#mudslinging

Kevin Bloody Wilson sums up the first Trump Biden Debate

https://youtu.be/cJ_46Woadeg (profanity warning)

What a circus. A screaming match. Like two bald men arguing over a comb. Talking over each other and lots of name calling. We’ve seen more gracious belly flops in Olympic 10m diving.

None of the content was fresh other than Trump talking about his push to lower drug prices and Biden’s Roe v Wade attack on SCOTUS nominee Amy Coney Barrett. .

No doubt the media will pick the bones of the highlights and edit to fit whatever narrative they want to portray to say their man won. In reality, the content didn’t mean much. It was all noise.

If some were looking for dignity, they opened the wrong door. Trump was Trump. Typically boisterous and he cut in way too much meaning Joe Biden couldn’t get a word in edgeways.

Biden on the other hand was way better than the low expectations set. Sure he stuttered now and again as he rattled off his “here’s the deal” messages while staring down the camera but he came across far more statesmanlike. No question. But his script was tired and predictable.

Biden started strong on COVID but flailed on the economy, environment, taxes and riots/race. Trump nailed him on Biden’s lack of police endorsements.

Trump also muddled the response on condemning the KKK and white supremacists despite doing so explicitly in 2017. Saying “stand down, stand by” to the Proud Boys will no doubt be played on a loop. He should have been firm on it.

We could go on critiquing more minutiae but what is the point? Much of the back end was mud slinging. Slagging off Hunter Biden and his cocaine habit or Trump’s $750 income tax return charge.

We doubt many shifted from their default positions heading into the debate.

In summary, most can’t wait to get November 3rd behind them.

Clinton Foundation supposedly bought Khizr Khan for $375,000

img_8669

This US election campaign just keeps plunging new depths. Anonymous have hacked the bank account of lawyer Mr Khizr Khan, who spoke at the DNC (with his wife by his side) admonishing Trump for his bigoted views on Muslims and not knowing real sacrifice. It seems the Clinton Foundation has paid him $375,000 for ‘services.’

Now Clinton’s campaign is all over a leak that Trump recorded a tax loss of over $900mn. The question is whether he “broke a law”? As the late Kerry Packer said to a tribunal “anyone in this room that doesn’t try to minimize their tax ought to have the heads read!”  

Tax evasion is a serious crime. Tax avoidance is fair game. Sadly it’s usually only the wealthy that can afford tax lawyers who can find loopholes. The average taxpayer doesn’t make enough coin to exploit the same trade. Call it unfair but why not blame the guy who gets a massive tax break when he buys a Tesla paid for by the guy who mows his lawn from the back of a pick up?

You have to laugh at the moral equivalence bandied about by both sides. Is tax avoidance worse than paying bribes? Is a philandering husband worse than a man divorced 3 times? Is deleting emails and using bleachbit to cover evidence worse than screwing contractors on a tower? Is stating a case pledging support to idealistic Millennial Bernie Sander’s supporters after lying to them better than fat shaming someone who has turned out less pure than made out? It’s the two wrongs argument.

What gets me is many of my learned friends that are Democrats just will not admit that Clinton is highly unethical. I am happy to admit that Trump is not holier than though but I find him at least more in touch with reality on how bad things are in the US (his strongest card). I’d think more highly of Democrats for saying she is a disgrace but the lesser of two evils.

is it any wonder a recent Gallup poll suggested that 57% of US voters don’t want Trump or Clinton but a third major party.

I really wonder whether Trump releases both barrels at the next debate. Apparently Nigel Farage is coaching him. I don’t think anyone is unaware of his poison tongue so targeting her on her unethical behaviour which he failed to do  in debate 1 could bury what is left of her next to non existent credibility.