Trump: Disgusting "disser"-in-chief

Chalk up another disgusting comment by the "disser"-in-chief, Donald Trump.

The self-proclaimed champion of US Vets and the Armed Forces has insulted the most deserving and decorated of Americans by calling the (civilian) Presidential Medal of Freedom "actually much better" than the Congressional Medal of Honor, given to recipients for distinguishing themselves "conspicuously by gallantry and intrepidity at the risk of (their lives) above and beyond the call of duty." Trump made the offensive comment to cozy-up to a megadonor upon whom he had bestowed the Presidential Medal of Freedom when he was in office. 

PFC Milton L. Olive, III,
a true American hero

Those such awardees, obviously in Trump's eyes, surpass risking their lives "above and beyond the call of duty," and his own disgusting morals are revealed in those he has recognized: inflammatory/defamatory political commentator Rush Limbaugh, divisive US Rep. Jim Jordan, and the man who is currently running Trump's Truth Social media platform into the ground, former US Rep. Devin Nunes.

But here's a pair of those brave soldiers whose actions and awards Trump considers inferior to the accomplishments of Limbaugh and Jordan and Nunes: US Army Private First Class Milton L. Olive, III (the first African American to receive the Congressional Medal of Honor) who, during the Vietnam War (at age 18), covered a grenade, giving his own life to protect his fellow soldiers; and Trump-given recipient, Delta Force Sgt. Thomas Payne, who continued reentering a burning, collapsing building under enemy fire to rescue dozens of hostages being held by the Islamic State.

Again, in Trump's view, the valor of Limbaugh, who spread political conspiracy theories and called women "femi-nazis," or the heroism of Rep. Jim Jordan refusing to comply with a subpoena from the January 6 Committee (or, for that matter, even remembering if or when or how much he spoke to Donald Trump on January 6), or the bravery shown by Devin Nunes with his earlier and current promotion of lies that work towards benefitting Trump, outshines that of all the Medal of Honor recipients. 

When you add this latest disrespect to Trump's resume, it certainly paints a deservedly unflattering picture. Trump's one-time Chief of Staff General John Kelly confirmed Trump wouldn't visit US soldier graves in France because he said the fallen were "losers." Trump also said POWs weren't heroes because they had been captured. He's suggested the execution of the country's top general. When running for President in 2016, he claimed to know more than all the generals. Trump (even to this day) shamelessly claims credit for the VA Choice Act to help US Veterans, despite it having been passed under Obama.

And Trump's current lap/attack dog, VP pick JD Vance continues to disparage the 24 years of National Guard service by Harris VP pick Tim Walz.

It's all a pattern of behavior and beliefs of Donald J. Trump that shows disrespect for those in the US Armed Forces.

And it's disgusting.

And, by extension, so is he.

Trump better HOPE VPs don't matter...

"I think this is well documented historically, the vice president, in terms of the election, does not have any impact. No impact."

There's no bandage big enough to cover
Trump's real misfortune, tabbing Vance for VP

So, saith Donald Trump during his amazingly off-the-deep-end rant at the National Association of Black Journalists (in which he also disparaged the racial identity of his Presidential opponent, Vice President Kamala Harris).

Well, Donald--despite what the GOP and your MAGA faithful believe--saying something does NOT make it true. 

And, it appears, Trump better pray that the VP actually has no impact when it comes to the case of his train wreck of a pick, Ohio's freshman US Senator JD Vance.

Since being named Trump's VP pick, Vance's favorability ratings have been sinking (even more dramatically than Trump's poll numbers against Harris). Before the GOP convention in Milwaukee, Vance scored even on the favorability ratings in several polls. Once he opened his mouth as Trump's pick, however, that all changed.

By the time the RNC closed up shop in Milwaukee, Vance was already -3 on the favorability/unfavorability polls (unheard of for a VP pick following a convention). Since then, the reappearance of Vance's "childless cat lady" comments from 2021, or having said no exceptions to abortion bans, or having compared his boss to Hitler, or publicly hearing from Trump himself that VPs have no impact, Vance's unfavorability currently outpaces his favorability by more than nine points.

And now that Vance is acting as Trump's attack dog on the campaign trail (in place of Trump, who seems to be avoiding the campaign grind himself), he's continued to disparage Harris's race and qualifications and now has started in on her VP pick, MN Governor Tim Walz, trying to smear his 24 years of distinguished service in the US National Guard.

Unlike Vance, though, Walz hasn't spent his time alienating Black voters, or women, or US Veterans.

In fact, Walz's poll numbers are surging (as are Harris's), up from 1 point favorable in July to 11 points in the favorability rating, as of yesterday.

As we know, Trump saying January 6 criminals are "patriots," or immigrants are "criminals," or the 2016 election was "stollen," or Obama wasn't born in the US, or Biden's a crook, or Harris doesn't identify as Black, or even that Senator Ted Cruz's father was involved in the JFK assassination, just doesn't make such statements true.

But Trump better hope like hell that his statement about VPs having no impact on the election is the one thing he says that finally--FINALLY--turns out to be true.

Or else his electoral chances are REALLY screwed.

The curious VP pick of Tim Walz

The results of the Harris Veepstakes are in. The winner? Minnesota Governor Tim Walz.

MN Governor Tim Walz--a good man,
a capable leader. and way left-of-center

So, um, huh?

It's possible Harris may have overplayed her hand by choosing a Progressive over a Moderate.

Don't get me wrong, there are some things for Democrats to like about Walz on the ticket: he brings executive experience as Governor, he's a National Guard veteran, and he's enacted all sorts of legislation in his state that polls show are important issues nationally (especially among Dems)--"red flag" gun laws, increasing funding for education and infrastructure, codifying abortion rights. And, I'm not exactly sure how, but he's also managed to cut taxes for most of his constituents.

So, why my confusion about Walz as Harris's running mate?

Well, for starters, Minnesota isn't a swing state (as are the homes of other Harris VP finalists, Arizona's Senator Mark Kelly, and Pennsylvania Governor Josh Shapiro), so his selection doesn't bring any immediate electoral advantage, in that regard.

Secondly, the above-mentioned accomplishments of Walz's tenure--despite being popular in nationwide polling (and also gibing very well with Harris's beliefs)--are also pretty liberal ideas even for a ticket headed by the left of-center Harris,* one that is ostensibly trying to bring aboard Trump-averse right-of-center moderates (Note: most of Walz's passed legislation came with the help of a completely Democratic state assembly).

And some of Walz's other legislative wins can read as even more so (especially for many moderate voters): increasing payroll tax to fund paid childcare and medical leave, increasing state commitment to clean energy, granting voting rights to convicted felons, legalization of recreational marijuana, making Minnesota a haven for transgender rights and care.

As my wife asked me, "Exactly how does that appeal to moderates, how does that unite the country?"

That's a great question.

It doesn't. It essentially doubles down on a left-of-center agenda. And it doesn't exactly (in my opinion) expand the Harris tent (which would have easily invited in those fence-sitting, Trump-hating moderates with someone such as pro-gun, but anti-gun violence/from-a-border-state/former astronaut Mark Kelly).

Of course, pretty much all Democrats laud Walz's selection. Some, like hard-to-please WV Senator Joe Manchin praise his "normality." Others, like former President Obama cheer his character and his desire to "serve all of the people." Some claim Walz--who coined the GOP moniker "weird"--will serve wonderfully as Harris's "attack dog" on the Trump/Vance ticket.

But some, such as former Obama political strategist/CNN commentator David Axelrod (and, again, my wife) compare such a leftist choice to that of Trump's ultra-right wing pick of JD Vance (although Walz currently polls higher in favorability)--neither of which seems to attempt to appeal to moderates in that "big tent."

But it's the hand that Democrats now hold.

And Harris and the Dems (and democracy-loving citizens everywhere) have got to hope that the moderates they could have so much better courted find the Trump/Vance conservative ticket distasteful enough to cast their ballot for a pair of left-of-center liberals* 

*Signifies correction of mischaracterization of Harris as a Progressive in original post. Hat tip to capper.

Quick take: Racist Trump's birther lies were inevitable

As perhaps the easiest prediction outside of "the sun will rise tomorrow," Donald Trump has rolled out his birther lies about VP Kamala Harris (allowing his equally morally-bankrupt Conservative pals to do the heavy lifting).

Trump's not fooling anyone--the
man behind the racist mask is him

So, on X, one can find copies of Harris's birth certificate that list her parents as immigrants, accompanied by the cry that she CAN'T run for President (conveniently ignoring the part in the US Constitution that gives citizenship for all born in this country). The certificate clearly states Harris was born in California (which, at last check, is part of the US). 

I don't want to brag, but the day after Biden removed himself from the Presidential race, I wrote:

How long, for instance, before Trump amplifies another birther accusation against an opponent (especially one born of two immigrants)?

And, just like his lies against about Obama's birthplace or questioning Nikki Haley's citizenship because of immigrant parents, these birther lies are designed to diminish and derogate the qualifications and accomplishments of people of color. 

In other words, it's straight-up racism.

And Trump does that--along with purposely mispronouncing "Kamala" (or the given Indian first name of Haley), or not denouncing his GOP pals who call Harris a "DEI hire," or by saying "Harris just happened to turn Black"--for one reason, and one reason alone:

Trump's a racist.

And so are all those that join him or defend Trump and his indefensible comments.

And whether such disgusting comments are meant to gin up his rabid, immigrant-hating/fearing white base, or meant to cast aspersions on someone's racial identity in the seriously misguided belief that it will pry Black voters away from Harris, again, Trump does it for one reason:

Trump's a racist.

And I called it.

Oh, and the sun will rise tomorrow.

Um, so VP DOESN'T matter now...?

What JD Vance says about his importance as Trump's pick for VP is, well, kind of a disturbing statement, really.

"My attitude is, it doesn't really matter."

But what does Donald think
 about JD? Turns out, not much...

Um, it doesn't matter to voters who the person is that is a heartbeat away from the Presidency?

Guess not, because, fortunately, Vance's opinion of his insignificance dovetails nicely with his boss's views (from Trump's amazingly inflammatory appearance at Wednesday's NABJ conference):

"...the Vice President, in terms of the election, does not have any impact. No impact."

Well, to a VP-pick, that's certainly got to be a resoundingly reassuring kick in the crotch, huh? And, to a nation weighing the competency of the person who is next on the US chain of command, hearing both ends of the ticket say it doesn't really matter who it is, really isn't that comforting, is it? 

For some reason, Trump
admires fictional murderer and
cannibal Hannibal Lecter

(Perhaps Trump thinks he could even win with 'the late, great Hannibal Lecter?")

Nine times in the history of our country, a Vice President has had to step into the Presidency (eight were for President deaths, but the most recent, Gerald Ford, became President with the resignation of Richard Nixon, 50 years ago this week).

Trump and Vance apparently think voters don't seem to care who that "number two" (no pun intended) person is. That's a problem when "number one" is an overweight, far from beloved, fearmongering felon that is the oldest nominated Presidential candidate in the history of our country. Not exactly the poster child for a four-year term in what is ostensibly the most stressful job in the world.

Perhaps unsurprisingly, just one year ago, Republicans sang a very different tune. The GOP, in fact, was saying the exact opposite--how important Biden's second-in-command was because he was an older President. As former rival (and now-Trump-suck-up) Nikki Haley said at the time, "A vote for President Biden is a vote for Kamala Harris."

Fortunately for our democracy, Pence
 wasn't the VP Trump thought he was

To be honest, if Trump had cared enough and had vetted his 2016 Vice President to be as unprincipled as he was--and now, presumably, as JD Vance is-- Biden's victory would have likely been overturned.
Thankfully for the country, despite tremendous pressure from Trump and the Trump supporters chanting, "Hang Mike Pence!" outside the Senate chambers, Pence did not bend to Trump's twisted will, but, instead, followed the directive of the US Constitution and ratified Biden's electoral vote victory. 

So, the VP turned out to be very important to this country.

And Harris's pick may help to shore up regional outreach or offer strength regarding Harris's perceived weaknesses (I'm looking at you and immigration, Arizona Senator Mark Kelly).

But, to Trump and his pick, it doesn't matter.

I guess that really says a lot, doesn't it? 

And that is, perhaps, the most disturbing statement of all.

Quick take: Trump wouldn't REALLY ditch Vance, would he?

Donald Trump wouldn't be thinking of replacing his VP pick JD Vance, would he?

Despite all the GOP lawmakers who privately say that Vance is a train wreck, Trump still backs him (well, other than publicly refusing to say if Vance would be ready to become President "on day one," and remarking that "the choice of Vice-President makes no difference").

Donald wouldn't throw JD
 under the bus, would he?

I mean, Trump wouldn't be the kind of man who would disregard his principles and his loyalties and his word to throw someone under the bus just because they make him look bad, would he?

And Trump really doesn't care that if he isn't elected, he will very likely still be facing a host of criminal indictments (which, if elected, he could order the DOJ to make them disappear), does he?

After all, JD Vance obviously checks all the boxes.

Alienating women and gays with offensive comments that the women running the country-- like (stepmother and Vice-President) Kamala Harris or even (gay dad) Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg--are "childless cat ladies."  

Check.

Alienate what polls show are a majority of women voters by saying there should be a "no-exceptions" abortion ban.

Check.

Emerge from the RNC convention with a virtually unheard of negative popularity rating for a VP candidate.

Check.

Write a forward for the ultra-conservative/radical Project 2025--which despite mentioning Trump or his administration a couple hundred times--is a plan supposedly disavowed by your boss.

Check.

Once have called your boss "an idiot," a "cynical a**hole," and compared him to Hitler.

Check.

So, will Trump replace Vance? As Melania famously said in announcing her increased campaign participation (um, which hasn't yet happened), "Stay tuned."

Read a pair of insightful, longer takes on the topic:

The Independent's Can Trump replace JD Vance as his running mate? (msn.com)

Polls Show Vance Is Deeply Unpopular — Could the RNC Remove Him From the Ticket? | Truthout

Tracking Trump's implosion

Just as Trump was smart to let Biden talk at the debate and doom himself, Harris has been letting Trump and his team do the same.

A simulation of the Trump campaign's chances
of getting necessary voter demographic groups

And it's working brilliantly. 

Every day, the Trump/Vance ticket alienates another group of swing voters they'll need to win the election.

To court Black voters, Trump sat down yesterday to answer questions at a conference of the National Association of Black Journalists. Trump's ensuing racist and lie-filled tirade was absolutely jaw-dropping. Between insulting the journalist moderators (which Trump has a rich history of doing to African-American journalists), to blowing his racist dog-whistle for his MAGA base questioning whether or not Harris is even Black, to ending his hour-long commitment after only 34 minutes, you could almost hear the campaign's hope for the Black vote crashing to the ground.

Trump's entire visit at the NABJ conference

The fact-check of his visit to the NABJ conference

Harris called it "the same old show," and said, "The American people deserve better than Donald Trump's divisiveness and disrespect."

CNN's token Republican strategist (and Trump/GOP apologist), Scott Jennings was a little less genteel in his assessment: "(Trump) did crap the bed today. My advice would be get up and change the sheets."

But Trump being Trump, he's doubled down on his pathetic Truth Social platform with rants such as "Crazy Kamala is saying she's Indian, not Black," as well as mocking a photo of Harris, with her Indian-heritage family, dressed in traditional Indian clothing.

While Trump is busy insulting American Blacks (well, and people of Asian descent), comments from his VP-pick Vance are doing the same with the women's voting bloc.

Whether saying the country is run by "childless cat ladies" like VP Harris (who, um, has two stepchildren) or calling career-focused women "sad, lonely, and pathetic," the Trump/Vance ticket's courting of women voters without children (um, 21% of women ages 18-34 say they never even want children) doesn't seem to be going well.

When you throw in Vance's previous no-exceptions abortion stance and things like his comments criticizing beloved US Olympian Simone Biles (um, who's also Black, btw) for stepping away from the last Olympics for mental health reasons, it's not clear that the Trump/Vance ticket thinks they need the votes of any women at all.

About the only group Trump makes sure he doesn't alienate is his staunch base of primarily white voters in his dwindling MAGA movement.

And that won't be nearly enough votes to win in November.

One has to wonder, which other voting demographic can the Trump/Vance ticket offend in the next 95 days?