Austrian cartoonist Leopold Maurer (Cartoon Movement) provides an opening piece for today’s look at tonight’s debate.
Note that he doesn’t predict that Trump will go off the rails. Rather, he depicts a perfectly calm, rational debate, but notes the underlying tensions that nearly every observer has also suggested.
On the other hand, he shows the two opponents being silent, suggesting that the debate has not yet started.
Once it actually begins, we’ll see if it remains calm and rational.
Another overseas observer, Morten Morland, is not so polite in depicting how the two sides are preparing for the debate, and he’s not all that far off in how things seem to have been shaking out as the moment approaches.
It is widely felt that Harris, having exuded joy and good vibes so far, needs to be prepared to present solid proposals this evening. Her ability to do so will depend on the questions she is asked and the behavior of her opponent, whose usual style would be to keep her back on her heels in a defensive position throughout the evening.
And while his advisors are no doubt asking him to remain calm and rational, Trump has spent the past week in mudslinging mode, threatening to arrest his political opponents and promising that his mass deportations of immigrants will be “bloody.”
Nor has he made any attempt to tone down his running-mate’s astonishing, hateful lies about Haitian immigrants who are in this country legally.
Meanwhile, in this country, Garth German suggests that, as Harris bones up on policy, history and statistics, Trump arms himself with hysterical appeals to fear and loathing, including bogus accusations and falsehoods that should be obviously phony to rational listeners but will earn him points with more gullible, fearful voters.
Whether German is correct in suggesting that these elements will emerge on the surface of the debate, both Morland and Maurer have captured the underlying tone of the campaign.
This makes the election less a matter of specific policy proposals than a decision on national direction, which is why it has attracted so much commentary and so many endorsements from across party lines.
Harris seems unwilling to step into the mud herself, but her campaign is not hesitant to point out the lack of support Trump has from prominent people who have worked with him. This ad will be running on Fox News and, locally, in Palm Springs:
I was disappointed by the number of cartoonists, including Joe Heller, who took advantage of Dick Cheney’s surprising endorsement of Harris by recalling the incident in which he accidentally hit a hunting partner with birdshot.
It was an accident, though fortunate in that it did little permanent damage to the victim and provided humor for late-night comedians.
But aside from reminding us all of gun safety, it was trivial and said nothing about how Cheney had nominated himself for vice-president and then became the most active and influential VP in American history.
The Republicans are currently blaming Biden for 13 deaths in the withdrawal from Afghanistan, but this Adam Felber gibe from the start of the Iraq invasion reminds us that there are some 4,000 Gold Star families — and countless bereaved Iraqis — on Dick Cheney’s tab.
While in 2005, Pat Oliphant reminded readers of how, as a bereaved mother pressed for answers about the death of her son in Iraq, Cheney remained the dominant force behind what Oliphant insisted was a less capable, less assertive George W. Bush.
So Jack Ohman (Tribune) depicts the surprise over Liz Cheney persuading her father to speak up against the anti-American proposals Donald Trump is bringing before the country.
While George W. Bush has declined to make an endorsement either way, his VP has stepped forward to denounce Trump, saying “In our nation’s 248-year history, there has never been an individual who is a greater threat to our republic than Donald Trump.”
Juxtaposition of the Day
Darkow and Anderson settled on depicting Cheney as Darth Vader, apparently before the death of James Earl Jones put Vader on people’s minds.
Cheney was, for many progressives, the personification of evil, and Darkow is correct in suggesting the surprise many had in seeing him step across party lines in defense of the Constitution and the nation, while Anderson cites the cognitive dissonance of Democrats having to embrace him as an ally.
Most responses are not completely unhinged, but there are a number of progressives who seem willing to nod in his direction but not to shake his hand. Which is how politics should work in a crisis.
Though there are two sides to every issue, and Gary Varvel (Creators) insists that it’s crazy to object to concentration camps, an end to elections and the triumph of authoritarian white nationalist Christian government.
Juxtaposition of the Day #2
The outcome of the debate, Deering and MacLeod suggest, will be largely in the hands of the media analysts, with Deering anticipating a continuation of the sanewashing that has seen major outlets translating Trump’s confused, discursive rants into calm statements, while, as MacLeod notes, ignoring, for instance, the utter ignorance of his views on tariffs, which neglect is as major a sin, IMHO, as failing to point out that nobody is killing babies after they are born or performing secret gender-changing surgery in elementary schools.
The point being that, while a large audience is anticipated for tonight’s debate, there is a strong tendency for people to judge an event by what is said of it later.
Thus a close, high-scoring 90-minute football game can be remembered entirely for a dubious pass-interference call that sports analysts dwelt upon in their wrap-ups and the second Carter/Reagan debate was boiled down in the public mind to four words: “There you go again.”
Clay Bennett (CTFP) sees the debate, and the election, coming down to a bully being opposed by a trained, disciplined strategist.
But unless, as in the Biden/Trump debate, one person is knocked out and the other escapes without a scratch, what happens tonight will largely depend on what people expected to see when they tuned it, and what they are told in the aftermath that they saw.
Though who knows? With the right energy, there’s always a chance for persuasion.
“TDS” has to be the laziest argument ever heaved up by Trumpsters on the internet, so the fact that it’s being used by a “professional” cartoonist is beyond pathetic. As a Hoosier, I wish we could churn out something better than Gary Varvel.
“TDS” is calling someone crazy for disagreeing with you which saves you from adding any substance or looking into why they disagree with you. I think Trump Derangement Syndrome is when you’re a Trump sycophant, like Gary Varvel.
Real “TDS” is still believing that Trump won. And believing that 34 indictments are part of a “plan” and he’s “playing 4-D chess, you’ll see.” And believe that a man who bragged about grabbing women by the pussy would never grab a woman by the pussy.
Yeah, seeing a professional cartoonist using “TDS” unironically is just eye-rolling.
The cartoonists are talking about Democrats agreeing with Dick Cheney, but nobody seems to notice that most of the Trump supporters LOVED George W. Bush and Dick Cheney and have switched to hating them. And don’t seem to think that it calls their judgement into question.
Well yes, it doesn’t matter how much a blood red Republicans you are, ANY talk of being against Dear Leader is unacceptable.
You don’t have to be a Trump supporter to find the idea of Harris as “a trained, disciplined strategist” somewhat hilarious.
She’s a trained prosecutor with experience and has demonstrated it in Senate hearings.
Amen
She’s been in pubic service for years and there’s ample documentation of her being “trained and disciplined”.
It’s ridiculous— it’s one thing to just say that you don’t agree with her policies (I can remember a time when that was actually how conservatives used to speak), but to make her out to be some kind of dim bulb when I can pretty easily find footage of her in Senate hearings being exactly the opposite—-well, let’s just say this is not the flex you think it is.
What they mean is “she’s a woman AND she’s not white!!”
Yes, I agree. Steve is not a woman though. They think strategically different.
I’m thrilled that Dick Cheney has come out in support of Harris.
Not because I think he’s a good person (HA!) or because his endorsement of Harris will help her, but because it’s yet another crack in the GOP’s foundation.
The sooner the GOP collapses, the better. It’s not even the GOP anyway, it’s been the Trump Party for almost a decade now.
I wondered what you thought