Quantcast
Connect with us

Conservative columnist says Trump could be ‘in for a rude awakening’ in the first presidential debate

Published

on

Chris Wallace (Screen Grab)

The first of three presidential debates is scheduled for this Tuesday, September 29 and will be moderated by Fox News’ Chris Wallace, who leans conservative but is by no means one of President Donald Trump’s mindless sycophants. Trump and his Democratic challenger, former Vice President Joe Biden, can both expect some hardball questions from the Fox News host.

ADVERTISEMENT

Conservative columnist Jennifer Rubin laid out how there are many issues on which Trump is vulnerable, suggesting questions on everything from the U.S. Supreme Court to health care.

It remains to be seen who Trump will nominate for the U.S. Supreme Court following the death of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, but it’s obvious that Trump and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell are determined to ram a far-right nominee through the U.S. Senate as quickly as possible. And Rubin’s suggested questions for the first debate include “Mr. President, have any of your Supreme Court nominees assured that they will vote in your favor? If so, on what issue?” and “Mr. President, are you certain the nominee is going to reverse Roe v. Wade? Or strike down the Affordable Care Act?”

Another question Rubin suggests for Wallace is, “Mr. President, do you want the next justice to vote to reverse same-sex marriage? Protection for gay and transgender rights under the Civil Rights Act?”

Rubin also recommends that Wallace ask Trump about what the Senate majority leader has described as the “McConnell Rule.” Following the death of Justice Antonin Scalia in 2016, President Barack Obama nominated Judge Merrick Garland for the Supreme Court — and McConnell refused to even consider Obama’s centrist nominee, insisting that under the “McConnell Rule,” it was unfair to vote on a Supreme Court nominee during a presidential election year. Trump agreed. But McConnell and Trump have flip-flopped on “the McConnell Rule” now that Trump is the one making a nomination ahead of a presidential election.

Despite her clear preference in the race, she doesn’t think Biden should be entirely let off easy. He must explain himself, too. She suggested asking: “Mr. Biden, how is your plan different than what Trump has done?” and “Mr. Biden, should you have ended rallies sooner? Do you think Trump is endangering his supporters?”

ADVERTISEMENT

Those would be good questions, as Biden not only needs to attack Trump’s record — he also needs to spell out, in detail, what he would do differently if elected president in November.

Wallace, Rubin explains, “released the following debate topics, each of which will get about 15 minutes in a 90-minute debate: the Trump and Biden records, the Supreme Court, COVID-19, the economy, race and violence in our cities, and the integrity of the election. Trump, who reportedly has not practiced for the debate, may be in for a rude awakening next week.”


Report typos and corrections to: [email protected].
READ COMMENTS - JOIN THE DISCUSSION
Continue Reading

2020 Election

‘Truly grotesque’: On way out the door, Trump prioritizes bringing back executions by firing squad and electrocution

Published

on

Among the slew of potentially destructive policy changes the Trump administration is rushing to implement on its way out of power is a rule that would authorize the return of electrocutions and firing squads for federal executions, an effort critics slammed as a twisted priority amid deadly public health and economic crises.

ProPublica reported Wednesday that the rule, first published in the Federal Register by the U.S. Justice Department in August, "has raced through the process with little notice but unusual speed—and deadly consequences."

"This rule could reintroduce firing squads and electrocutions for federal executions, giving the government more options for administering capital punishment as drugs used in lethal injections become unavailable," ProPublica noted. "The Justice Department surfaced the proposal in August and accepted public comments for only 30 days, instead of the usual 60. The rule cleared White House review on Nov. 6, meaning it could be finalized any day."

Continue Reading

2020 Election

Americans ‘won’t stand’ for election results not being honored: Biden

Published

on

US President-elect Joe Biden said Wednesday that Americans "won't stand" for the results of the November 3 election not being honored.

"Our democracy was tested this year," Biden said in a Thanksgiving Day address in his hometown of Wilmington, Delaware. "And what we learned is this: The people of this nation are up to the task.

"In America, we have full and fair and free elections, and then we honor the results," he said. "The people of this nation and the laws of the land won't stand for anything else."

Biden did not mention Donald Trump by name but he was clearly referring to the president's refusal to accept the results of the election.

Continue Reading
 

2020 Election

The strange truth about our Trump addiction

Published

on

Are we addicted to Donald Trump? It's a question that's haunting journalists and political commentators, most of whom hate Trump but cannot deny that his name drives traffic and ratings. Even though Trump lost the election and Joe Biden will be the next president, Trump continues to be the big attention draw for political websites and cable news networks.

Part of that is completely understandable. Trump is still big news. He literally spent the past few weeks attempting a coup. While he failed, that doesn't change the history-making fact that he even tried, or that he got so much support. Certainly Biden, whose main activity is finding boring-but-competent people to staff his administration, can't compete with that, and there's no real indication that he wants to. (Unlike Trump, Biden views governing as a job and not just an opportunity to get attention.)

Continue Reading