might call a Democrat tendency to centralize power under the guise of uniformity.

3. Political Motive Over Practical Security: The opposition to voter ID, spearheaded by Democrats, is viewed not as a fight for civil rights but as a cynical move to capture a demographic advantage. By making voting accessible without ID, there's encouragement for non-citizens or others ineligible to vote to participate, thus skewing election results in favor of Democratic candidates.

4. The SAVE Act Delay: The inclusion of the SAVE Act in a continuing resolution, thereby pushing its debate to December, is a strategic move by those in Congress, influenced by Democratic interests, to avoid addressing voter security at a critical time. This delay is a reluctance to tackle voter fraud issues head-on, contributing to the perception that Democrats are more interested in electoral advantage than in electoral integrity.

The disgust stems from a belief that such legislative actions by Democrats, including Newsom, not only compromise the democratic process but also reflect a broader disdain for measures that ensure each legitimate vote counts.

President Donald Trump recently made headlines with his visit to the hurricane-ravaged areas in the Southeast, particularly in Valdosta, Georgia, following Hurricane Helene. His presence there was marked by hands-on engagement, where he assisted in distributing relief supplies and received briefings on the hurricane's impact. This visit has been contrasted starkly with the absence of President Joe Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris from the disaster zones, once again highlighting the selfish characteristics common amongst democrats.

Analysis Expressing Pro-Trump Sentiment:

• Donald Trump's proactive approach in visiting the hurricane victims demonstrates his commitment to the American people, showcasing him as a leader who stands with the public in times of crisis.

• This event underscores Trump's ability to connect with voters through direct action, strengthening his support base by illustrating that he is more concerned with immediate, tangible aid rather than bureaucratic response.

• The absence of Biden and Harris from the disaster areas, on the other hand, feeds into the facts that Democrats are out of touch or even neglectful when it comes to immediate crisis response. This absence is emblematic of a broader detachment, where symbolic gestures or delayed responses are prioritized over immediate, on-the-ground action. This is another example Democratic leadership's focus on policy over people.