With the Harris versus Trump showdown in full effect, we’ve got an actual presidential race underway now. That being the case, we also have a glimpse into who has great plans for our next four years, and given what’s been put out by the candidate so far, one thing I can tell you is that Donald Trump’s plan for our national debt is just like his business dealings an utter disaster. 45 proposed tax cuts would add 4 trillion in debt over the next four decades, costing us far more in debt than it would boost in terms of revenue. All the while, Kamala Harris proposes a budget strategy that would reduce the deficit by trillions of dollars, largely by taxing the rich. Now, if you are fiscal minded Well, or you’re maybe just somebody who cares about our national debt, you should probably vote blue, particularly given how the looming societal shift is about to erupt when it comes to economics in our country. So let’s talk numbers. The federal debt, it’s hovering around 35 trillion, and Trump, well, him and Biden added about the same amount in terms of debt, but neither of those men were entering the administration that was at a tipping point. The next president will be dealing with a surge in deficits brought on, in part because of baby boomers. They’re going to be retiring, and they’re going to be sucking Social Security and Medicare dry. In fact, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office predicts that the national debt will leap from 35 to 57 trillion over the next decade. That is regardless of whether we get new tax cuts or spending programs. Basically, we’re approaching a pinch, and the priority must be reduction. But that’s not what Trump does. He trumps everything up, including costs. He’s proposed various tax cuts with the idea of appealing to voters struggling financially, but even if he were to come through on his promises, the costs would be enormous for the country. For example, Trump proposes to eliminate taxes on Social Security benefits for retirees, also on tips issued to waiters and rideshare drivers. He also wants to cut corporate income tax down from 21% to 15% altogether. Trump’s proposed cuts would reduce federal revenue by some 7 trillion, causing the national debt to climb. Trump’s proposals to use what cryptocurrency to slash $35 trillion in debt is shenanigans, given that all the Bitcoin in the world doesn’t amount to even one and a half trillion dollars. Hard stop. It’s evident that this man is simply saying things that he thinks voters want to hear so he can get into office. But Trump’s not looking out for our nation’s best interest, nor is he proposing changes that are even plausible. If he were well, he’d be looking to tax the rich, much like Kamala Harris is looking to do. The Manhattan Institute looked at avenues for taxing the rich, meaning the 1% who make more than $686,000 each year, and it found that by raising taxes on individual income, capital gains, estate tax and other corporate tax rates, the government could see nearly 7 trillion of our federal deficit reduced. That’s enough to stabilize the debt over the long haul, there are many ways in which we, the people, can secure our future financially without running into extreme debt. Trump is not looking to make our financial future a priority or secure. He’s just looking out for his own just like he showed us when he was president, and he hauled in 2.4 billion during his four years in office, at least 160 million, of which came from foreign countries, according to Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, and we know the allegations that Trump was selling government documents and secrets abroad, this man will Sell us and our economy down the river without looking back, we the people, must remember that come November 5, we.

One thing you hear a lot from voters during election years is how they supposedly want the candidates to lay off the personal attacks against each other and spend more time talking about the issues. Yeah, right, that could be one of those things that voters like to say to appear highbrow when they really enjoy it, when one politician punches another in the nose, rhetorically, of course, in any case, if the issue at hand happens to be the combustible topic of immigration, it may just be a smart strategy to stay away from talking about it altogether. For one thing, elected officials tend to find it very difficult to thread the needle between being tough and compassionate. For another, this is one of those debates that’s all or nothing, black or white, with no room for nuance or common sense. Then there’s the fact that everyone seems to have their own solution, and they’re not the least bit interested in hearing anyone else’s and finally, the immigration issue is so emotionally charged and likely to offend that politicians tend to be vague or elusive or creative in the rewriting of history. We saw some of those tendencies play out during the Democratic National Convention in Chicago.

You would think that Democrats would start out with an advantage when talking about immigration, because they’re lucky enough to have that one essential characteristic. They’re not Republicans as such, they’re not talking about how immigrants are to cough up the bile of former President Donald Trump, quote, poisoning the blood of America, or threatening to deport 10 million or so undocumented immigrants and whoever else ends up caught up in the net when it comes to immigration. Democrats are not evil, but they’re not honest either. Most of the time. They’re tied up in knots and contradictions. They try to have it both ways. They want to please both labor unions that want less immigration and Latino organizations that want more. It’s no wonder that the part of Democratic presidential nominee Kamala Harris’s acceptance speech that briefly touched on immigration sounded like it was written to be delivered in fantasy land. Quote, I know we can live up to our proud heritage as a nation of immigrants and reform our broken immigration system. Harris said we can create an earned pathway to citizenship and secure our border America. We must also be steadfast in advancing our security and our values abroad. End quote, so Democrats like Harris promised different things to different groups and hope that no one pulls an old interview or connects the dots or calls out a flip flop or connects a falsehood. Just look at former President Barack Obama, who, at 63 seemed to be having a senior moment at the DNC in his own speech to delegates and the nation, he veered briefly into a few remarks about immigration and then promptly forgot his own record, referring to Harris and vice presidential nominee Tim Walsh. Obama vouched for their compassionate approach to the issue. Quote, they understand that we can secure our borders without tearing children away from their parents. Obama said, great, but in turn, who can vouch for Obama? Nobody. The 44th president, tore kids away from their parents, both at the border and in the interior as he went about deporting 3 million people, a grotesque achievement for which he earned the moniker deporter in chief. Some of those kids wound up housed in cages on the US Mexico border, and others were dumped into the foster care system, where they got snatched up by American couples and never saw their biological parents again.

But hey, at least you don’t hear Democrats viewing the kind of harsh rhetoric we hear from Republicans. I mean, that would be cruel, you.

Well, we have a very interesting situation, given that there are still a couple of months until the presidential election, there are reports that the Trump campaign is abandoning New Hampshire, determining at this relatively early stage that they just can’t win, that Kamala Harris will win New Hampshire, numerous Trump officials, including volunteer Tom mountain, are saying it’s over. We’ve gotta leave it. Let’s focus on Pennsylvania instead. Now there are multiple interpretations of this, and I wanna go over them with you, also multiple interpretations of the fact that Donald Trump is reducing spending in North Carolina by several million dollars per month. And with all of these stories, with all of these news items, it’s really important to consider, what’s my reaction immediately about what this means, but is there another interpretation? Because with all of these situations, there is. So let’s talk about New Hampshire first, the most important takeaway about the New Hampshire situation is that Trump won in 2016 without winning New Hampshire, Hillary Clinton won it, and Trump lost in 2020 without winning New Hampshire. Joe Biden won it. So on the one hand, it would be an understandable reaction to say, Wow, if New Hampshire already looks so bad that Trump’s bailing from a political campaign standpoint, this must look terrible for Trump nationally. That may be true, but we don’t know that yet, and since Trump can wait, Trump has won and lost without New Hampshire before. It actually may be a very astute and shrewd reallocation of resources to say, win or lose. New Hampshire is not winner lose. Pennsylvania does appear to be winner loser, at least, is far more likely to be win or lose. Let’s reallocate resources there. So if your thought was, well, maybe I won’t vote if I’m voting in New Hampshire. Maybe I don’t have to worry about the outcome of this race, because Trump’s abandoning New Hampshire. That is very much the wrong interpretation, and it is that that that’s a caveat emptor buyer beware interpretation, which could lead to Trump getting four more years. Now I do want to mention one other aspect to this. There is kind of a kooky scenario where if Trump does win New Hampshire, and then a couple other states, I believe, I believe, don’t hold me to it, but it’s something like, if Trump gets New Hampshire, Michigan and Wisconsin, you can have a 269 to 269 tie. So it is true that there is a scenario in which New Hampshire is the difference maker. It’s just considered a very unlikely scenario. It’s considered an under 1% chance of that scenario happening. So it’s not that New Hampshire can’t make the difference it’s that it almost certainly will not second, uh, campaign happening very much worthy of some interpretation. There was, there were reporting. There were reports that Trump is cutting spending from August to September in North Carolina by several million dollars. And again, the initial instinct might be to say, Wow, if he’s bailing on North Carolina, then that must certainly mean that it’s very bad, or that here’s the important thing to understand about North Carolina, the fact that Trump is even spending money in North Carolina is really the important bit of news. North Carolina, for some time, has been a state where it’s been sort of assumed it’s out of reach for the Democratic candidate. And while some are saying, Oh, that what does it mean that Trump’s cutting spending? Does it? Is he cutting spending because he’s got it in the bag? Is he cutting spending because he’s bailing? It’s none of the above. North Carolina still very much leaning Trump, but it’s in play, at least since Joe Biden was replaced by Kamala Harris. The North Carolina take away. That is most interesting to me is that this time around, Trump actually has to go and fight for it. Now what’s the 30,000 foot view on all of this stuff? It does not matter. We must get out and vote. And this is why these sorts of following the national polling versus the battleground polling, versus the political spending versus the donations. It’s all fascinating. It’s all interesting. There’s historical implications, cultural implications, about the future of the country politically. I don’t deny that for a second, the risk is that hearing any one of these little bits and pieces gets voters to say, oh, you know what? X, state doesn’t need my vote, I will stay home. That’s the risk. Now, is it likely that if a Democrat stays home in California, it will impact who wins that state? No, it’s not likely, because there’s a millions of vote margin for Democrats in California. More relevant though, New Hampshire, North Carolina, Georgia, Arizona, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Michigan, Ohio, to some degree, no matter what our assessment is about, what’s going to happen, the only action that we really have control over is, do we go out and vote? I can’t determine. How will trump spending in October? Impact turnout. What I can control is, am I voting and am I convincing people I know about the importance of voting and making sure that they do so. 

Yeah, okay, the emperor has no clothes, ladies and gentlemen, all of the pop, the fizzle, the WoW of Donald Trump has well gone. Why? Because propaganda always has a limited life force. You see, My grandmama taught me that the truth may walk slow and a lie may run fast, because the lie has a limited time to live, but the truth will endure forever. So at some point there’s a reckoning, is what my grandmother meant, and you’re seeing that reckoning right now with the Donald Trump campaign. They are out of ideas. They are not fresh. They’re not solving any problems. Their poll numbers are dwindling by the day, and it’s against the candidate who, yeah, did not even run a Democratic primary at all. That’s not an indictment on Kamala Harris, the Vice President. It’s an indictment on the lack of substance and the lack of popularity of Trump. What is his latest claim? The latest claim is that it was perfectly legal. It was perfectly within his right to interfere in a presidential election. No, it wasn’t. You see, he’s saying this, in my opinion, because when he did his interview on Fox News and basically admitted to the thing he’s still charged with, and his co conspirators are charged with, he said this because he’s attempting to nullify the jury, the upcoming juries that he will be, well, the target, and if he can convince people somehow, well, you know, yeah, I interfere with the election. But, but why is that illegal? My popularity went up. I was able to gain more poll numbers, yes, as if somehow, just because people like the fact you do a crime, somehow negates you from being responsible for the crime you did. Donald Trump has admitted he interfered with the election. We know that statutory laws existed prior to him doing so. So the law was clear. Nobody made up new laws just to prosecute Donald Trump. These laws on the books, these laws of both state and federal and Trump knew, or should have known, that engaging in this kind of conduct was, well, frankly, against the law. The reality is this, Donald Trump doesn’t care about the US Constitution. He does not care about the role of democracy. He doesn’t care about veterans. He doesn’t care about those who are currently serving. He doesn’t care about POWs. He only cares about himself. He barely cares about his family. He only cares about him. So now you have a charlatan who promotes well family values but has none. He becomes the standard bearer for the party, but he cannot bear the standard he has taken the Republican Party and he has ripped you all into shreds. And the reality is this also, it is your fault that you allowed a wrecking ball to come in and basically hijack what you had. I need a strong Republican Party. Yes, I’m a progressive, but you know why I need a strong Republican Party? Because I need there to be a level of competition among the voting ranks. You know, Democrats can get away with anything because they’re not Trump. So they don’t have to really serve, hyper serve, let’s say, the minority community or progressive issues. Because What other choice do we have? We can’t vote for Trump. Maga is a clown. We can’t go with the clown show. So we’re left with this with, well, Democrats to give lip service to progressive ideology, but then do nothing. Time out for that. So I’m actually standing with conservative saying, take your damn party back. Take it back from the Maga clowns who took it over. It is time. I.

Music, check, check.

The way that Donald Trump chooses to take on his opponents is unlike anything we’ve ever seen in the mainstream political sphere. He is cruel, he’s racist, he’s sexist, he is an unapologetic criminal, and over the years, said opponents have tried different tactics to shut them down, primarily taking the When they go low, we go high, approach popularized by Michelle Obama in 2016

Hillary Clinton, as an example, often responded directly to Trump’s sexist attacks during her presidential campaign, she aimed to counteract them with detailed rebuttals. Barack Obama chose to address such comments by highlighting their divisiveness and advocating for unity. But comma, she is doing something very different. In her recent appearances, notably her sit down interview with CNN Dana Bash, she has taken a refreshingly dismissive tone towards Donald Trump’s pointed racism and misogyny, taking on a confident and, dare I say, humorous approach that is proving to be exactly what we needed. Insert clip of Dana Bash interview.

She makes him so small, his attacks so lame and infantile, and yet she also manages to neatly turn the conversation towards issues that actually affect us all this rhetoric she’s saying is is a ridiculous distraction. She’s sucking the air out of his attacks, depriving them of the attention that they’re seeking. Love.

It look,

look racist and sorry.

Music look racist and misogynistic. Attacks have long been used in politics to undermine the credibility and authority of people of color and of women of color in particular.

And Kamala Harris as the first woman, first black woman, and first person of South Asian descent to hold the office of Vice President. Yeah, she challenges traditional power dynamics, making her an obvious prime target for such attacks.

Trump’s goal with these attacks, from what I can see, is to dehumanize the individuals he targets, to undermine their professional achievements and qualifications. For Kamala Harris, the point is to polarize the electorate, framing her candidacy as illegitimate despite her extensive experience and accomplishments. Harris’ strategy, however, aligns with broader trends favoring authenticity and resilience in our political leaders, in an era where voters are increasingly skeptical of political posturing. Harris’s tactic of just refusing to take Trump’s bait and redirecting the conversation to policy issues resonates with the public fatigued by political drama.

Also, and most importantly, she is an incredibly qualified political candidate, and he knows it.

So does she

unbothered like a queen, as the kids would say, I love to see this as a political strategy, and I have to say I am also loving this as a parent. What a woman, what a lesson in how to intelligently, elegantly and effectively take down a bully. I.

With Israel attacking Gaza, anti semitism has been on the rise everywhere. Hate speech abounds as well. Many anti war protesters exercising their speech rights are being unfairly labeled anti semitic simply for speaking out against Israel or showing solidarity with Palestinians. And notwithstanding, freedoms of press, a number of journalists have been arrested for simply documenting police handling of those protesters. As a professor of Media Law, I can confirm that our society is on the First Amendment struggle bus, and it is careening toward utter chaos. The charges recently filed against New York City video journalist Sam Seligson is case in point. In early August, prosecutors charged selaga sin with criminal mischief plus a felony hate crime enhancement. And why? Well, because he was present when pro Palestine protesters graffitied people’s homes. The credentialed independent videographer filmed a small group of people when they spray painted anti Zionist slogans on the home of a Brooklyn museum director and others associated with the museum, who is being accused of mistreating pro Palestinian protesters. But Seleka sin didn’t spray paint or vandalize property, nor is he being accused of doing so on that June night in NYC, Celica sin just did his job. He documented the events as a journalist, the fact that he’s facing prosecution with a hate crime enhancement should have anyone who cares about fighting anti semitism or protecting free press up in arms if we don’t stop unjustified weaponization of anti semitism and unwarranted prosecution of journalism our society as a whole will suffer. Foremost, let’s talk weaponization of anti semitism. Those objecting to the war in Gaza or supporting Palestinians are not de facto anti semitic. In fact, a number of those fighting against the attacks in Gaza are Jewish. Yet individuals are still pushing this false and dangerous de facto narrative to silence others so that they disregard the substance of their concerns. This weaponization of anti semitism is incredibly problematic because it intensifies discrimination against marginalized communities, including members of the Jewish community. Claiming that objection to Israel alone is inherently anti Jewish waters down instances of actual anti semitism, making individuals more blase about hate that in turn makes it far more difficult to fight anti semitism, which is extremely important now. FBI data in 2023 shows that 55% of all religion based hate crimes are driven by anti Jewish bias, and according to the survey of attitudes about anti semitism, US and Jewish adults, nearly half of Jewish respondents said that they have had to change their behavior due to fear. Anti semitism is a serious problem. We cannot afford to have it diluted or disregarded because of undue weaponization, particularly when that weaponization impacts the Fourth Estate,

freedom of the press. It’s a cornerstone of our democracy. It is essential to hold our government to account. Yet attacks on press freedom have been skyrocketing over the past year and worldwide, from Gaza to Sudan to Russia, journalists are being slaughtered, silenced for reporting, corruption, civil war, genocide. We rely on journalists to shed light on truth, tell stories and document events. We must protect them, no matter the nation they’re from or in and in the United States, well, we claim to be the beacon of free press, but hey, that’s not the case. It’s just the opposite playing out when law enforcement attacks journalists, according to the US press freedom tracker, in the past six months, 34 journalists have been arrested or charged criminally. 44 have been assaulted while covering the Gaza war protests. These individuals were just doing their jobs, like selighan says he was no one suggesting tagging private property is lawful, or that anti semit, anti Zionism is anti semitism, not at all. The problem is that we cannot become a society that is so intent on silencing certain messages that we harm marginalized communities and erode the fourth estate in the process.

There has to be room in politics for decency. There has to be room in politics for decency. And while we’re on the subject, we could use more civility, empathy, manners, kindness and compassion and to make room for all these things we can and should cut out a bunch of crap we don’t need arrogance, cruelty, bullying, superiority and mockery. In short, Americans need to dial back our passion for things that don’t mean anything, issues and policies and partisanship, and spend a lot of time improving something that means a lot how we treat people. What brings all this to mind is something that should have to be considered one of the greatest heists of all time. It happened at the Democratic National Convention in Chicago, where on the night that Minnesota Governor Tim Walz, the Democratic vice presidential nominee, was tasked with giving a speech to introduce himself to the nation, the show was stolen by Waltz’s 17 year old son, Gus, as the governor got to the part in his remarks where he said how much he loved his wife Gwen and their two children, hope and Gus, the camera cut away to his son, who was clapping loudly and had tears streaming down his face. Suddenly. Gus, overcome with emotion, jumped to his feet, pointed at the stage and yelled out with pride, that’s my dad. That’s my dad as a dad myself, in fact, one with a 17 year old son who’s running a video camera right now, I can’t watch that clip or even think about that episode without tearing up. Who could find anything wrong with a sweet moment like that? Republicans, that’s who some of them took to talk radio, social media, political podcasts. To make fun of Gus someone described a teenager as blathering. They had to know that this moment was political gold for the Democrats, and so they did everything they could to try and tarnish it. How ironic that they were the ones who wound up getting tarnished after it was revealed that Gus is no ordinary 17 year old. He has what is known as a nonverbal learning disorder that puts him on the autism spectrum.

As soon as that fact got out, the conservative trolls well, they started to retreat. They started to delete their posts picking on someone with a learning disability. That’s not a good look. And heaven knows, the GOP already has enough bad looks. Now, to be fair, this is how ugly politics has become in 2024 and ugliness is a two way street. No one is innocent and no party is any better than the others. If Walt’s were a Republican and the exact same episode it played out at the Republican National Convention, I can promise you that Democrats would joke about it. They never met a Republican family. They didn’t beat up on or make fun of from the bushes to the Palins to the vances. Yet that doesn’t change anything. It certainly doesn’t let off the hook those disgusting human beings who, at one of those moments that define who a person is or isn’t, couldn’t manage to suppress their juvenile instinct to make fun of someone they perceive to be different and weak and easy to prey upon.

And these trolls are Maga people who support Trump Vance. Well, it sure looks that way.

In that case, there must be some misunderstanding. You see, politics, politics is about addition, not subtraction. The goal is to be likable, not detestable. What’s

the political upside for Trump supporters to reveal themselves to be even more hateful than we thought they were.

What is Team Trump trying to do here? Win an Election or dominate an unlikeability contest? If they keep up their antics, they can forget all about the first but there’ll be a shoe in for the second.

What.

Will Donald Trump actually debate Kamala Harris? That’s my question for you today. Now, there’s a bunch of interesting things to consider here. On a personal level, I want to see this debate. Call me selfish, say it’s about have a personal interest to live stream the debate to what will certainly be a huge audience. Putting all that aside, I want to see this debate to see how different the dynamic is when it’s Kamala Harris up there, a notably younger, more energetic, more intelligent, better on the issues candidate than Donald Trump, and certainly much more ready to go than Joe Biden was. So I want to see it right. Let’s put aside I want to see this debate, and that’s part of my motivator for wanting it to happen. There’s a real question as to why Trump really wouldn’t debate. In other words, Trump loves publicity. Oh, ABC is unfair to me. Trump loves publicity, and Trump’s bias is to any publicity is good publicity. So for Trump to be considering not debating, he must, to some degree, fear that this debate could be a very bad thing for him as far as the election goes furthering this belief is that he knows debates that go well can be really good for him, because look back to June 27 the June 27 debate, despite the fact that Trump lied his way through it right? If it weren’t for Joe Biden failing to have a good debate performance, more people would have noticed the disastrous, lie riddled, glitch filled, Trump debate performance. But Trump knows debates can be beneficial, because the June 27 debate was so bad for Biden and so good for Trump that it led to the polling shifting towards Trump, and Biden saying, I’m actually getting out of this race. So Trump knows the upside is so big that you can take a commanding lead of the election and knock out your opponent if it goes well. So for doubly so, if Trump is now considering at I don’t know that I’m going to do it. It’s because, to some degree, he must suspect. He must know when he sees Kamala Harris, when he sees the video of Kamala Harris questioning Brett Kavanaugh during his confirmation hearings to the Supreme Court when she was in the Senate, when he sees the energy behind her, he must suspect to some degree, that this could really backfire and be a very bad thing for him. What this gets us to is in practice, if Trump doesn’t show up this time, what would it do with the primary? Trump, straight up, didn’t debate. Didn’t matter. He had control in the lion’s share of the support from the Republican primary voters. He easily won the primary, even though it was by smaller and smaller margins in the later primaries, because Nikki Haley was picking up support, he didn’t need to debate, and the proof is in the fact that he still won the primary easily. Now I believe that the net effect of Trump not debating would probably be negative. I interviewed former Trump White House communications director Anthony Scaramucci recently, and Anthony Scaramucci said that while he expects Trump to debate because he’s desperate for attention, that if Trump didn’t debate, even in front of his some of his core audience, he would, and the phrase Anthony used was self emasculate. I think that there are lots of Trump cultists who are such hardcore believers that if Trump doesn’t debate, they will stick with him and they will say, No, he was right not to debate a, b, c is biased. It’s all unfair. It was setting up Kamala Harris to look better. He was right not to debate. But we know from polling that there is a growing skepticism, certainly from independents who are now supporting Kamala Harris by plus nine over Trump, which is the margin that Biden had in 2020 over Trump were already there risk of getting completely blown out among independents of this continues for Trump. There is a growing slice of Republicans skeptical of Trump, but they really don’t like Kamala Harris. Who are going to see Trump make the decision not to debate, if that’s the decision he makes, and they will say now, now this, he’s just afraid, I can’t vote for a guy who is this afraid of just showing up and debating Kamala Harris? They may not switch to Kamala Harris, this group of voters, but they very well may stay home. So I don’t know to what degree Trump is seriously considering not showing up, but my calculation, based on everything I’m seeing, reading and all of the data that we have. Is that while there are many folks who would not care if Donald Trump were to stay home and not debate, there are plenty that would and it’s too big a risk for Trump to take. Let me know what you think I.

Watching the DNC, all I could think of was how happy the Trump campaign must be that Michelle Obama appears to have zero desire to get into politics herself. I’m excited to see how Kamala handles this potential debate, don’t get me wrong, but I think Michelle would give the man one silent look and he’d wither away like Voldemort. 

Her speech at the DNC was applauded across the board, and was notable for a plethora of reasons, but perhaps none more so than her evolution in tone. Remember “when they go low, we go high”? Now we “do something.”

Michelle is not here for Trump’s BS anymore. And this shift in tone reflects the urgency of the moment: It’s time, she’s saying, to move beyond rhetoric, into decisive action. It’s time, in other words, to stop whining.

When Michelle introduced “When they go low, we go high” during the 2016 DNC – remember that? I’ve aged thirty years since then. She delivered the phrase in support of Hillary Clinton, and it quickly became a guiding principle for the party – this call to respond to negativity8 with grace and dignity. 

In an interview with Stephen Colbert, she explained ”going high” means channeling one’s anger into purposeful actions that aim to unite rather than divide. She emphasized that resorting to “going low” is ultimately unsustainable and ineffective in solving the underlying issues. Which…yes. 

But 2016 was a very different political landscape, and in 2024 Michelle’s messaging took a notable turn. In last week’s speech, oh, she did not shy away from criticizing the former President, suggesting that his view was narrow, fear-mongering, born from insecurity, and above all deeply and inexcusably self-serving. She also got in some fantastic zingers.

[Insert “black jobs” clip]

Despite this shift in tone, her message remains the same: Preserve hope, take positive action. It’s less of a departure than an evolution, and it couldn’t have come at a more crucial moment. In a time where political divisiveness often paralyzes progress, her message pushes for constructive actions that lead to real solutions.

In this wild socio-political climate, we’re all looking around for the grownups in the room, and to be provided with not just concrete steps to action, but something to actually feel good about…it’s giving me…

What was that, Oprah?

OPRAH: Joy!

That’s what I’m talking about.

The United States has plenty of issues going on such that I will sometimes forget to check across the pond. And while I just did, and it is quite disturbing, what’s going on there, there’s an astounding wave of anti immigrant hate going on across Europe now, while I am somewhat used to France burning it all down in opposition to political measures, this is different. Citizens of the UK and other nations are causing mass disorder and chaos, assaulting immigrants, asylum seekers and other nonwhite individuals. Now this anger appears to be fueled by scarcity. Mentalities among economic decline in the EU jobs are scarce, healthcare and other social services are overextended, so unfortunately, we’re seeing a far right make immigrants an easy target. Now, social media is also playing a big role in spreading misinformation and stoking races like those who attacked a Rotherham England hotel housing asylum seekers earlier this month. Things are so bad that the EU formally asked Elon Musk to censor Donald Trump during a scheduled conversation between the two that’s running on the platform X. The EU can’t even handle divisive rhetoric from a convicted criminal 5000 miles away, between white supremacists and far right wingers rioting in the streets, torching cars and unleashing heinous attacks online. It is evident that the most vulnerable in the UK are not okay, and things are only going to get worse for them and other marginalized peoples across the globe if Donald Trump returns to the White House, that’s why we must vote blue. The US presidential election may happen within these 50 states and several territories, but its profound implications are felt across the border. Experts are predicting that the economy in Europe would take a significant hit if the dawn takes office again during his last term, trade tensions between the US and EU flared with Trump instituting tariffs on European steel and aluminum, impacting auto imports, only for the EU to hit back with tariffs on US goods, according to Goldman Sachs Analyst, well, Trump has pledged to impose an across the board, 10% tariff on all US imports, including from Europe, which would likely lead to a sharp increase in trade policy uncertainty, as it did in 2018 and 2019 that’s a costly problem for Europe that would likely exacerbate the attacks on immigrants who are currently under attack. Trump is also expected to slash, if not entirely, cut, US aid for Ukraine. The US is a main provider of monetary support to Ukraine right now, and Congress has given the country at least what some $70 billion toward weapons alone since the war began. So how do you think that cutting Ukraine’s funding would work for their war against Russia, or for Ukrainian asylum seekers in the EU did I also mention that Trump says that he won’t help NATO countries that aren’t meeting the 2% defense spending requirement, so those EU countries will have to redirect funds toward military spending or operate without us contributions. That sounds also like it’ll be quite costly beyond the economics, though. We also must bear in mind that having yet another far right leader in the world is scary, as they seem to want to dismantle their respective state for the professed benefit of white Susette glory. Just look at Viktor Orban, the Prime Minister of Hungary, or Italy’s Maloney and so on the far right is on the rise. A second Trump administration brings significant geopolitical harm, the impact of which will be felt by those who are most vulnerable, namely immigrants. So when November comes, it is important that we keep in mind that our vote isn’t just about our government. It’s going to impact far more than us. It will have an impact around the world and.